Page 4636 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 19 October 2011

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


speech he articulated why this is not the case and the fundamental distinction between Senator Brown’s actions and the substance of the bill. This of course has absolutely nothing to do with the issue and simply again goes back to the point I was making previously, that the opposition to this is either simply because of its proponent or because of ignorant bigotry on a phantom issue that really does not have anything to do with the fundamental issue, which is of course the basic democratic rights of territorians.

I do note that the current Liberal position is in stark contrast to the principled position the Liberal Party took back in June 2006 when a valid law of this place was disallowed by the commonwealth executive. At that time the Liberal Party supported the address to the Governor-General essentially asking that the Governor-General not disallow a law validly made by this democratically elected parliament.

Mr Coe: On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: One moment, Ms Hunter. Stop the clocks.

Mr Coe: Mr Speaker, I draw your attention to standing order 57 with regard to the Speaker determining offensive words and ask whether Ms Hunter calling Senator Brandis bigoted is indeed parliamentary.

MR SPEAKER: Sorry, I do not—

MS HUNTER: I did not call Senator Brandis bigoted.

MR SPEAKER: One moment, thank you. Mr Coe, on your point of order, there is some uncertainty. I am actually going to reflect on this over the lunch break and I will come back to the Assembly this afternoon. Ms Hunter, continue.

MS HUNTER: Thank you. At the time the Liberal Party supported the address to the Governor-General essentially asking that the Governor-General not disallow a law validly made by this democratically elected parliament. So why have the Liberal Party changed their minds? Why is this parliament no longer worthy of the democratic autonomy it deserved five years ago? At that time Mr Stefaniak said that he did not agree with the policy but he did agree with the principle. The principle is of course that this parliament should stand up for itself and fight against the interference of the commonwealth executive that is not elected by the people of the ACT and has no interest whatsoever in the day-to-day life of the people of the ACT.

It is a principle worth fighting for and I think it is a real shame that again we cannot all agree that this parliament should be free from commonwealth executive interference. The control of the commonwealth parliament is a different matter and a constitutionally entrenched one.

I do believe that this is a very important piece of legislation. I again applaud my colleague Senator Bob Brown for being such a great representative of the people of the ACT, for taking this bill up, for fighting for it; and the Labor Party for supporting it in the Senate.


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