Page 3752 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 22 November 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
on the federal parliament to get rid of this power, that is what we are talking about. I think that matter was also addressed in Mr Stanhope’s comments when he talked about people of the ACT having the right to expect their elected representatives in the Assembly to fight to the death for democratic rights. The issue shows the contempt of the federal parliament.
There was a comment that these threats are not perpetrated on the states because the commonwealth cannot direct the Governor-General to override state legislation. It cannot do that. It can do it only to us and to the Northern Territory. As mentioned by Mr Stanhope, we saw that happen in the history of this federal government, the Howard federal government, with the issue of euthanasia. The federal government made threats about the issue of the Human Rights Act. With the antiterrorism legislation we were concerned that the federal government would do the same thing it did with the Civil Unions Act. There is a concern. That is why I said at the beginning that all members in this place should be concerned.
Dr Foskey asked what would happen if the boot were on the other foot and a federal Labor government overturned legislation made by a Stefaniak Liberal government; would you not be outraged then? I think I would be outraged, Mr Stefaniak, if that were the case. I do indeed think that I would be outraged. In fact, I am quite positive of it.
Dr Foskey said that she felt as though she was a bit player in this argument. I am sorry that Dr Foskey feels that way. I said at the beginning that I looked forward to listening to the views of all members. I did listen to all of the views put forward in this place today, except for those of Mr Barr. I had to be out of the chamber during his speech, but I am well aware of his views. I do not agree with the views of all members; that is why I am standing up here and refuting those views. Dr Foskey, I am sorry that you feel that way, because I do value the comments that you made—
Dr Foskey: This is a joke. Come on. Get over it.
MS MacDONALD: I do value the contribution that you made. I totally agreed with the comment that you made about what would happen if the boot were on the other foot. Dr Foskey, I think you need to keep in mind that, while the history of this place has been that people on the cross bench have a greater say in this territory than they would in other parliaments, that has—
Dr Foskey: Sometimes they have had the balance of power too.
MS MacDONALD: That has been the history of this place. The fact is that the Greens in this place and other places are still a minor party. While you may feel as though you are being treated like a bit player, the fact is that you are one of the minor parties. I do not say that disparagingly, Dr Foskey.
Dr Foskey: It is all right. I can get over it too.
MS MacDONALD: That is good. Let me turn to Mr Mulcahy’s comments, which I found particularly interesting. He said that the ACT Assembly should have unfettered power and not be accountable. Who is the Governor-General accountable to, Mr
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .