Page 3714 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
He says, “Your press release clearly stated that in your opinion the Human Rights Act means that the government must review curriculum and pedagogy for students in non-government schools.” It does not say that. Point it out. I think it has been appropriately picked up by the crossbench. It does not say that. It does not say it anywhere. It does not mean that. The minister has taken something—fair enough, there is argy-bargy in this place, and it is the nature of parliaments all over the world—then invented a story, put it on ministerial letterhead and put it out in the way that has been done. It is disgraceful!
This letter and the way the minister behaves in public goes to the ministerial code of conduct. We have heard a lot about the code of conduct this week, and I am sure we will hear more about it. The code states:
Ministers will treat other members of the Legislative Assembly, members of the public and other officials, honestly and fairly…
Well, there is no honesty or fairness in what was written.
Mr Doszpot, in direct contrast to the behaviour of Mr Barr, has behaved with a great deal of honour in this matter. He has asked for a correction on a number of occasions. He wrote a letter asking for a correction. It asks, “I think the appropriate thing would be for you to stand up in the Assembly and apologise.” Matter done, matter all gone away.
Compare the behaviour of the contenders for the crown, Minister Gallagher and Minister Barr. Minister Gallagher made a mistake. She said something in this place and I called her on it. I said, “You are wrong, go and check your facts, I expect an apology.” The next morning, first thing, at 10 o’clock in the morning she came into this place. She had the great courage to stand up and say, “I got it wrong. I apologise.” I thanked her, and that was the end of the matter.
That is how it should be. Those are the rules. That is the way it is played. If you make a mistake, you come and apologise. You withdraw, you retract, you apologise and you do it unreservedly, with no Wally words. To give her her due, the Treasurer did exactly what should be done. She said, “I got it wrong. I apologise.” Not Mr Barr. Mr Barr was asked. A letter was written to Mr Barr, very calmly laying out the case. Mr Barr wrote back a letter attacking the person who has been verballed in this way. He continues to hide behind ministerial letterhead. He is saying, “I can take whatever you say and I can invent it. I can invent a story and put out a ministerial letterhead with the full authority of the government, knowing I have got the backing of my colleagues.” That is the shame of what is happening today.
Go back to the way this ministerial statement was made. While offering to provide some extra information to the Assembly in further answer to a question of the previous day, he made what, in effect, is a ministerial statement. Normally, for ministerial statements, the opposition and the Greens crossbench are given advance notice. But he did not do that. It is the way Mr Barr operates. It is very Lathamesque. You twist it, you invent the story and you then put it out.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .