Page 2578 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 24 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries is a member of the Liberal Party. Mr Humphries agrees, as does every other member of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee, that the Electors Initiative and Referendum Bill, which grants the people the right to have a binding say, is valid. That is only fair.
The people have the right to have a binding say. The result of a referendum should be introduced into law. Let us say that someone wanted to introduce a Bill that had no engine - a sort of citizens referenda vehicle without an engine - that would not make the referendum result binding. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee have already agreed that, provided this Assembly wants to pass the legislation, the result of the referendum can be made binding on this Assembly. Once again, I make the point that all members of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee and Professor Whalan agreed with that. So the suggestion that the Bill should be advisory only is not valid.
Something that I left in the Electors Initiative and Referendum Bill when I retabled it was that the citizens should have the right to determine how some of their money is spent. Obviously, any proposal that does not allow the citizens to determine how some of their money is spent is a nonsense. After all, what is government about if it is not about spending taxpayers' money - in our case, $1.3 billion in the last year, plus whatever was borrowed? So, naturally enough, if you ruled out any expenditure of taxpayers' money in a citizens referenda Bill, not only would it be like a car without an engine but it would not have any wheels after the tyres had already been stripped.
Something else that I left in the Bill was that the citizens should have the right to determine, by referendum, an urgent matter. Naturally enough, if there were a legislative proposal by politicians to, say, knock over a building, particularly a school or a hospital, and build a tunnel, if we had anything approaching direct democracy in the ACT the citizens would have the power to bring on an urgent referendum, not at the next election and certainly not a year or so later. They would need time to do that. Within three months would be about right. The Electors Initiative and Referendum Bill allows that. As members know, normally, I do not spend much time talking about these matters. However, I think members will well understand that what we proposed to do this morning is all but over; so it is not as if we are pressed for time. Mr Berry came around to see me a couple of minutes ago and said - - -
Mr Humphries: Madam Speaker - - -
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Stevenson, Mr Humphries is attempting to take a point of order.
MR STEVENSON: I just thought I would make the point.
MADAM SPEAKER: You did, Mr Stevenson.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .