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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (Wednesday, 25 August 2004) . . Page.. 4137 ..

MS GALLAGHER: The opposition is saying that I am hiding behind the public interest disclosure excuse. The fact is that there is a Public Interest Disclosure Act and it is very clear about how these matters are to be handled. I have not received the public interest disclosure. My office has not received the public interest disclosure. It received 12 pages of a supposedly 43-page fax, which may be the same as the document that you have been reading from, Mrs Burke; I do not know.

Advice came back from the department very swiftly. It was saying, “There is no role for the minister in public interest disclosures. There is a public interest disclosure. We cannot brief you on it. We are taking legal advice.” That was the end of the involvement. I never saw the fax. I do not whether it is about the thing that is being investigated. Who knows? I have not seen the document that you have, Mrs Burke. I think that it would be in everyone’s best interests, including those of the complainant and possibly other people who may or may not be named in that public interest disclosure, to allow for the investigation to go ahead.

Even if I had received the public interest disclosure, as I said yesterday, I could not have done anything with it anyway because of the way that public interest disclosures are handled. If you are trying to trip me up on whether I received it and whether I have misled the Assembly, you can keep trying, but the fact is that I have not. I will say it again: my office has not received the public interest disclosure, I have not received it and I am not involving myself in any way with it.

I would really urge that this matter be put aside to allow for the investigation and natural justice to occur for all of those involved in this matter, because there is a law in place that allows for it to be handled. It is actually about protection for all the people involved and what we are not doing here is protecting anybody.

MRS BURKE: I have a supplementary question. Minister, given that this is not about the detail per se, why did your senior adviser request the PID if you did not want to know the contents?

MS GALLAGHER: As I said, my understanding of the conversation that occurred between the CPSU organiser and my adviser was that there was a whole range of allegations being made—a whole range, nothing specific—to do with the Department of Education and Training and, as with people ringing anyone’s office to make allegations, you would usually say, “Is there anything you have got to support them?” I would have to check with my adviser about whether he specifically asked for a fax to be sent.

Mr Smyth: You haven’t asked?

MS GALLAGHER: I have not actually asked that question. I understand that a fax was sent. I do not know who instigated the fax, but I doubt very much that the CPSU organiser knew what she was dealing with. That is my understanding. I do not think that she knew it was a public interest disclosure, but that may not be the case. I will check with my adviser about who asked for the fax to be sent, but my adviser has acted absolutely appropriately and above board all the way with this matter.

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