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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 5 Hansard (25 August) . . Page.. 1210 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

Mr Whitcombe's proposal was based on him bringing the whole property to the venture. In discussing this with Mr Whitcombe, he has indicated that he was not aware of the former withdrawals.

On 28 May the Chief Minister is absolutely confident.

Ms Carnell: That he did not know when he came to the PA.

MR STANHOPE: That is right.

Ms Carnell: Otherwise he is a liar.

MR STANHOPE: That is right. Otherwise he is a liar.

Ms Carnell: So you are saying he is a liar?

MR STANHOPE: No, I am not. I will just read the rest of the sentence. There is a "however" there, Chief Minister. You were not listening. This is Ms Pegrum to the Chief Minister on 18 May:

However, PALM has advised that file notes indicate that Mr Whitcombe was present at a meeting within DUS at which the tenure area was discussed.

Ms Carnell: So you are saying he is a liar?

MR STANHOPE: No, I am saying you are.

MR SPEAKER: Order, please! We can dispense with this censure debate and both of you can go outside and talk about it, the way it is going at the moment.

MR STANHOPE: I withdraw.

Mr Kaine: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: No, they cannot. This is interesting.

MR STANHOPE: What we are discussing here is the absolute confidence of the Chief Minister that Mr Whitcombe never knew; yet we have only a week earlier the chief official in the Chief Minister's Department telling the Chief Minister that DUS had advised them that he knew. Maybe DUS were wrong but I love the language - "absolute confidence" and "believed totally" - despite the fact that Ms Pegrum, chief executive in the department, was telling the Chief Minister, "Chief Minister, be warned. DUS have a file record of discussions with Mr Whitcombe in which they told Mr Whitcombe that he did not have authority over the three blocks". Make of it what you will. Why did the Government enter into an exclusive deal with Mr Whitcombe? We have discussed this. We now know, through extensive file notes, that Mr Whitcombe did not bring to the table what he thought he had.

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