Page 2146 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 6 June 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
more robust procedures to select a Senator when compared to practices in other State and Territory legislatures; and
(2) recognises that:
(a) the High Court of Australia, in its decision of 8 May 2018, has now provided further guidance on eligibility that will assist potential candidates and political parties for their candidate selection in the future; and
(b) the High Court decision will be considered in the context of the current review of standing orders.”.
This is the third time that former Senator Gallagher’s eligibility for nomination has been raised via a motion in this place. There is no doubt that each of these motions has led to debate on the subject despite what would appear to be fairly clear findings by our own administration and procedure committee in February on the relative strength of the ACT’s nomination process. To be frank, it does feel like groundhog day all over again, and that—
Mrs Dunne: That is a tautology as well.
MR BARR: I am allowed one if you are. If we are revisiting this issue, let me reiterate what I have previously said on the matter. In November 2017 the Assembly determined to refer the matter to the administration and procedure committee, which found, as Mrs Dunne has indicated, that the Assembly has one of the more robust procedures to select a senator when compared to other practices across the states and territories.
It is a fact that the High Court of Australia has ruled that former Senator Katy Gallagher was ineligible to stand as a candidate in the 2016 federal election. In that decision the High Court has provided some guidance on eligibility requirements that will, I am sure, be taken into account by all political parties when selecting future candidates.
As Mrs Dunne has indicated, the decision will also be considered in the context of the current review of standing orders, which is the appropriate process. I am pleased that we have that acknowledgement today to consider any amendments to our own standing orders.
As I have said previously, it is not the role of the Assembly or, indeed, of any parliament to usurp the role of the High Court in determining an individual’s eligibility to sit either as a commonwealth senator or indeed as a member of the House of Representatives.
The amendment that I have moved recognises, acknowledges and puts formally on the record in this place that the High Court of Australia, in its decision of 8 May 2018, has provided further guidance on eligibility that will assist potential candidates and political parties with candidate selection in the future; and that the High Court, acting in its role as the Court of Disputed Returns, ruled on 8 May that Ms Katy Gallagher
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video