Talk:Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly

Purpose-built

Is the Legislative Assembly in a "purpose-built" facility as the article claims? I thought the building used to belong to the Trade Labour Council or something. El T 15:08, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

You're right - that was a stuffup on my part. However, where are you getting your information about its name? Ambi 15:18, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

From the Legislative Assembly website; also from exposure to ACT legislation (where that's how they always refer to it). El T 16:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

They may use this in particularly formal contexts, but even their website refers to this form just as much, and a Google test overwhelmingly supports this one. Ambi 23:34, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay, but it should be at least mentioned, just as the article on Australia mentions the "Commonwealth of Australia".

Fine by me. Ambi 02:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Categories

I've changed the categories on this article as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics/Parliaments. It may seem unnecessary in the context of the very few articles in the ACT categories, but it will acheive consistency among Aust Parl categoriess and international legislature categories. -- Adz|talk 12:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Governor/Administrator

I was about to remove this:

• The Assembly is unique in terms of Australian states and territories, as the Australian Capital Territory has neither a Governor nor an Administrator.

but thought I'd discuss it here first. A governor or administrator, if there were one, would be part of the ACT governmental system, but would not be part of the Assembly as such. In that sense the Assembly is no different from any other Australian legislature. We could make the point that the lack of such an office makes the ACT unique in Australia, but doesn't make the ACT Legislative Assembly unique. Comments?

Also, we don't say anywhere what happens when a bill passes the assembly. Does it become law automatically? Does the Governor-General have to give royal assent? Seems odd that the G-G has the power to overturn an ACT LA law, if he's not involved in assenting to laws in the first place. What is the process? JackofOz 10:29, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Aha. I've found a fact sheet by the Legislative Assembly that clarifies the situation just perfectly. Can this be incorporated into the article somehow? Rebecca 11:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Excellent, Rebecca. I think the relevant bits of that sheet should became part of our article, and the whole sheet can be a source. JackofOz 03:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Exactly a year later, I came here to pose this percise question -- i.e. who gives Royal Assent to laws pased by the ACT assembly. I don't think it was ever added to the article and the link above is now dead. --Jfruh (talk) 17:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I've dug up another link that explains things.

"The provisions for the executive branch of government do not include a vice-regal post exercising authority as the representative of the Head of State. There is no role of Administrator, Governor or Governor-General, as in the state, Northern Territory and federal constitutions."

"Instead, the functions of the head of the Executive – commissioning government, proroguing parliament and enacting legislation – are exercised by the Assembly itself and by the Chief Minister. Instead of vice-regal or regal assent, a Bill passed by the ACT Legislative Assembly is enacted on ‘notification’ – publication of a notice authorised by the Chief Minister, in the Government Gazette." [1]

Does someone want to add this to the article? Rebecca 00:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Very belatedly, done. Thanks for the source, Rebecca. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Leadership - Cheif Minister?

I've added the Chief Minister to the infobox - but other similar articles such as NSW Legislative Assembly and NT Legislative Assembly just list the speaker. Is it helpful to list the leader of the government as well? twilsonb (talk) 04:38, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

2006 conflict between ACT and Federal government

" In July 2006, the Federal Government again threatened to overrule the ACT Stanhope Government's anti-terror legislation, which was not consistent with other state laws."

I changed this sentence, because the previous version was grammatically wrong. However, it is still unclear. Did the Australian Parliament actually overrule the ACT law, or was the ACT assembly persuaded to amend or repeal its own law ?Eregli bob (talk) 01:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Question

Excuse my ignorance, but why is it that the three electoral districts don't elect the same number of members? I'm don't think this is even legal where I live; it's almost all one person, one vote all the way down save for the Senate. Is Canberra's legislative set-up unusual for even Australia? --Criticalthinker (talk) 15:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes it's unusual, in fact unique. No other parliament has this sort of arrangement; though almost all Australian parliaments have one chamber elected from multi-member electorates, each electorate elects the same number of members. The ACT follows "one person one vote" better than some others though, since Mongolo with a larger population elects more members than the other two electorates, unlike the Senate or the Western Australian Legislative Council where low-population states/regions elect the same number of members as high-population ones. The reason for the ACT's strange arrangement is that the Federal Parliament established a 17-member ACT assembly, giving it the power to change its own electoral system but not its size. It was originally elected by an at-large party list system, but when Hare-Clark was brought in multiple electorates were needed and there was no other option but uneven electorates, since 17 is a prime number. However, legislation has now been passed increasing the size of the assembly to 25, with 5 electorates each electing 5 members, which will take effect from the next election. Colonial Overlord (talk) 04:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Source: http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2014/03/act-legislative-assembly-set-to-increase-in-size.html. The above info should probably be added to the article, though I'm not quite sure how to do it. Colonial Overlord (talk) 04:07, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response! Yeah, that information about the proposed changed should be added. BTW, for anyone who regularly edits the page, I'd create a "Composition" category to place the information about size and how members are elected to the body in. --Criticalthinker (talk) 11:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Population control

The ACT Government lead by health minister Gallagher enabled a system of abuse where victims to be abused would be declared by a court process which made sure to delete metadata that disproved police allegations.

Victims of the abuse range from criminals to suspected-woman-haters where upon no evidence of an actual crime was needed apart from the phonetic ravings of a Government staff member whom assumed they were above others within the same Government and could use this hierarchy system to enable action upon the victim, many of whom knew not of the hierarchy system but held to an ideal of Justice which sadly is lacking in Canberra courts as they only exist to assist police in the improper application of the rules of law and abuse court process for the instant conviction with possibility of no trial what so ever.

The ACT Government ministers like to have people raped - and to conceal police making statements in support of rape the Government will send armed officers to 'check upon the health' of anyone with such evidence in the hope another suicide by cop goes under-reported (some professor will need 400k in grants if the press is good and that helps the Govt inject the bashed victims of drunks while the political party accepts donations from like minded animals). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.175.63.236 (talk) 08:52, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110328084555/http://www.elections.act.gov.au/elections/1989/timetable_89.html to http://www.elections.act.gov.au/elections/1989/timetable_89.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:32, 21 October 2016 (UTC)