Page 2522 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Seselja introduces some real furphies into the debate. He suggests that we need some check on decision making in this place. There is plenty of experience to demonstrate that self-government in other territories has worked well with a single-chamber parliament; there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that we do not need to go for an upper house or some other mechanism in relation to checks and balances. Indeed, the experience of self-government is that for the overwhelming majority of the period of self-government there has not been one party with an absolute majority in this place. Under the electoral arrangements, it is more likely than not that that is what will occur. There will be exceptions—we have seen there have been exceptions—but they are just that: exceptions to the rule rather than the norm.
So there are other checks and balances already in place. We as a polity have created those checks and balances ourselves. We as a community, regardless of the political views of certain parties at whatever time, have chosen electoral systems, for example, that give protections that provide for representative decision making and a representative democratic process.
If we can do that, I think we can sort out the other things. That is the point that we should make to the commonwealth—that these matters are best dealt with by this place to the greatest extent feasible. That is what we need to convince the commonwealth to do. Let us get on with the main game. Let us get on with the main game of convincing the commonwealth that we need to review this act. Let us not hold it up down here with yet another select committee that may or may not come up with a consensus position.
Mr Seselja: Have you read the amendment?
MR CORBELL: Well, whatever it is. Let us get on with the main game. Let us get on with the main game of convincing the commonwealth that the act needs to be reviewed. That must be our task, and that is what this motion is designed to achieve.
I thank the Greens for their support and their preparedness to accept amendment to their motion. That is important. I close with the comment that I have endeavoured to get some agreement from the Liberal Party on this matter as well. At lunchtime today, I discussed the matter with Mrs Dunne, along with representatives of the Greens. I have been in constant contact with her office, and my office has been in constant contact with her office on this matter throughout the day.
Mrs Dunne indicated to me at lunch-time today that the Liberals would oppose the amendment. I waited until 4 pm to receive something from the Liberal Party; I had not received anything. I thought I needed to circulate something in the chamber, because it was unclear whether anything was going to be forthcoming from the opposition. That is why I took the course of action I did. It was not for want of trying; it was not for want of trying to engage in the discussion. (Time expired.)
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (6.11), by leave: I want to speak on a couple of those issues. It is important that we deal with these fairly comprehensively. Mr Corbell has introduced a new element into it which actually
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .