Page 3309 - Week 11 - Thursday, 22 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, by innuendo, I believe that Mr De Domenico is trying to cast a slur on my part in this business delegation. I can confirm, Madam Speaker, that it does appear that an amount of around $1,000 was misplaced, lost or stolen after it was forwarded to Treasury by an officer - not by me, by an officer.
Madam Speaker, there has been an independent inquiry carried out into that matter by a senior officer and, unfortunately, the missing funds were not located during that process. As a consequence of that, the matter has been forwarded to the Fraud Prevention Unit, and the inquiry officer's report has also been forwarded. It is now in the Fraud Prevention Unit's hands to arrange a formal investigation of the circumstances surrounding the missing money. In the meantime, Treasury is implementing revised procedures - much-needed revised procedures, I might say; I totally agree with Mr De Domenico on that point, I am sure - and better controls for the receipt of moneys, to ensure that such errors do not occur again.
MR DE DOMENICO: I have a supplementary question, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: You had your supplementary question, I think, Mr De Domenico.
Mr Humphries: No.
MADAM SPEAKER: I would rule that you had two questions.
Mr Humphries: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: The Chief Minister asked Mr De Domenico to clarify a matter in his question. It hardly counts as a supplementary question. He simply repeated - - -
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! Please be seated, Mr Humphries. Mr De Domenico, you may proceed; but I find it very difficult when members keep on and on with these tedious supplementary questions.
MR DE DOMENICO: I assure you that this one is not tedious. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order!
MR DE DOMENICO: I ask the Chief Minister, noting that there was an SES officer on her Japan trip last year, whether an officer would have signed an agreement by cardholders which states:
I will not use my ACT Corporate Credit Card to draw cash or its equivalent.
If this is the case, how can Treasury occasionally approve cash withdrawals? Under what circumstances, and for what reasons, was this particular approval granted?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .