As is well known, this power was removed in 1997 at the same time as the Federal Parliament overrode the NT Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1995 (the RTI Act). This unprecedented intervention in the self-government of the territories was initiated by Kevin Andrews, a staunch opponent of VAD, via what we know call the Andrews Bill.

It should never have been left to a private member's bill to set the precedent as to the circumstances (if any) in which federal intervention is appropriate, and as to how that intervention should be achieved. This was the first (and, so far, the only) occasion on which these issues have arisen. They were of fundamental importance to the future self-government of the territories: they required clear leadership from the federal government.

In particular, they were not issues appropriate to be decided on a conscience vote driven, as it was, by Mr Andrews' own personal abhorrence of any laws on VAD, coupled with his contemptuous disregard of the rights of territorians. As he said in his second reading speech, territories "do not have rights - they have responsibilities, particularly to protect the ill and the vulnerable".

READ MORE:

This led to an emotional debate, in which many members of Parliament allowed their personal objections to VAD laws to overwhelm any consideration of the rights of territory residents to self-government. It shifted the decision as to whether the territories could make such a law in the future, away from the elected representatives of territory residents and into the hands of Federal Parliament, the vast majority of whose members are not answerable for their actions to residents of the territories.

This interference in the good government of the territories was quite unwarranted, not least because it allowed Mr Andrews to impose his own doubtless sincerely held religious, moral or ethical beliefs about VAD on the residents of the territories, without consideration for their equally sincerely held contrary beliefs. It was a violation of the basic principles on which self-government was conferred.

Quite apart from that, the main reason for the overriding of the RTI Act was that it was considered inappropriate for the NT Legislative Assembly, the smallest legislature in the Commonwealth, to have taken the lead in enacting a law on VAD. That was a temporary situation which was always likely to change, and which now, over 20 years later, has changed quite dramatically - with VAD laws enacted in Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania, and under consideration in the other three states.

The unjust, discriminatory consequences of that removal of power from the NT and ACT legislatures are now all too apparent. Moreover, the circumstances that were seen as justifying intervention in the self-government of the NT in the mid-'90s no longer exist.

The Commonwealth government should respond to Dr Leigh's motion at the earliest opportunity by restoring the plenary legislative powers conferred on both territories when self-government was granted.