Page 2017 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
as was indicated by Mr Connolly in respect of what it was possible for Professor Pearce as an inquirer into these matters to make comment on when he was conducting his inquiry. I quote from page 3 of the report, where reference is made to the question of privilege which you, Madam Speaker, raised with Professor Pearce. He said:
It is at least questionable whether reference may not be made to statements made in public session that are reported in the proceedings of the Assembly to confirm statements made before a Board of Inquiry.
I say no more about that subject at this stage. I would like to comment about that further on another occasion.
Madam Speaker, I want to conclude by saying that the Chief Minister said in March that the contract was unquestionably a good deal for the Territory. Mr Berry said that the VITAB agreement was a big winner for the ACT. Those statements today are in tatters. Compare what the Opposition said about those matters in the course of the last few months to what the Pearce inquiry has found about those matters. The deal was badly thought through. That has been found by Professor Pearce. The principals' background was not adequately checked. The implications of the deal for other TABs in Australia were overlooked by the TAB. The directorship of VITAB was misstated in this place on several occasions. Every one of those claims has been vindicated.
It is grossly distorting for members of this Government to go out of this place and pretend that this Pearce inquiry report is a vindication of the actions of this Government. If it were, we would be entitled to ask the question, "Why should it be that the TAB board has been sacked?". As Mr Moore put it quite well, "If incompetence has been found, then incompetence must be punished". If the Government claims that nothing was wrong with this deal, why has it gone ahead to punish the incompetents, the TAB board, for having advised the Minister to enter into this arrangement?
Mr De Domenico: And who appointed the board?
MR HUMPHRIES: Indeed, who appointed the board? Professor Pearce does not say, as Mr Berry suggested, that the Liberal claims are baseless; quite the contrary. He suggests that most of them, if not all of them, are true. It is sheer nonsense for Mr Berry to rise in this place and suggest that it is the Liberal Party in this place which is responsible for the cancellation of the VicTAB contract. He talked about muckraking and then threw a great wad of mud across the chamber. What complete and utter nonsense! Obviously, he roamed through this report searching desperately for words of vindication. There were pitifully few in the report to turn to.
Debate (on motion by Mr Kaine) adjourned.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .