Page 2680 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 25 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DE DOMENICO: And that is what a bagman is. That is the whole point of this situation, Madam Speaker. Mr Berry is now attempting to censure Mrs Carnell, me and Mr Humphries for virtually repeating what was said by the Western Australian royal commission.
Mr Humphries: That is right.
MR DE DOMENICO: That is exactly right. Ms Follett obviously was not aware of this.
Ms Follett: I was. I said that I was.
MR DE DOMENICO: You were aware? We asked the question, quite rightly, of the Chief Minister: If she was aware, did she consider that the appointment of Mr Wright was a good appointment? She said yes. She is entitled to say that, but this Opposition is also entitled to bring to the public domain very important concerns expressed by the royal commission.
It will be interesting to see how members vote on this motion. I can recall Mr Moore, for example, using certain names in this place in relation to a development in Braddon about three or four months ago. I heard no-one move to censure Mr Moore. Mr Moore did not have the use of a royal commission inquiry into anything. He purely and simply, of his own volition, stood up and slurred the names of three or four prominent members of this community. Mr Berry was not on his feet saying, "Hey, listen! Let us censure Mr Moore for doing this, because this is disgusting". Ms Follett said nothing; she just smiled. But it really hurts when a prominent member of the Labor Party and a member of the ACT community is found by the royal commission to have been involved in things that were considered by the royal commission not to be all hunky-dory. Members opposite will realise that it was good enough for this royal commission and the activities of Mr Burke and Mr Dowding and others to bring down the Western Australian Government. That is what the activities of Mr Burke and his mates did. They brought down the Government of Western Australia.
If the Opposition in this place raises a question about a prominent member of the ACT community named in the same report that brought down the Western Australian Government, of course it is of concern to the community. Why should we not bring it up? In fact, if we had not brought it up we would have been remiss in our duties as members of the Opposition. So Mr Berry's motion to censure three members of the Opposition for asking a question because Mr Berry did not like the way it was asked is poppycock. It just shows how Mr Berry does not understand the gravity of the situation. Madam Speaker, quite obviously the Opposition will not be supporting Mr Berry's motion. It will be very interesting to see the way the Independents go.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (3.36): Madam Speaker, the Opposition this afternoon have used the old gutter tactics of the slur and the innuendo to attack a member of the public who has no redress in this chamber. Mrs Carnell and Mr De Domenico have tried to create the impression that there was some adverse finding against Mr Wright in a royal commission report. They continue to use the word "bagman", knowing the implication that the word "bagman" carries to the ordinary member of the public. We all know about bagmen for organised crime, bagmen for illegal activities.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .