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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Tuesday, 10 February 2004) . . Page.. 4 ..

This is clearly an exhortation to the public to mount a campaign to achieve a result in the inquiry. It involves the committee secretariat in that campaign and the campaign is intended to influence the committee, which constitutes, in my opinion, an improper interference with the work of a committee of the Assembly.

With regard to the implications of the flyer for the actual inquiry, there was, in my opinion, sufficient justification for the inquiry to be aborted, sufficient indication that the integrity of the committee in the conduct of the inquiry was compromised, and sufficient indication that the community’s perception of bias by the committee was real. Indeed, the constituent who brought the matter to my attention indicated that it was considered by people to whom he had been speaking that there was no point in making submissions, because the committee’s mind had been made up.

When I brought the matter to the committee, members agreed with my concerns. The chair indicated that if there was significant feeling in the community that the inquiry had a predetermined position—and comments from members indicated that this appeared to be so—she would withdraw from the inquiry. She apologised for what she described as an inept attempt to act in the context of a local member and communicate with her electorate on an issue of concern to it.

Her withdrawal was accepted, as was her apology, and the committee resolved to issue a letter to those who had been approached by the committee to submit their case indicating that the chair had withdrawn from the inquiry, to ensure that the integrity of the inquiry was intact. A media release to this effect was also released by the chair. Mr Speaker, as far as I am concerned, this action on the part of the chair was honourable and, one hopes, has restored the confidence of the community in the committee’s deliberations on this particular issue.

However, Mr Speaker, it does not remove the notion of a contempt of the Assembly. There is an overlay with regard to this issue. I contend that the chair’s action in mounting a campaign to achieve a result in an inquiry by a committee of which she is chair and the use of the committee secretariat in that process constitute more serious offences against the Assembly.

The issue of the flyer shows, in my opinion, that the chair was prepared to interfere in the work of her own committee to achieve a political result. I contend that the issue of the flyer constitutes a serious interference in the work of the committee in that the inquiry came close to being aborted, the integrity of the committee system has been compromised and the very essence of the Assembly has been compromised.

Further, the chair has, by this action, betrayed the trust of the community, the members of the committee and the Assembly itself. The matter is made worse because the chair carries the responsibility of the opposition spokesperson on planning. The inquiry was all about a planning issue and the chair has compromised the committee by not separating her roles of committee chair, opposition spokesperson on an issue before that committee and local member.

Mr Speaker, this is a very serious matter. It goes to the integrity of the committee system and, indeed, to the integrity of the Assembly itself. This issue is one of damage to the

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