Page 3668 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 20 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (3.19): Madam Speaker, while we are on the subject of bouncing cheques I would like to remind members opposite that during the period of the Alliance Government Mr Kaine's Finance Minister, Mr Craig Duby, in fact wrote a cheque which bounced and this information found its way into the Canberra Times. When I was asked to comment on that matter I would not comment on it, because I think that to do so is sleazy. Of course what was said by Mr De Domenico is a descent into utter sleaze. Nevertheless, at the time that that incident occurred in the course of the Alliance Government, there were calls, including calls in this chamber, for Mr Kaine to sack Mr Duby. In fact, I remember probably one of the most virulent Canberra Times editorials I have ever seen in my life being on that subject.
Nevertheless, the Liberal Government of the day did not sack the then Minister for Finance for the same offence that Mr De Domenico now accuses Mr Wright of. Mr Duby was in this house to defend himself, Madam Speaker, and that was one major difference. He also had his then Chief Minister, Mr Kaine, defending him as well. Madam Speaker, I think that the action that Mr De Domenico is taking in this matter is a gutter tactic. It is an utter gutter tactic. It adds nothing to the debate that we have already had, and it is merely a further attempt to smear a particular member of this community. It is disgraceful.
MR HUMPHRIES (3.21): Madam Speaker, Ms Follett seems to have misunderstood the nature of this exercise. This is not a question of finding out who bounces cheques and who does not. It is a question of a person occupying a publicly funded position on the basis of his supposed good business acumen, his good business reputation. Those were the Chief Minister's words. Madam Speaker, the fact of life is that whatever Mr Duby may have done - and I have no doubt that Mr Duby did indeed bounce a cheque on the occasion referred to - the question is: What was the follow-up from either of those individuals in question when that cheque bounced? As far as I am aware, Mr Duby's problem was resolved very quickly when Mr Duby made sure that the money that was not paid over on the dishonoured cheque was paid. Madam Speaker, Mr Duby honoured his debts when they were due. The difference between Mr Duby and Mr Wright is that Mr Wright's cheque was written on 28 February 1989 and it still has not been honoured - and it is now October 1993. That is - - -
Ms Follett: That is probably not true.
MR HUMPHRIES: Madam Speaker, if it is not true Mr Wright can indicate how we are wrong. The fact of life is that the cheque has been written and it has not been honoured. The Minister claims that Mr Wright is a man with a good business reputation. I say that if these allegations are true - and I believe that they are true, and I believe that Ms Follett knows that they are true, because she would not answer Mr De Domenico's question today - - -
Ms Follett: How would I know that?
MR HUMPHRIES: You should have taken it on notice, then, should you not? Madam Speaker, if the allegations are true, then Mr Wright's capacity to hold the position on the tourism advisory committee has to be called into question. Nobody who has withheld payment on the basis of his good business acumen for four years is entitled to call himself a man of good business reputation. As such, these documents ought to appear on the public record and ought to be tabled in this Assembly.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .