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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4732 ..

MR SPEAKER: Standing order 117(h) states:

A question fully answered cannot be renewed.

I uphold the point of order.

MRS LITTLEWOOD: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Attorney-General, Mr Humphries. Can the Attorney-General inform the Assembly of what steps should be undertaken, as a matter of sound commercial practice, to ensure that probity checks are undertaken on people with whom the Government enters into major commercial contracts? How do these processes compare with those undertaken as part of the VITAB contract approved by the former Minister for Sport, Mr Berry?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I thank Mrs Littlewood for that very pertinent question. As far as the first part of her question is concerned, a lawyer involved in a commercial transaction is under a duty to assist his or her client to identify matters which may affect the client's interests. In this regard, the role of my department is to work with its clients to identify what is necessary to protect those interests. Any action taken depends upon the subject matter of the contract, any particular matters associated with the contract, and so on. Assessment of probity is based on information provided, information which is available or which can be ascertained, and that which is known to a person from their reputation or standing. It is usually not a question which is very difficult to ascertain, I might say.

Sound commercial practice requires that all information which can be obtained is obtained when the Government enters into major commercial contracts. However, the relevant information is not always available to government; nor is it always in the public domain. The Government does not have any special powers, save where they are clothed in a statutory authority, to gain information of a commercial or criminal nature. It is certainly the practice of this Government, Mr Speaker, where necessary, to invite those with whom it proposes to contract to give it the authority to obtain all necessary information and also make disclosure on specific matters relevant to the subject matter of the contract, where that is appropriate.

I will set the scene here by quoting what the Burbidge report had to say about the concept of probity. In paragraph 84 the report states:

The concepts of probity in the context of gaming licences is well recognised. It embraces not merely absence of convictions, but ideas of reputation, financial stability, background and associates.

This is a concept that is understood to be an integral part of any contract to do with gaming, or it should be. It is a concept that is understood by most people in this place, but obviously not Mr Berry. Those of us who were here in the First Assembly remember all too well the probity checks that were carried out, for example, on the potential casino

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