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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 6 Hansard (25 May) . . Page.. 1838 ..

Mr Corbell: They were scheduled in advance, and you know it.

MR HUMPHRIES: That may be the case, but I don't see-

MR SPEAKER: Order, please! Just a moment. We are not going to have a cross-examination.

Mr Corbell: You asked the question and I am giving you the information.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I have to appeal here. I have been continuously interjected upon. I ask for some assistance.

MR SPEAKER: Yes. I do not want a cross-examination from either side, thank you.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, there is no evidence that Mr Smyth, even if he said those words, intended them to change Mr Gower's evidence before the standing committee. There is no evidence that Mr Smyth even knew the standing committee was meeting on a particular day when Mr Gower was going to be a witness. That is an important argument.

Other cases have occurred of people having their arms twisted or influence being exerted on people to get particular results that do not relate to committees of the Assembly. We assume that, as soon as somebody reports that to an Assembly committee, that act of attempting to influence somebody becomes a contempt of parliament. Think about that. It is not very logical.

Supposing I say to someone sitting up in the gallery, "You had better support the government's budget that has just come down otherwise we are going to get very angry with you and not build new roads in your suburb. We want you to say something nice about our budget," and that person subsequently turns up in an Assembly committee and reports that, suddenly what is merely an act of bad manners to a person in that setting becomes a contempt of parliament. You cannot work like that. You have got to actually-

Mr Kaine: Are you saying the minister is guilty of bad manners?

MR HUMPHRIES: I am saying that nothing was said of the kind that has been alleged by Mr Gower, and I say that because I know Mr Smyth is a man of integrity. Even if it was said, it could not constitute a contempt of parliament and therefore it should not be referred to a select committee on privileges. It cannot.

I said before that other brandishments and threats and so on had been made from time to time. I know Mr Wood has raised the question of how members of community organisations have had implied threats made to them that if they do not support a particular government position there will be cuts to their funding.

Mr Wood: That is right. I have said that.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Wood confirms that. I want to confirm to this house that such things do go on.

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