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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 2 Hansard (9 March) . . Page.. 418 ..

MS CARNELL: The person involved, as I understand it, was on a short-term contract in Heritage, the contract expired. It is that simple. That contract expired and she has since been offered a new short-term contract. The contracts of people on contract expire every day. That is the reasons they are on contracts. If they were in a job for the long term they would be permanent; they would have permanent positions. The person involved was on a short-term contract. That contract expired and the person has since been offered another contract, I understand, in a part of the Chief Minister's area, in an arts area. It is that simple. As I understand it, no contract was terminated. It actually expired and a new one was offered in another area of government. It seems like a totally appropriate approach to me.

MS TUCKER: I ask a supplementary question. My question was not answered, and I did not mention the employment status of that particular person at all. The point is that an accusation of conflict of interest was made. That is the point that officials clearly made to my committee. My question was: When does a close relationship constitute a conflict of interest and when does it not? We were told clearly in those committees by officials that she was seen to have a conflict of interest. That was the point of my question, which has not been answered. I am happy for it to be my supplementary question if the Chief Minister answers my question, but if she chooses not to I would like to know how the community could have any - - -

Ms Carnell: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. This is just out of order.

MR SPEAKER: It is out of order, Ms Tucker. If you have a supplementary question, would you mind asking it?

MS TUCKER: I think I might ask my first question again as a supplementary question.

MR SPEAKER: I will not guarantee that you will get an answer, because the Chief Minister has answered the question.

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, my understanding was that the comment that was made by Ms Tucker in the first question was that somehow this person in Heritage had had their contract terminated or suspended or whatever because of a conflict of interest.

Mr Kaine: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Chief Minister is dealing with a subject that Ms Tucker did not ask about.

MR SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Ms Tucker, if you wish to ask a supplementary question, ask it, but only a supplementary question. I do not want a preamble relating to the first question. Otherwise, I will rule you out of order.

Ms Tucker: I thought I had asked the first question again as my supplementary question.

Ms Carnell: You cannot do that either. It is out of order.

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