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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 04 Hansard (Thursday, 1 April 2004) . . Page.. 1483 ..

was in contempt. I would like to read from paragraphs 5.4, 5.5 and 5.6 of the privileges committee report. Paragraph 5.4 states:

However much Mrs Dunne protests that she in no way intended to mislead or influence the outcome of the inquiry, it remained her responsibility to realize that her actions were ‘likely to amount to an improper interference with the free exercise by … a committee of its authority or functions.

Paragraph 5.5 reads:

As discussed elsewhere in this report a member must distinguish between his or her role as an individual member and as a participant in the committee process. While this distinction is not always easy to make, the committee is of the view that in this case it was quite clear that there has been a seriously inappropriate blurring of these roles.

Paragraph 5.6 reads:

Mrs Dunne has admitted her ‘mistake’ in confusing her roles in both the committee and the Assembly and did disqualify herself from further involvement in the remainder of the Planning Committee’s supermarket inquiry.

I was looking back over the debate—I am not reflecting on that debate, Mr Speaker—that established the committee on privileges. At that time Mrs Dunne said that she apologised to the committee and offered to withdraw from the inquiry because it was put to her that she had crossed the line. She went on to say that she immediately admitted her mistake, she did that freely and unequivocally, and she had no intention to interfere with the work of the committee. With those undertakings from Mrs Dunne, the fact that the report into the Aldi inquiry was able to be completed and tabled, and the recommendation by the committee that no further action be taken, it does seem a bit heavy-handed to censure Mrs Dunne at this point.

I think we have to look at what else we have done in this place. Members have already referred to privileges inquiries that have looked into a number of issues, one of which was the actions of the Minister for Health. The outcome of that debate was that this Assembly expressed concern at the minister’s actions.

I think in today’s debate this Assembly is also expressing its concerns. I think the privileges committee report does that—it expresses its concerns at Mrs Dunne’s actions. It talks about the need for members of this Assembly to be quite clear in the distinction between their roles, to try and find the appropriate balance between their roles on committees, their roles as representatives for electorates, and their roles as spokespersons for political parties. The report notes that this is a very difficult thing to do, but there are clear examples why it is important that this be done. We need to treat the committee process with respect, so that the community remains confident in the work that the committees do.

I think this Assembly should accept the committee’s report, and we will have a debate on that report later today. I think the Assembly should accept the recommendations of the committee. All of us should be aware of the recommendations in this report, the

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