FNR Home Page  The Foundation for National Renewal
Constitutional Convention: Introduction  The Constitutional Convention of February 1998

Federal Election October 2004:
Which Candidates Trust the People?

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Friday, 13 February 1998
Page 7

Ms DELAHUNTY- Mr Chairman, I will speak briefly. I was the convener of the working party that laboured with many delegates to produce what we thought was a formula for ongoing constitutional change. We were bitterly disappointed when we were knocked out a few days ago.

Let me commend this motion to you. Clearly, the Australian people, many Australians, have engaged with their Constitution for the first time in their lives, thanks to this Convention. Delegates, let this civic conversation continue.

 

Mr ANDREW- Mr Chairman, delegates: if, as a member of this chamber for five years or as a member of the chamber on the hill for the last 10 years, the chamber or I had engaged in an exercise of self-congratulation such as I have witnessed here over the last half an hour, the press gallery and the people of Australia would rightly have abused us up hill and down dale.

We parliamentarians in Australia have been accused day in and day out of ignoring the grassroots. Let me tell you, on behalf of all parties and the Independents, we are only here because we speak to the grassroots. Whether I am speaking to the grassroots in my electorate or they are speaking to me, invariably what they say to me is, `Neil, the problem we have is that there are too many parliaments and too many parliamentarians.'

Ms Peris-Kneebone earlier today, in a very well delivered speech, made the point that she has been to, I think she said, 26 countries-

 

Ms PERIS-KNEEBONE- Twenty-nine.

 

Mr ANDREW- I stand corrected, 29 countries- and there is none she would sooner live in than Australia. It was a point that touched all of us because it echoed all of our sentiments. We all, Madam, agree. The point is- no matter whether it has been under Labor or Liberal administrations or any other form of administration- the government of this country has not been all bad. In fact, the people of this country find they are living in a country better managed than most other countries around the globe.

In this resolution Mr Elliott has suggested that there are a number of changes that should be made to things such as revenue raising, the environment and all sorts of sensitive issues that we are all aware of. He knows as a state parliamentarian and I know as a federal parliamentarian that no one of those issues is ever off the parliamentary agenda. If parliamentarians are ever guilty of ignoring any of the issues that Australians raise, then clearly they will discipline us in the ballot box, as we all well know.

Frankly, I think this is an exercise in absurdity. If there is need for ongoing constitutional reform- and I do not doubt there is- then the parliament will be sensitive to it, and the people will tell us and the parliament will convene a convention as appropriate at the right time. But for us to think that we have some sort of extraordinary wisdom that exceeds that of any other representative and elected body astounds me. I am opposed to both the amendment and the resolution.

 

Senator STOTT DESPOJA- I am also a member of parliament. I also, as do state, federal and local government colleagues, talk to people- indeed, the grassroots. There are many issues that we are confronted with and we have raised when we talk to members of our constituency. One of the things that I hear overwhelmingly is that people in our community not only feel disillusioned with government but also alienated from the process. So there is absolutely nothing wrong with the motion before us. In fact, there is everything to commend the motion before us. I include in that Reverend Tim Costello's original motion to the Convention, because it seeks to involve the community, to involve the grassroots in this civic conversation that Mary Delahunty has so eloquently discussed.

How can we say that we should either leave this to our parliaments or that our parliaments are duly and appropriately representative of the Australian people? We still have only one-third in the chamber of the Senate- and that is a bumper representation of women as opposed to around 20 per cent across the board. How can we say that our federal parliaments in particular are representative when we have no indigenous Australians and few people from different socioeconomic or ethnic backgrounds? And the list goes on. There is every reason to commend Mr Elliott's and Reverend Costello's motion before us today.

A variety of issues have been listed in the amendment. They are not being prescribed for a particular constitutional outcome. They are there for consideration and discussion. We have seen how beneficial this process can be. I rose as soon as I heard the expression PR because I believe proportional representation, electoral and voting reform should be discussed.

 

Senator Boswell interjecting-

 

Senator STOTT DESPOJA- But others, like you, Senator Boswell, may not, even though I notice you rely on it to get into the Senate. Others may disagree with that, so take part in this conservation. Participate, ensure that at least two-thirds are directly elected because that will ensure that the diversity in our community is at least reflected and represented in a way that I believe this chamber has reflected over the last two weeks. That is something we should be seeking to continue, not to reject. I also note that the environment and issues of gender equity are part of this motion. I commend it to the Convention as I do the motion before it.

 

Mr ELLIOTT- I move:

 

That the motion be now put.

 

Motion carried.

 

CHAIRMAN- The question now is that the amendment to Mr Costello's proposed addition to the other matters agenda item moved by Mr Mike Elliott and seconded by Ms Catherine Moore be agreed to.

Amendment carried.

 

CHAIRMAN- We therefore move on to consider the main amendment: the motion moved by Mr Costello. Are there any speakers on the main motion of Mr Costello's- that is, the motion by Mr Costello that is set out on the paper headed `Proposed handling of "ongoing constitutional review" process'? It begins with the introductory paragraph. We then have the motion. To it are added the words that you have just agreed from Mr Mike Elliott.

Motion, as amended, carried.

CHAIRMAN- Mr Costello's motion, as amended, now becomes part of item 2. I put the question that the resolution on consequential matters that was moved by the Resolutions Group, as amended, be agreed to.

Motion carried.

 

CHAIRMAN- I think we had better have a formal vote for the sake of the record. It would be the final vote on that particular issue, and I think it is important. Before I put that formal vote, Professor Winterton did request that he be given leave to move a particular change to the preamble; I gather it is largely because of the wording. Professor Winterton, would you present your proposal?

 

Professor WINTERTON- Thank you, Mr Chairman. You may remember that the other night, in order to have some recognition in the Constitution that there should be ongoing constitutional change, we included item C11 on page 2 in the matters that should be included in the preamble; that is to say, item (4), the preamble, item C11. It would look rather inelegant in the preamble since we have passed a substantive resolution concerning future change. I did move that C11 be included; I now move that it be deleted. I formally move the amendment circulated in my name.

 

CHAIRMAN- What Professor Winterton is suggesting is that the words `A provision allowing ongoing consideration of constitutional change' be deleted in view of our having accepted the firm proposal a few moments ago. Is leave given for Professor Winterton to delete those words?

Leave granted.

Amendment carried.

 

CHAIRMAN- I have asked for the bells to be rung so that we can formally take our vote on the transitional and consequential issues question. I think that for the purposes of the final vote of this Convention it is desirable that we do as we have done with all other votes- we take it formally and then we are in a position to proceed.

Has everybody got their ballot papers for this vote? It is a ballot paper which will enable us to vote on the transitional and consequential issues question. That is item No. 2 on the agenda. It is a resolution of the Resolutions Group which will approve or reject the proposals for the determination of transitional and consequential issues as modified as a result of decision of the Convention a few moments ago. I have just received a proxy on behalf of Professor Judith Sloan nominating Professor David Flint to act on her behalf from 3 p.m. this afternoon, which I propose to accept. I will pass that to the secretariat.

Mr ANDREWS- Just a point of clarification. Is it a case that now we are voting on all the consequential amendments which we have voted on one by one when the deputy chair was in your place?

 

CHAIRMAN- That is correct. I was going to identify exactly that on which you were voting as soon as we were all in the chamber and the bells were switched off. The question before the Convention is that the report moved by the Resolutions Group on transitional and consequential issues, as amended by the Convention over the course of the debate in the last little while, be approved. Does everybody have their ballot papers?

You will note that there are three alternatives: in favour; against; or abstain. I ask you to put a clear indication, either a tick or a cross, in the box that you intend to pursue. I ask that those in favour rise in their places and hand in their ballot papers as soon as they are ready.

 

Delegates submitted their ballot papers.

 

CHAIRMAN- Is there anybody who has voted in favour of that resolution whose ballot paper has not been collected? I ask those who wish to vote against the resolution as amended to stand and to hand in their ballot paper.

 

Delegates submitted their ballot papers.

 

CHAIRMAN- Is there anybody who has voted against the resolution whose ballot paper has not been collected? Those who wish to abstain, please rise in their places.

 

Delegates submitted their ballot papers.

CHAIRMAN- Is there anybody who has abstained whose ballot paper has not been collected? The result of the counting is: 102 yes, 16 against and 32 abstentions. We are two short, with 150 people being here. I declare the motion carried- that is, the motion of the resolutions group on the determination of transitional and consequential issues. The detailed results are as follows:

Motion: That the "Resolutions on Consequential Matters" report of the Resolutions Group, as amended, be adopted.

Moved: The Hon Daryl Williams AM QC MP

Seconded: The Hon Gareth Evans QC MP

Motion put.

 

Delegates (102) who voted "yes":

 

Delegates (16) who voted "no":

 

Delegates (32) who abstained from voting:

 

Resolution agreed to.

Previous Page
Next Page

·=============== Top of this page===============·

Last updated: 21 October 2000