Page 5274 - Week 12 - Thursday, 28 October 2010

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


It is just the most bizarre conspiracy theory that I have heard since I have been in this place—in fact, probably for even longer than that. I think we just need to take a step back, draw breath and remind ourselves of the purpose of this legislation. The Greens did support the Liberal Party to pass this legislation because we believe it is appropriate to have some sort of check and balance on government advertising.

Certainly, at a federal level—some would argue at an ACT level—we have seen occasions when government advertising perhaps has not been what taxpayers would have expected from it, where it has perhaps promoted a government program. I think having an independent reviewer to ensure that that does not happen is a good thing.

Mr Smyth picked up on the rationale for having a two-thirds majority. He talked about this new paradigm—consensus, working together. My sense was that the two-thirds provided a useful check and balance to make sure that the government did not come into this place in a different situation at some time in the future. It is always good to think about future configurations of this place, not just the current one. Perhaps at some future time a government may have an absolute majority in this place. We wanted to actually have an ability to not just have the government appoint the person that they wanted.

Again, that was the rationale for the discussion of why we went for a two-thirds majority. I never anticipated in those conversations, which actually were quite positive and quite constructive—I appreciated the spirit in which we pushed back and forth, shared ideas, critiqued the various suggestions—that we would find ourselves in a situation where we would be at such an impasse, such a block, for no apparent good reason, except based on, as it turns out we have learned today, some quite fascinating conspiracy theory that has been cooked up on the first floor of this building.

It begs the question of how we move forward from here. I do not want this legislation to fall over because of the intransigence of those opposite. This legislation is good legislation. The intention of it is a good intention. I think in the end it was reasonably well-designed legislation. We may find down the line that we want to tweak it but in essence it is good legislation. I guess the question we are going to have to ask now is: what do we do if we cannot actually move past this silly act of blocking because of a conspiracy theory?

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): Members, I draw your attention to the fact that subsection 12(4) of the Government Agencies (Campaign Advertising) Act 2009 requires that the motion be passed by a two-thirds majority of members. I therefore direct that a vote be taken. I understand that there is one pair in operation. Mr Coe and Ms Porter will take that pair.

Question put:

That Ms Gallagher’s motion be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—


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