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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Tuesday, 10 February 2004) . . Page.. 14 ..

the amount of work that was done by the clerk and the committee secretary to ensure that everything was put right, there has been no interference in the operation of the committee.

Criticise me for a lapse of judgment but do not turn the issue of privilege and contempt into a political football. Although Mr Hargreaves’s hand is on his heart—“more in sorrow than in anger”—this matter is really more about politics than anything else. It is easy now because Mr Corbell has been before a committee on contempt and certain findings have been found, and this seems to be a tit for tat process.

MR SPEAKER: Mrs Dunne, you should not reflect on an earlier vote of the Assembly.

MRS DUNNE: I was not reflecting on an earlier vote of the Assembly. I am reflecting on what is the likely outcome of this vote, Mr Speaker, and I think I am allowed to do that. All I can say is that there was no intent to interfere and, when the failing was brought to my attention, I acted immediately to fix it.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism, and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (11.15): First, I agree with Mrs Dunne that the smallness of this place does make it difficult for all of us in that we have to play a number of roles. That is a part of the game. I would also like to congratulate her on a well-crafted defence, not at all assisted by the crooked logic of her leader, let me say. I have to say that some of what has been put forward is an insult to our intelligence.

The well-crafted defence depends upon the claim that this leaflet was to inform petition signatories—3,000 of same. If you wanted to really connect with those people, you will find that people do put their names and addresses on petitions and it might have been worth your while writing to them, a much more efficient and effective way to contact them. I have had a little look at this leaflet and I cannot find the words “Dear petition signatory” or “this is to give feedback to petition signatories”. It starts off by attacking the ACT government: “The ACT Government seems determined to stop…” and so on. That is the case.

What we have here, according to the logic put forward, is that Mrs Dunne can effectively make a mistake, determine the gravity of that mistake herself, decide whether there should be a sanction or not, apply that, and that should be the end of the day. I do not think anybody in this Assembly has uttered more words of piety and indignation than Mrs Dunne about the so-called or maybe perceived transgressions of others. I really do consider that this is quite clearly a breach of privilege and once that is established—

Mrs Dunne: Point of order, Mr Speaker: the Treasurer cannot give his opinion on whether or not this is a breach of privilege because that is a matter for the committee.

MR QUINLAN: I have given my opinion. In as much as you can say it is not, I can say it is, and I do.

MR SPEAKER: Members should not pre-empt the work of the committee.

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