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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Thursday, 24 June 2004) . . Page.. 2719 ..

What has become clear to me is that in those discussions quite simple notions of expressing regret or apologising for distress caused were something that could go a long way to recognising the value of one’s statements in this place and the value of one’s approach to the work that we all do here. I do have regret and recognise the concerns that crossbench members in particular have raised in this place. Unlike members opposite, I feel that they have at least recognised the human dimension to this discussion and that there is the need to honour words not just in what is said but also in how it has been said.

I do apologise for my actions and for the concerns and distress they have caused members in this place. I recognise that there is an opportunity to build a more constructive relationship with a range of members in this place and I will be endeavouring to do so. Again, I reiterate to members that this opportunity is one that I think can come about as a result of the discussions that have occurred this evening, but it is equally one which allows us to focus on the business of government in this place rather than, I would have to argue, the fairly difficult and, in some respects, less relevant discussions that we have had to embark upon in recent times.

I do express my concern and my regret to members for the distress I have caused them. I understand that members take this issue very seriously and I do intend to pay greater attention to that in the time between now and the next election—and beyond, if I have the opportunity—in whatever role I have in this place.

MRS DUNNE (9.52): This is a very serious matter and has not been done lightly. I think that most members on this side who have been around this place know exactly how gut-wrenching an experience like this is for a member. I also know, because I have sat on the advisors’ bench, how gut wrenching it is for the staff who are supporting their member and who always have in the back of their minds that, if everything goes wrong, their jobs are on the line as well. Therefore, this has not been done lightly.

I want to speak about only one matter today. I also remind members that, as Ms Dundas said, this motion is about persistently and wilfully misleading the Assembly. Ministerial conduct and honesty are the key as to how parliaments work. It is a primary convention of responsible government that ministers who mislead parliament are expected to resign or be dismissed from office. This is borne out in the House of Representatives Practice, which says:

In cases where a minister has misled parliament … resignation or dismissal is the appropriate action.

The ministerial code of conduct of both the previous government and this government sets quite a high bar about ministerial honesty. It states:

The position of a government Minister is one of trust.

Being a Minister demands the highest standards of probity, accountability, honesty, integrity and diligence ...

There are things about “full and true disclosure”; “Ministers to ensure that they do not wilfully mislead the Assembly in respect of their Ministerial responsibilities”; and

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