Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (13 June) . . Page.. 1681 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

Those requirements did not exist until now, yet we got along quite well for 12 years. Suddenly, it is deemed useful to put these new hurdles in the way of Independent and small party candidates. I think that it is laudable to have an electoral system that assists Independents and minor parties. That is what I thought we had. But it is less than laudable that the major parties now seek to put in place these hurdles and impediments which will work counter to that and, in my view, counter to the interests of the community out there that has clearly expressed the view that it wants Independents and members of parties other than the two major parties in this place. Yet the two major parties now appear to be conniving to remove that.

In some cases, these hurdles appear to be hurdles that do not apply to candidates of the major parties. These hurdles are for the rest, for the hoi polloi. Where is the provision, for example, that candidates for the Liberal Party or the Labor Party, when presenting for nomination at the Electoral Office, have to produce a list of 50, 20, 100 or any number of supporters? Why is it that a Liberal Party candidate or a Labor Party candidate can front up to the Electoral Office with $250 and get enrolled, but if Mr Moore, Mr Rugendyke or I turn up, we are asked for a list of our supporters? Where is the justice in that? I will come back to that in a minute.

Mr Stanhope: It is extra for a party vote. You need 100 members to get to the starting base.

MR KAINE: I ask you, Mr Stanhope: where is the provision in this legislation that a Liberal Party or Labor Party candidate must produce the membership list of their party before they can be registered with the Electoral Commission as a party? When did the Labor Party last present its membership list to the Electoral Office to justify the registration of the Labor Party as a party in this place?

Mr Stanhope: We will do it at any time, Trevor.

MR KAINE: You have never had to and there is no legislative requirement, but you make it a requirement that I have to do so, Mr Rugendyke has to do so or Mr Moore has to do so. Is that having a level playing field? It is justified by the government and the opposition in their own self-interest, I submit. The intention of all of this clearly is to discourage individuals from attempting to stand as candidates other than as Liberal or Labor candidates. If you want to stand, join the Liberal Party or the Labor Party and they will get you in, no problems, if you are in favour with the party. But if you want to do it some other way, tough luck; they will make it difficult for you.

In fact, I am quite surprised to see the Greens participating in this regard. Ms Tucker has an amendment before us which, if passed, will make the situation even more draconian that the government or the opposition is proposing. I cannot understand how she justifies that, given the stance of the Greens that we live in a democracy and we should all be free to act. I am hoping that at some stage during this debate the government and the opposition will justify the position that they are taking. They will set hurdles that they will not have to meet. They will set those hurdles for all the little people out there that really only clutter up this place up and make things difficult.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .