Page 2722 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 23 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The committee goes on to recommend:
… the Chief Minister … write again to the builders involved in the OwnPlace Scheme—those with whom he had previously corresponded and misrepresented the committee—and that the Chief Minister correct the record.
What an extraordinary reflection on the Chief Minister’s integrity when we have to, as a committee, conclude and recommend that he actually write to builders and tell the truth! We actually asked the Chief Minister to write to them. In fact, in the end we had to write to the builders themselves and correct the misrepresentation of the Chief Minister. What a reflection!
Ministerial standards are set from the top, from the Chief Minister. The example that he is giving to his ministerial colleagues is that you can misrepresent all you like; you can make it up as you go along in order to score a cheap political point; do not bother about the truth; do not bother about being accurate in your correspondence with builders and with industry.
It was a shameful episode that the committee would come to the conclusion that we had to write to these builders to actually correct the misleading statements that had been made by the Chief Minister. What a disgrace! What an outrage! What a poor reflection on this Chief Minister that we would be forced to actually do that because he was not honest, because he misrepresented, because he thought he could get some sort of cheap political hit out of it!
We also saw how things operate under this government, and, indeed, under this Chief Minister in terms of the public service and the way that government resources are used to fight political battles on behalf of the Chief Minister. What we had was a headline in the Canberra Times that the Chief Minister did not like. The Chief Minister did not like the headline in the Canberra Times. He actually had to conclude that there was absolutely nothing in the article that was incorrect, that there was not one word in the article that he could actually reasonably refute. All that he could refute was the headline which, at best, was ambiguous.
As a result of the Chief Minister not liking the headline, as a result of him being annoyed, we saw a situation where, before 9 o’clock I think, an email had been sent out essentially ordering the LDA to take out an ad in the Canberra Times to respond. He also had a letter prepared, attacking the reporting, attacking the Liberal Party. This is how the Chief Minister spends his time and this is how the Chief Minister uses the public service and public resources. He uses it to fight his political battles.
He believes that he does not get enough opportunities through press releases, through the Assembly, through daily doorstops, to actually make his case; so he has to go and spend thousands of dollars of taxpayers’ money to make the case that he clearly feels he is incapable of making in these fora. He is incapable of responding to this in a reasonable way. Perhaps the fact that he was not able to refute anything in the article suggests to us why he had to take out an ad. The ad did not actually refute anything that was in the article; it simply promoted the schemes. So we see taxpayers’ dollars spent because the Chief Minister is annoyed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .