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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (14 June) . . Page.. 1721 ..

MR HUMPHRIES: No. We were being condemned by your colleague Mr Berry for showing contempt for the Legislative Assembly by not respecting the decision it had made to conduct an inquiry. You were saying that, Mr Kaine was saying that, Ms Tucker was saying that, and I think Mr Rugendyke was also saying that the executive had to give way when the legislature was imposing its view about these matters.

Mr Wood: It is probably the case.

MR HUMPHRIES: If it is the case, what difference does it make whether it is effected by an amendment to the Inquiries Act or by a binding resolution on the floor of this Assembly? What difference does it make? Mr Speaker, it makes no difference whatsoever. None whatsoever. I will put on the record the fact that, the cat having being released from the bag, it will be used again. I do not rule out the fact that people on this side of the chamber will be prepared to use that power again because-

Mr Stanhope: If you have got the numbers I am sure you will.

MR HUMPHRIES: All I know, Mr Speaker, is that governments tend not to have the numbers, wherever they may be. I put that very clearly on the record for the next time this debate takes place. I might not be around when it takes place. Some of us might not be around, but the fact is that it will take place again, and I send this message to posterity. The power is there. Whether this bill is passed today or not is irrelevant.

We are being consistent by voting against the bill because we argue that power should not be created. But, frankly, it is a bit inconsistent to see some people who argued for the power of the Assembly to impose its will saying today that-

Mr Stanhope: Disingenuous.

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes, it is disingenuous of you, Mr Stanhope.

Mr Stanhope: You are being disingenuous in your argument.

MR SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR HUMPHRIES: No, I am not. I am not being disingenuous. You are being inconsistent by saying in December that you think the executive should do what the Assembly wanted, and today, in June, saying, "Oh no, the Assembly must not be allowed to force the executive to do what it does not want to do with respect to inquiries." Sorry, but it does not wash.

Let me also indicate that I think Ms Tucker was in error when she said that it was open to an executive to ignore a resolution moved or passed under this legislation. Clause 5A (2) says:

That is the resolution in clause 5A (1).

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