Page 2283 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
from the allegations raised is not allowed to do that without fear of coming to this place and being judged through a privileges process.
This has never happened in the ACT Assembly before. That is the warning that this joke of an Assembly today is sending. It is sending a message that if you criticise anything, regardless of whether those criticisms are true, and in this case they are not true, you can make those claims, you can fax-stream it out to every media outlet in Canberra and the person that you are offending is not allowed to write a letter back to the member correcting that record. That is what this Assembly is saying today as it starts this shambolic, joke process. That is what it will be: a joke. No-one will take it seriously.
Mr Hanson has had his feelings hurt. He has had a month off, he has had his feelings hurt and he is going to waste this Assembly’s time by prosecuting a matter that he should be embarrassed about. If you read his letters, he should be sitting here embarrassed by the media release he put out, the letters he wrote and the fact that he had to go running and crying to the Leader of the Opposition, to the estimates committee and to the Speaker because he got upset because he was caught out because someone sought to protect their reputation and the reputation of their agency. That is what this Assembly is agreeing to today if it supports this motion, and the government will not be supporting it.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Water, Minister for Energy and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (10.55): Mr Speaker, there are absolutely no grounds for this motion today. It is important I think to draw just on what matters constitute contempt. Mr Hanson asserted them himself when he quoted from the standing order, which states:
A person shall not improperly interfere with the free exercise by the Assembly or the committee of its authority … A person shall not, by fraud, intimidation, force or threat of any kind, by the offer or promise of any inducement or benefit of any kind, or by other improper means, influence a Member in the Member’s conduct as a Member …
Mr Speaker, the question before us today is: where is the fraud in Mr Cormack’s letter? There is no fraud in Mr Cormack’s letter. Where is the intimidation? Where is the threat? Where is the force? There is none of those elements that are necessary to prove even the potential for a breach of privilege, a contempt of this place and an infringement on a member’s responsibilities and rights.
Indeed, Mr Speaker, what we have heard very clearly from the Deputy Chief Minister is that what Mr Cormack did was write a letter to Mr Hanson correcting the record and inviting him to reflect on those facts and to choose for himself whether or not he should take steps to clarify his statement. Mr Speaker, the fraud is not Mr Cormack’s; the fraud is Mr Hanson’s, because Mr Hanson fraudulently alleged—
Mr Smyth: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: “fraud” is an imputation and it should be withdrawn. If there is an allegation of fraud it should be run through a substantive motion, not in this matter.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .