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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 13 May 2004) . . Page.. 1786 ..

of the probing going on through the coroner. Let me remind people that the substance of the cabinet meeting on Thursday came to light only during the course of the McLeod inquiry. The ministers had done nothing to alert this Assembly of that meeting and what it heard.

I cite just one quote from Hansard—Mr Smyth has already referred to it—from 3 March 2004. It sums up the Chief Minister’s deception. The Chief Minister is caught in question time clearly denying that he had contact with officials on the morning of Saturday, 18 January. I quote:

…the telephone call that I received from Mr Keady—which was the first contact I had with any of my officials on that day—was somewhere around one o’clock…

I repeat:

…which was the first contact I had with my officials on that day…

We now know this to be totally untrue. What is this Assembly to do with a Chief Minister—a head of government—who has betrayed its trust? Governments are well aware of the importance of accountability and this ACT Labor government is no exception. Indeed, the very first sentence of Labor’s preamble in its code of conduct for ministers issued only in February this year—so it is very much up to date—states:

The position of Government Minister is one of trust.

This is elaborated upon in section 2 “Respect for the law and the system of government”, which states:

Ministers will uphold the laws of the Australian Capital Territory and Australia, and will not be a party to their breach, evasion or subversion. Ministers will act with respect towards the institution of the Legislative Assembly and are to ensure that their conduct, whether in a personal or official capacity, does not bring the Assembly into disrepute, or damage public confidence in the system of government.

Under “Conformity with the principles of accountability and financial and collective responsibility” the code of conduct goes on to state that:

Being answerable to the Assembly requires Ministers to ensure that they do not wilfully mislead the Assembly in respect of their ministerial responsibilities. The ultimate sanction for a Minister who so misleads is to resign or be dismissed. Ministers should take reasonable steps to ensure the factual content of statements they make in the Assembly are soundly based and that they correct any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity.

We know that the Chief Minister, the subject of this motion of no confidence, supports and espouses these commendable, fundamental virtues. Apart from Labor’s code, Mr Stanhope is fond of stressing their importance in debates in this Assembly. Indeed, the five motions of censure or want of confidence the current Chief Minister has either initiated or participated in since his election in 1998 are studded with such references that he quotes with approval.

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