Page 625 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 12 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The question we must look at first of all is whether that was misleading. I think it certainly was misleading to say that other States were going for this deal. We should understand that that is the oldest sales line in the business, to get someone to make a decision in a hurry. The line is, "Look, I have someone else on the phone. Do you want to do the deal or not?". That being the case, I can understand why someone may not want to go out and ask other people who supposedly are in competition, "Are you in competition with us?". That is a viewpoint that Mr Berry could have held and he may not have wanted to talk to what he had been told was the competition.
The next point that I will look at is whether there were inducements, or could that be a problem. The information presented today, and logic, would tell us that inducements would be a huge problem, potentially, to TABs in Australia. I do not see that there is any doubt about that. Mr Berry has acknowledged that inducements can be a problem. The information that Mr Berry gave on 23 November was that VITAB is at liberty to give inducements, but immediately thereafter he tabled a letter from VITAB saying that they would not give inducements, that they would not try to lure punters in Australia overseas. I believe that that letter is not legally binding. I have read the opinions of the two solicitors on that and, when you look at them and look at the letter, I think it is agreed that it would not be legally binding.
One of the questions that Mr Wood brought up and that I was interested in was how the TABs were doing around Australia, particularly in Victoria. I would like to see a month-by-month turnover in Victoria for the last 12 months. That would be interesting. We are told that the ACTTAB turnover has increased 6 per cent in the last year. I wonder which part of the last year and I wonder how it has been going over the last few months. Perhaps that could be supplied. In other words, there could be changes that have occurred more recently due to an increase in the turnover of VITAB in Vanuatu.
One of the points I look at is ministerial responsibility. There is no question, or there should be no question, that the Minister is responsible to the parliament. We also have a responsibility, on behalf of the people of the ACT, to ensure that the Minister does his job. There is no question of that. One of the points that I am concerned about, and this has been an ongoing concern for five years, is whether Mr Berry was helpful as a Minister at least to other members of this Assembly when he had access, presumably, to all the information, or certainly could have gained the information. I think one must come to the conclusion that he was not being open and helpful to the Assembly or to all members in the Assembly. One can suggest that there might be reasons for this if someone feels that they are going to be attacked. However, a Minister has a responsibility to serve the parliament, and I am not sure that that was done.
One point that was made by the Chief Minister just before we recessed for a break was that that was an appalling or atrocious thing and that we should not do it. She said that the Liberal Party members should not go and have a meal and should not have the opportunity to lobby other MLAs. I suggest that it was a perfectly valid thing. I think it is a trifle unfair to suggest that only they would have the opportunity to lobby MLAs. Everybody has had that opportunity. I think that Ms Szuty, Mr Moore and I have been totally open to anybody to come along to us and to present any information. I think the three of us have spent a considerable amount of time allowing people to do just that.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .