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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (1 March) . . Page.. 439 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

people went through the turnstiles? I suspect it is less than the number that she has quoted. Regardless of that, does the Chief Minister think that an expenditure of $84,000 of public money, even if 5,000 people did go, was money well spent on this PR exercise?

MS CARNELL: This was part of the promotion of the Olympics. The AIS was also part of it, as members would be aware. Mr Kaine could have gone on a tour of the AIS with Olympic athletes. He could have been given information about the Olympics both in Sydney and in Canberra. It is absolutely essential that we promote Canberra as an Olympic city because that is what it is. The whole event was about promoting Canberra as an Olympic destination. The money was in CTEC's budget. It was part of the promotion approach that was, if not tabled in this place, certainly released publicly last year. I believe it was a great day, and obviously a lot of Canberrans decided that it was a good thing to have a look at the AIS, to have a look at Bruce Stadium and to get more information about the Olympics. I am disappointed that Mr Kaine was not there, because I am sure he would have enjoyed it.

MR KAINE: I ask a supplementary question. I can only assume the Chief Minister's answer is: "Yes, $84,000 estimated, not actual, was a good expenditure". In the same answer, the Chief Minister confirmed that her Government was paying Mr Rob de Castella to, among other things, write a series of presumably favourable articles for the Canberra Times. I have an example of one here in which Mr de Castella is obviously knowledgeable about Auditor-General's reports and the like. I ask the Chief Minister: Precisely how much public money is Mr de Castella being paid for this public relations exercise through the Canberra Times? Or is this information, like so much other information from the Government, commercial-in-confidence?

MS CARNELL: If Mr Kaine had been absolutely honest, he would have quoted the answer to that question. What the answer said was that Project 2000 was paying - - -

Mr Kaine: That is the Government. It is a government entity.

MS CARNELL: Sorry, Project 2000 was paying Mr de Castella to do a number of things in terms of Olympic promotion. One of those was to write a series of columns. Another was to appear at, I think, three events a year and to do promotional activity with regard to the Olympics. The answer went on to say that there was no editorial input into Mr de Castella's articles.

It is atrocious for anyone to think that Rob would in any way prostitute his honest beliefs because he was being paid to do so. Anyone who thinks that is running down a great Canberran and a great Australian. What Mr Kaine has intimated is that Mr de Castella has been paid to make particular comments. That is simply not the case. It is quite clear in that answer that there is no editorial input into Mr de Castella's articles.

Mr Stanhope: That is what John Laws says.

MS CARNELL: If Mr Stanhope is also suggesting that Rob de Castella, who is a great Canberran, is of that ilk - - -

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