Page 1000 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 19 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Ms Follett: Like above-the-line voting?
MR MOORE: We do have a clear picture of the ballot-paper. The Chief Minister interjects, "What about above-the-line voting?". We have a clear picture of a ballot-paper that has no above-the-line voting. It is quite clear to people reading this, Madam Speaker, that there is an intention to have group non-party candidates. It is mentioned, and clearly illustrated, at one place in the referendum options description sheet. On the other hand, Madam Speaker, it is equally reasonable to say that the notion of a single group is not mentioned anywhere in the description sheet, and the picture in the description sheet does not show a single member at all. It seems to me, therefore, that the proposal put by Ms Szuty to modify what Mr Humphries has put out is eminently sensible. That is why I will be following the same process as my colleague Ms Szuty.
MR HUMPHRIES (10.12): Madam Speaker, I accept that we will not have the capacity for parties to have only one candidate. I repeat that I think it is not possible to infer, because there are no party columns with only one candidate in them on the description sheet, that, therefore, it was not intended that parties not be able to nominate only one candidate.
Ms Follett: How would you have Robson rotation?
MR HUMPHRIES: I will come to that question. The Chief Minister says that this amendment is a clear attempt to avoid the operation of Robson rotation. I must say, Madam Speaker, that to hear those words come from a woman who would sell her grandmother to be able to get rid of Robson rotation seems to me to be pretty rich.
Ms Follett: I have not, and you have.
MR HUMPHRIES: We know the Labor Party's view about Robson rotation. We know your view about Robson rotation. You know that you hate it. You know that you would love to have something different. I think it shows the deviousness of the Labor Party's thinking, that it would seriously consider putting forward a proposal to have Robson rotation defeated, which it obviously wants to do, by providing for more than one of its candidates to be distributed as candidates of single parties, presumably the Wayne Berry Labor Party, the David Lamont Labor Party, and so on. That is a quite bizarre idea. Madam Speaker, my party is perfectly happy to put itself at the mercy of Robson rotation. We will not be taking advantage of any arrangements to allow parties to have single candidates. All the Liberal candidates will be in a single column in each electorate, not anywhere else.
The Chief Minister says that there is ambiguity between the representation on page 1 and the text. I invited her to tell me where. She has not done so. The Chief Minister, remarkably, seems to be able to find ambiguities there when she wants to. I am afraid that the rest of us find it hard to see how they appear. Particularly, we could not find the bit about the above-the-line boxes anywhere here. Apparently the Chief Minister could find that too.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .