Page 805 - Week 05 - Thursday, 6 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Personal Explanations
MR KAINE: I seek to make a personal explanation of a matter that arose from Mr Collaery's discourse.
MR SPEAKER: Does the member claim to have been misrepresented?
MR KAINE: Yes, Mr Speaker. There is reason to believe that I may have been misrepresented, and I would like to clear that matter up. Mr Collaery has completed an erudite discourse. It has been wide-ranging; ranging from 1933 Nazi Germany to the USSR and back to various activities within Australia and within this Territory. During the course of his learned and comprehensive response to the Government's challenge, he alluded to the fact that once I sat on the GALA board concurrently with Mr Tony Hedley. It happens that I did sit on the GALA board for a short time while Mr Hedley was the departmental representative on that board. Indeed, as a member of the House of Assembly between 1982 and 1986, I saw Mr Hedley on a business basis on many occasions in his capacity as a senior officer of the ACT Administration.
I had a similar relationship with all other members of the GALA board and with all senior public servants in the ACT Administration. In some cases, those other relationships were closer and more sustained than that which I had with Mr Hedley. I was not in the chamber when Mr Collaery's comment was made, and I missed the context of it. I trust, however, that Mr Collaery was not implying any impropriety in the fact that I once, for a short time, sat as a member of the board of GALA, and that Mr Tony Hedley happened to be a member at the same time. But to ensure that no such inference can be drawn, by the media or by others, I would ask Mr Collaery to make it clear that there was no such implication in the words that he used.
MR COLLAERY, by leave: I rise to address the Assembly with the complete confidence that there was no suggestion of impropriety. The indication in respect of Mr Hedley was an aside to do with the perceived level at which Mr Kaine appeared to know of this senior official, Mr Hedley. There was absolutely no suggestion, of course, that there is any association with any of the matters raised. It was simply an aside to deal with a former colleague. The remark was meant in that context. Of course, I hope that the press does not draw any inference from that of the nature that Mr Kaine mentioned, because it would be a sad day if that occurred. When one is on one's feet for that period, there is always the possibility that there can be a suggestion arising from the words which has no relevance to the issue.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .