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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1438 ..

Ms McRae: You are just talking rubbish.

MR HUMPHRIES: We are not talking rubbish.

Ms McRae: You are so.

Mrs Carnell: But if it is only about the recount and there are no names of people or patients' names or - - -

Ms McRae: That is what the motion says, for heaven's sake. What are you talking about? That is what the motion says.

MR SPEAKER: Proceed, Mr Humphries. We will get this over a lot faster if there are no interjections.

MR HUMPHRIES: It is also possible that information which does not contain a name - that is, where a name has been omitted - may still be information which nonetheless identifies a person by virtue of the person being in charge of the area being discussed.

Mr Moore: But it says "excluding any information which may lead to the identification of any officer". That is a reasonable approach.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I have real doubts because I think it is extremely vague. I think it is a dangerous precedent to set. I think the Assembly needs to be careful about this. If you sit down and think about this carefully, there is literally an endless amount of information which could be included in it. If Mr Berry is fishing for something, let him say what it is that he wants. If he knows of a meeting or believes there were meetings, let him say what those meetings are and we will table the minutes of those meetings. What he has asked for here is extremely unspecific.

MR MOORE (5.45): Mr Speaker, I rise to speak to both the motion and the amendment. My memory takes me back to a time in a previous Assembly. If a motion like this had been put up and a Labor Minister had moved an amendment of the type Mrs Carnell has moved, she and Mr Humphries certainly would not have accepted it. Maybe, with the wisdom of being in government and realising how many papers there are to deal with and all the other issues, things change. There is no doubt, and Mr Humphries has said this himself, that things change when you are in government. I cannot remember his exact words, but they were something along those lines.

Mr Speaker, it seems to me that the compromise that Mr Berry has come up with is a very effective one. He said "details, excluding any information which may lead to the identification of any officer". I think that is a perfectly reasonable way of going about this process. It is interesting that Mr Humphries is saying, "Why are you asking this question? Tell us what you want. Why are you going on this fishing expedition?". My memory also takes me back to Mr Humphries, Mrs Carnell and Mr De Domenico going on a fishing expedition on a matter associated with VITAB.

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