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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 04 Hansard (Thursday, 1 April 2004) . . Page.. 1490 ..

There have not been many privileges matters before the Assembly. This is about the third matter, all of them being in this Assembly. Whilst we have had a couple of ministers and chief ministers go, resign or be thrown out through no confidence motions in the past, I cannot think—I would welcome correction, Mr Speaker—of any incidents in this Assembly whereby a committee chair has been removed. I would strongly caution members about that. You are going down very dangerous ground there. In fact, you certainly cannot, as Mrs Cross is suggesting, if I have understood it correctly, engage in horse trading if the committee chair goes. Sorry, that is not what it is all about. Members, we have never in this Assembly got rid of a committee chair.

We have a situation here where the Assembly committee has reported. It has found that the chair of a committee has done the wrong thing and been found guilty of contempt, but the committee in its wisdom and deliberations has decided that no further action should be taken and made that recommendation to this place in a unanimous report of the committee.

In talking about precedence, there is also a fair wealth of precedence in this place that, if committees make unanimous reports, they tend to be accepted, especially when it comes to a matter like this one. I think that it is very important for members to bear that in mind and also to bear in mind the fact that Mrs Dunne has apologised on a regular basis, has stood aside as chair and has stood down from the committee.

Mr Quinlan made some comments. He was one of the members who said in the majority report in November that there was a contempt, but no further action should be taken. What has changed here? This case involved somebody else, of course, so the situation is quite different.

Mr Hargreaves said something concerning Mrs Dunne’s press release about being vindicated. I interpreted that one to mean, Mr Hargreaves, that she had a position on the markets and that she felt that whatever we had put down in the report was in line with what she believed and she felt vindicated there.

Mrs Cross: Two days before she was to give evidence at an inquiry. Come on, Bill!

MR STEFANIAK: I think that it might have been after that. Ms Dundas made the point that Mrs Dunne apologised at the first available and possible opportunity and suggested and accepted that no further action be taken. Ms Dundas, of course, was the chair of the privileges committee that brought down the report in November of last year and one of the majority who recommended that there be no further action. She has had considerable experience in these matters and shown considerable consistency and she was in a very good position to make comments and recommendations like that.

Members, I ask you to bear those matters in mind. Certainly, I think that it is important just to look at the precedents in this place, look at what has happened before. It is not a big history, but there are precedents there—precedents in relation to committee chairs, precedents in relation to getting rid of ministers and chief ministers. We have now had a little bit of precedent in relation to committees. Again, this committee has unanimously reported to us that there should be no further action and I think that it is important that the Assembly listen to the committee.

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