Page 5205 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 29 November 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Labor-Greens government is the best government in all of Australia and quite possibly the best anywhere on the entire planet.
Mr Pettersson’s motion at first appeared to be one more reiteration of this now-familiar boilerplate. Then I got to paragraph 3(b). Here is something new to me. In a jurisdiction that still claims to be democratic, and in a chamber specifically dedicated to the pursuit of rigorous debate, I have been asked to cease negative speech. This, we are told, “detracts from our city”.
Note that it is not actually the things that may be wrong with our city that detract from it. No, apparently it is only the speaking about such things that is harmful. Governments inclined to totalitarianism naturally always wish that they could force their opponents to shut up, but seldom do they formally call upon others to actually do so. Today is different. Today I have been asked to surrender my voice as an elected representative of the people in my electorate of Ginninderra and instead say only positive things.
Mr Pettersson was careful to state that it is about Canberra—the place—that we should only say nice things. But, of course, what he really intends in this motion celebrating the achievements of the ACT government is that we should stop saying anything negative about the Labor-Greens government.
I guess this is the logical next step for a government that has repeatedly made it clear over the course of the past year that they do not really want to hear from anyone who might disagree with them. Those opposite have shown themselves willing to blacklist, ignore, belittle and talk over any and all who do not join them in their groupthink, where there is only one right opinion on any topic, only one right answer to any question, and certainly only one right outcome to any vote or division.
Forget about pluralism and diversity of thought. They just detract from our city and risk investment. Instead, as good members of the collective, we must willingly let problems slide if speaking about them would require making—heaven forbid!—negative claims.
Thankfully, Mr Pettersson’s clumsy attempt at silencing critics includes an effective escape clause. The phrasing is unclear, and I strongly suspect that he means to indicate that all negative claims are also unsubstantiated. After all, how could it be otherwise in a jurisdiction ruled by the best government anywhere in the world, whose benevolent dominion would bring endless peace and prosperity to all, if only its critics would just shut up? But there it is.
Apparently we can still speak honestly and forthrightly about our territory as long as our claims are substantiated. So, Madam Speaker, I am happy to take this opportunity to remind Mr Pettersson and those opposite, who will no doubt support this motion, what democratic debate actually sounds like. Mr Pettersson wants us to note that the ACT has the lowest unemployment rate of any jurisdiction, at 3.8 per cent. It is a substantiated fact that in July 2008 youth unemployment in the territory was also 3.8 per cent. But by May this year it had surged to 10.5 per cent. Youth underemployment is also an issue. In a survey conducted last year by the Youth
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video