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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (6 May) . . Page.. 1480 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

Assembly today critical of Mr Collaery's competence. This is so persistent that we have to take note of it. We have to see that this antagonism is very much behind the production of that letter.

I do not know the details of that history of the Alliance Government. Others do. I do know that Mr Humphries should have put all that rancour behind him as Attorney. Just as any person repeatedly exercising legal judgments, he should have developed the ability to respond objectively to issues. His inability to do so marks him for removal from office. Even the language in the letter, I believe, is evidence of that. The language is emotional and it should not have been.

I will have a little more to say about the Attorney's office and the approach to the Bender family later, but let us look at that letter to the Law Council. Mr Humphries professes concern, and it has been cited here before today. A key paragraph says:

that is, Mr Collaery -

That is very emotive language. The whole exercise of lodging a complaint from the Attorney-General to the Law Society was the strongest possible action that could be taken. With other members, I share the concern that Mr Humphries was so worried about this, so outraged by this, that it took him all of four months or more to lodge his complaint. Just how concerned was he that it took that period of time to lodge a complaint? This much delayed response is at odds, is quite inimical, with the drastic heavy action of the complaint to the Law Council. The two just do not fit together. The question is: Why did Mr Humphries belatedly write that letter? Perhaps he always wanted to, but had no real reason to do so. Perhaps he remembered those early years and eventually, slowly, put pen to paper, and that seems more likely in view of the comments that have been made from that side today.

It is interesting to note the comments from Mr Moore. Mr Moore, along with Mr Humphries, has tracked back to those Alliance days. Mr Moore too today has attacked Mr Collaery. I ask a question that I would look for an answer to today from somebody. Did Mr Humphries write this letter of his own accord without the knowledge of anybody else in the Government? He may well have done.

Mr Humphries: Yes.

Ms Carnell: Yes.

MR WOOD: Or did he write it well informing his colleagues?

Mr Humphries: No.

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