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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Friday, 14 May 2004) . . Page.. 2036 ..

city, in good faith, entered into an arrangement with this government to provide services. In fact, it is interesting—when we asked and we found out it was about Wizard—that that account or that transaction goes back to 2000 and these people are still waiting in 2004 to get their money for services rendered. The interest component alone is astronomical, Mr Speaker. All the Treasurer was asking for was $560,000 or $580,000.

Ms Gallagher: They’ve been paid.

MRS CROSS: In full? I hear the minister for WorkCover says it’s been paid. I will be very happy to hear that it’s been paid in full, including interest and everything that that vendor has provided for this territory, rather than being forced to accept a deal because of intimidation.

The majority of members of this committee had concerns with the way the government handled that person, that company, because, in a town where we are trying to promote business, to foster our economy and to look out for small business, not just large business—

Mrs Burke: You might be; they’re not.

MRS CROSS: Yes. It appeared—and I might be wrong; if you’re trying to do the right thing good on you; but it didn’t seem like that when we delved into this matter—questionable. If you don’t like this—

Members interjecting—

MR SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr Quinlan, please. Members, this risks falling into chaos unless we can get some silence while Mrs Cross concludes her remarks.

MRS CROSS: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

The other thing that was disappointing for the committee, Mr Speaker, follows the opportunity that we offered to the industrial relations minister to come back and give us supplementary information. The committee requested and was very happy to receive information. (Extension of time granted.) It was disappointing that, while the minister was giving that evidence—and I’m not going to say that the minister was directly responsible for this because it could have been other people; I was very concerned—press releases were going out; the media was being informed of things that we were being advised of during that situation; and there was information not being disclosed to the committee.

One could say she doesn’t have to; the government doesn’t have to tell us anything. But what about that open, accountable and transparent approach? It didn’t appear to be that way. In fact, the majority of members of this committee felt that the committee was perhaps exploited for the media. Rather than being open, accountable and transparent, it didn’t look good; and we were disappointed in the way it was approached.

A media release went out at 5.25 pm from the minister’s office. The minister was giving evidence between 5.00 and 6.00 pm. It was on WIN News at 6.03 that night—very interesting timing, Mr Speaker; very interesting how that whole approach was handled.

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