Page 2883 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 15 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I want to stress, Mr Speaker, that we are not talking about additional funding. The fact is that the Commonwealth has not made any funding available to enable the court to meet the expenses arising out of the Winchester inquest, either in the 1989-90, deferred, or the 1990-91 financial years. As members would well appreciate, the inquest is very expensive. It is a searching and detailed inquiry, reflecting the national status and position of the late Mr Winchester. There has been recognition by the Commonwealth that the inquest is providing a valuable service to the Commonwealth. The alternative for the Commonwealth may well have been a royal commission, costing in the order of $24m. In this context I do not see how the Commonwealth could expect the Magistrates Court, for which we are now responsible since 1 July, to absorb this cost.
The proposal for an additional $200,000 was put forward, I believe, in the Commonwealth budgetary context, presumably taking into account the Magistrates Court's lack of financial capacity to carry out such an important national inquiry. The Chief Magistrate informs me that there was a clear expectation that funding would be provided by the Commonwealth, and that this was supported by Mr Duffy and his department. I was, therefore, very disappointed to have received recently a letter from Mr Duffy - out of the blue - saying that the proposal that I knew nothing about had not been approved for extra finance. His stated reason was having regard to - and I ask members to dwell on this - competing priorities and the necessity for expenditure restraint in the current fiscal climate.
I have responded to the Federal Attorney-General, expressing my disappointment to receive that letter and I have indicated to him the views of this Government, which have been transmitted to me by my colleague, the Treasurer. I have also indicated to him that I am gratified to hear media reports, at least, saying that the Commonwealth has not definitely decided to refuse funding. I have sought clarification from the Federal Attorney-General concerning this issue, and asking for reconsideration. In view of the fact that the Attorney's office saw fit to make public comment on the matter, I present the following papers:
Winchester Inquest - Copies of letters between Mr M. Duffy, MP, Commonwealth Attorney-General and Mr B. Collaery, MLA, Attorney-General on the provision of Commonwealth funds, dated 1 and 14 August 1990.
Weetangera Primary School
MRS GRASSBY: I have a question for the Minister for Education again. We might get an answer. Is the Minister reviewing his decision to close Weetangera Primary School? How is this review being conducted, and when will he announce the results?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .