Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 22 November 1973
Page: 2084


Senator WRIGHT (Tasmania) - I have an amendment which refers to clause 7 of the Bill as proposed to be amended ', which reads:

The new and permanent Parliament House proposed to be constructed after the commencement of this Act shall be constructed upon the site marked 'Site of Parliament House' on the plan set out in the Schedule.

I move:

After the word ' site ' insert the words 'on Capital Hill '.

The clause will then read:

The new and permanent Parliament House proposed to be constructed after the commencement of this Act shall be constructed upon the site Capital Hill marked 'Site of Parliament House' on the plan set out in the Schedule.

Senator Sir KENNETHANDERSON (New South Wales) (5.15)- I wish to speak to clause 7, of the 'Bill as proposed to be amended' but before I do so I would like to say that I missed hearing Senator Wright deliver his second reading speech. I hope that I will go down in history in relation to this matter because last week I succeeded in clearing the air as to whether the site was to be Capital Hill or Camp Hill. I have some concern about the wording of clause 8 of the 'Bill as proposed to be amended'. I accept its intention, which I think is clear. Clause 8 reads:

Except in accordance with a resolution of both Houses . . .

By inference that means that both Houses are agreed. For 20-odd years we have been in conflict with the other place about this very issue. Therefore I am in difficulty in relation to certain situations in which there may be conflict between the 2 Houses. The meaning of this clause is left gloriously vague. For instance, some emergency may arise in relation to this matter which acts as a challenge and a threat to this very clause but because of some difficulty between the 2 Houses -some other matter may intrude- there can be no resolution of both Houses. I am not trying to be obstructive on this. Having bent the knee in relation to Camp Hill I am trying to get the best of all worlds for Capital Hill and for the concept of the Bill. I did say in our own conclave that in my view clause 8 is not strong enough for what it intends or wants to do. The lawyers are very good when we do not want them to be good. I would like to see them pull the digit and improve the clause.







Suggest corrections