Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 8 Hansard (26 October) . . Page.. 2122 ..

Mr Hird: You would victimise her. That is what you are saying.

Mr Wood: You put her in that spot.

Mr Hird: I did not put her in the spot; she put herself in the spot.

MS FOLLETT: You are the MLA.

Mr Humphries: How many wives are the property of husbands who can tell them what to do?

MS FOLLETT: Mr Speaker, we have also heard - - -

MR SPEAKER: It is called affirmative action.

MS FOLLETT: Thank you, Mr Speaker. When you get to interject, who gets to control you? That is what I would like to know.

MR SPEAKER: I have tried to control this. Continue.

MS FOLLETT: Thank you. We have also heard from members opposite veiled inferences that Mr Whitecross himself has a conflict of interest by virtue of the fact that his wife has been employed by the ACT Government Service. I would like to say a few words on that. First of all, for the period that Mr Whitecross has been an MLA his spouse has not worked for the ACT Government Service, and that is for the very reason that her job has been abolished and she was got rid of, in effect. Nevertheless, prior to that, she was an ACT public servant under both the Alliance and Labor governments.

Mr De Domenico: And a very good one.

MS FOLLETT: And a very good one indeed. She was appointed on merit, and she was most certainly not appointed by the Government, Mr Speaker, or by anybody close to the Government. She was appointed in the normal public service manner. Mr Speaker, I reject absolutely the inferences that have been made by those opposite that somehow Mr Whitecross's spouse reduces the case against Mr Hird. This is absolute nonsense.

Mr De Domenico: We did not make any inferences at all. You are the one throwing the mud around.

MS FOLLETT: The inferences were there, Mr Speaker. I also want to speak very briefly about the material facts that surround this matter. It is a very sad reflection on Mr De Domenico's capabilities as a Minister that not one of the material facts here has been correctly portrayed by him. He has been wrong on everything. I accept that it has not always been his fault; nevertheless it is the case. If we look to Mr De Domenico's assertion that the auction contract was won by the auctioneer putting forward the lowest price, it is a fact that Harold Hird and Associates' price was not the lowest price. There was a tender for zero.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .