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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (26 August) . . Page.. 2433 ..

MR SPEAKER: I will not involve myself. I will, however, allow you, Mr Berry, to develop your theme; but do not let it run for too long.

MR BERRY: That is right. The line of questioning that was raised by the Opposition on the date in question was about this Government not doing probity checks on companies whose character was in question in a commission of inquiry. Who would employ somebody who was a central figure in a serious commission of inquiry to do very serious work in relation to an important Territory-owned corporation? Nobody with any sense would, and that was the point that we were making in relation to the question.

Mrs Carnell: Mr Speaker, I take a point of order again. This is simply not the issue of the censure.

MR BERRY: It is the issue.

Mrs Carnell: It is not the issue of the censure. The issue of the censure is quite definite. Mr Berry and Ms McRae said that this company had been involved in tax rorts and had defrauded governments. Unless they can show that there is evidence that that is the case, it is out of order.

MR BERRY: That is not the point.

MR SPEAKER: It is out of order, Chief Minister, but they are certainly not making a case for themselves. If they wish to pursue that line, I suppose it will be evident to members of the Assembly whether they are making a case or whether they are not.

MR BERRY: Mr Speaker, I thank you very much for your learned comments in relation to whether I make a case or not, but it really is not your position to do so.

MR SPEAKER: No. I am actually upholding your right to continue the line that you are taking, Mr Berry. Whether that is a good idea or not is up to you.

MR BERRY: The very point I make in respect of this matter is that the questions - Mrs Carnell selectively quoted certain matters which were raised in the course of those questions - were pointed not so much at the issue of whether Fay Richwhite was good or bad but at the fact that the Government had appointed these people without doing probity checks on them. We proved that point; no question. And we proved that, while they had these question marks over their character, the Government was still prepared to employ them. So, that is the real point at issue, Mr Speaker, not the one that the Government has tried to use to divert attention from the fact that it failed the people of the ACT miserably in respect of that matter.

At the very beginning, I am willing to accept that I may have been presumptuous to have described the dealings of Fay Richwhite as fraudulent, and I withdraw that comment. On any assessment, the question of fraud was on foot in that commission hearing; but, as I have said, that was presumptuous of me, and I withdraw it unequivocally. However, I stand by my claims that the schemes that this company was involved in were rorts of the first order, that the Chief Minister was negligent and that she did not conduct probity checks of this company.

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