Page 4462 - Week 14 - Thursday, 1 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, I think it is important for us to look at the background of this matter, and to look, first of all, at how this Minister has handled this issue. Yesterday this house passed a motion which was then dealt with publicly by me, by Mrs Carnell, in particular, and by the Minister for Health, who also is the Attorney-General. That public appearance was the beginning of a series of misrepresentations which built up a picture as to how this Minister was going to act. Madam Speaker, when I come to the real reason for this motion, it will be a specific instance of deliberately misleading the house, but I think it is important to put it in its context. The context is that this Minister went into the public arena and constantly talked about an open slather. He constantly talked as though a piece of legislation passed in this house would in some way increase supply.
Mr Connolly: That is what my legal advice says.
MR MOORE: Even now, Madam Speaker, as I say "would increase supply", he interjects to refer to his legal opinion. Madam Speaker, his legal opinion specifically says that this would in no way affect supply. That is exactly what it says. Madam Speaker, he shakes his head now. Perhaps it is the arrogance of this Minister that has caused these sorts of problems.
Madam Speaker, on a previous occasion a no-confidence motion in a Minister has been carried in this house. It was against the previous Minister for Health. It was carried on the notion that a series of statements had been made and they had created an impression. They finally gave the house the impression that something was so when it was not so. Madam Speaker, that was indeed a serious matter, and you may well remember that it was reported seriously in the media. On this occasion, Madam Speaker, I considered the possibility of a censure motion. Indeed, I have discussed that with Ms Szuty. I discussed with Mrs Carnell and with Mr Humphries whether a censure motion would be more effective. Considering the heat of the time, Madam Speaker, that was indeed a temptation. Unfortunately, I think that that would be inconsistent with the previous no-confidence motion that was carried against Mr Berry. Where a case of deliberately misleading the house has occurred, there is no choice but for this house to demand the highest standard and to say, "You cannot mislead this house. You cannot mislead this house and be a Minister".
Madam Speaker, I said at the beginning that I would distinguish the issue from the action, and that is what I am intending to do. The notion of open slather was continued in this house today. That is conjecture. It is about what might happen in the future. It is a bit of political invective, although it does continue to increase the impression that something is when something is not. Madam Speaker, the specific action was a response from Mr Connolly when he informed this house that the AIDS Action Council did not support the legislation that went through yesterday. When he informed the house, Madam Speaker, that that was not the case, that he had been informed that that was not the case, that was entirely inappropriate and it was deliberately misleading this house.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .