Walton Brown has tabled an amendment to the Commission of Inquiry Act to transfer authority to establish commissions from the Governor to the elected Premier.

The Shadow Immigration Minister believes that the legislation granting authority to the non-elected Governor under the 1935 Act is outdated and is likely the result of an oversight within the Constitution enacted in 1968.

The issue will be debated in Parliament at the earliest opportunity which could be as early as next Friday.

While Governor George Fergusson’s decision to turn down a request by Parliament to appoint a Commission of Inquiry into alleged historic losses of property through theft and disposition was a “precipitating factor” to Mr Brown’s pursuit of an amendment, the real issue, he said, was representation of the electorate.

“The fundamental issue is that in a mature democracy, the establishment of things such as a Commission of Inquiry should be something that comes from the people and their representatives,” Mr Brown said. “The office of the Premier is the embodiment of the expression of the people. The quest is to have any decision about any Commission of Inquiry, not just this particular one, rest with the Premier who in turn is accountable to the people.”

Mr Fergusson said that legislation sets out that the establishment of a Commission is at the Governor’s discretion.

“In principle, I can see value in a Governor having an independent power to establish a Commission — if for example there was an action by the Government of the day that he or she thought merited examination but the Government did not share this view. I see no problem with the Government also having a power to initiate a Commission of Inquiry,” he said.

Mr Brown said he believed the current legislation was outdated. “Under the constitution, the Governor is granted power in areas of external affairs, defence and security so the constitutional powers don’t reach to areas such as a Commission of Inquiry so I suspect this was just an oversight,” he said.

Mr Fergusson replied: “Aspects of the power do look to me outdated — for instance, by my reading, the legislation limits the fees payable to the Commissioner to $100 a day, which won’t get far. The power of a Governor to establish a Commission is based in legislation — it doesn’t come into the Constitution. Any amendments to the power would be done by legislation. But the power to appoint a Commission is not out of step with the powers given under the Constitution to appoint judges, the Auditor-General and, by a more recent amendment, the Ombudsman.”

Back in July, the PLP boycotted Parliament after Mr Fergusson turned down a vote by Parliament to appoint an inquiry into the alleged land grabs citing a lack of clarity and urgency. He said that he would be open to consider this again if the House gave him clearer references to the kinds of abuses alleged.

Despite the invitation, Mr Brown maintains: “Our position is that the Governor was acting in a way that demonstrates that he didn’t wish to have a Commission. We had a seven hour debate in which everyone spoke on the issue, identified particular circumstances and events.

“The Governor will know that in the meeting that I and the shadow Attorney General Michael Scott had with him, we gave particular examples but more importantly it is not for the Governor to collect and assess information, that is what the Commission of Inquiry is for. Parliament sent a message that it wanted a Commission of Inquiry — it is almost unprecedented for a Governor to act in such a way.”

Responding to Mr Brown’s concerns, a Cabinet Office spokesperson wrote: “The Government looks forward to addressing this matter in the House when the Opposition Member debates the Amendment.”