Page 4022 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 22 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR SPEAKER: Mr Moore, he will have an opportunity. That is not a point of order.
Mr Moore: The point of order comes back to the issue of whether we can use draft Hansard that is currently before an Estimates Committee as though it is Hansard, as though it is a true and accurate transcript of something that has gone on.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Moore, I thought I just answered that objection. Please proceed, Mr Duby.
MR DUBY: In response to various questions that were put to him by Ms Maher, Mr Connolly has said quite categorically that there will be a reduction in staff in that area. Secondly, he has then denied ever saying to the Estimates Committee that there would be any reduction in staff at all. Page 46 of the draft Hansard of last Thursday confirms that, as does page 47.
Subsequently, he was asked again on Thursday, in question time - if I can just find my drafts here - how he then was able to justify the supposed inconsistency between his statements to the Estimates Committee and the statements to this Assembly. His responses again were along the lines of, "Oh, no, no. When I say, 'no, no', I must say it is usually the 'no, no' that I say when I am trying to cut a silly question out". The question asked was, "Can you give an undertaking; will there be any changes in the number of staff employed?". His response was, "Oh, no, no". That is not an equivocal answer from Mr Connolly.
I might point out, Mr Speaker, that at the time that he was answering these questions he had the draft copy of the Estimates Committee hearings in his hand. The simple fact is that Mr Connolly is one of those persons in this world who cannot bear to admit that they may have ever made a mistake, or had a lapse of memory, or whatever.
At this stage no-one is suggesting that Mr Connolly is deliberately trying to mislead the Assembly. We all know Mr Connolly's personality. We all know that it would be anathema for him to admit that perhaps he had made a mistake, that perhaps he had had his wires crossed, that perhaps there had been some error in his recollection of what he may or may not have said.
In finishing our question time last Thursday I specifically again asked Mr Connolly the question:
Can he assure the house - and I would ask him to think about the answer - that he has not misled the Estimates Committee?
Again he goes into it and says, "I believe that I have answered it truthfully". So far, we are still giving Mr Connolly the benefit of the doubt.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .