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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (10 December) . . Page.. 4792 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

"Do not do this. If you are doing it, do not do it. Do not offer inducements". Why would she do that? She would do it because she knows that it threatens our link with the Victorian pools. Here we are some years down the track and the very same board that negotiated the settlement, the chief executive officer - - -

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order.

MR BERRY: No, there is no point of order, my friend. I have leave to speak.

Mr Humphries: I am sorry; I thought Mr Cornwell was the Speaker. I beg your pardon.

MR SPEAKER: Sit down, Mr Berry.

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, Mr Berry a moment ago said, "Perhaps the Chief Minister covered up. We will never know". I think yesterday you ruled that the mere making of an imputation by way of a question does not make it any less of an imputation. That the Chief Minister deceived, presumably, the Assembly and the electorate is clearly an imputation, and I would ask that that imputation be withdrawn.

MR BERRY: Can I speak to this point of order? "Deceiving the electorate" has never been out of order in this place. I never made the imputation that Mrs Carnell had misled this Assembly, Mr Speaker; so Mr Humphries is quite wrong.

MR SPEAKER: I accept the explanation. However, I wish to make something quite clear to members. This is an important debate and I would like the Leader of the Opposition to be heard in silence. This will not be the last we hear of this. I am sure the debate will continue. You will all have your opportunities to make the points that you wish to make.

MR BERRY: The Burbidge report clearly documents that ACTTAB has facilitated the payment of inducements. It makes that point clear. That, of course, would be in contravention of our agreement and understandings with various TAB agencies around the country, because it threatens the future of TABs. This was the Government's board and the Government's chief executive officer. I take the view that the chief executive officer has undertaken an activity which endangers the profitability of the TAB and has not acted in the interest of the ACTTAB, and I think there is a strong argument that his services should be dispensed with.

Here is a person who was knowingly involved in an activity of a board which had to deal with the issue of inducements and VITAB, and we see a repeat of inducements being offered in the ACT with the full involvement of the chief executive officer of ACTTAB. I think that is wrong. There is a strong argument that this person's services ought to be dispensed with. I think it is made clear in the report, if you care to read that part of it, if you care to remember that part of it. These are the interesting factors which emerge from this report. Whilst the Chief Minister - - -

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