Page 434 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 23 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Sullivan said:
I do not have the documents but I have no doubt that it certainly sounds right, as you report them.
Then, for the information of the members present, I tabled those documents. Then I asked Mr Sullivan this: “Mr Sullivan, why did you tell the committee that the TOC was not in its final form when only three days before it had been approved, the board had recognised that it had been approved and it had authorised you to spend that money?”
Mr Sullivan responded:
Largely because we had not revealed the TOC and we were using it. There were still … negotiations with the Bulk Water Alliance in respect of the TOC for the dam versus the TOC for the Googong to Murrumbidgee transfer. So we decided there would be no release of the fact of the TOC on the Murrumbidgee to Googong transfer until we had resolved the full TOC issues between the water security projects.
I asked Mr Sullivan this:
Would it … have been more truthful to say to the committee, “We have resolved the TOC but it is subject to negotiations and I’m not at liberty to tell you what it is”?
Mr Sullivan said:
Having listened to your report of what I said, yes, it would … have been more prudent to have used less direct language than I used.
Mr Speaker, this is the crux of the issue, but it is not the only issue that has led me to write to you on this matter and to move this motion here today.
Mr Sullivan was taken through a time line of events—a time line of events which only became apparent because I made a number of freedom of information requests and my staff and I were able to compare documents that we received under the Freedom of Information Act with the information that had been provided. We were able to review the transcript and reveal that, when Mr Sullivan had answered a direct question from the committee, he had said something that was clearly untrue. And, when challenged on this some months later—last week, on 18 February—he admitted that it was untrue and he gave a reason as to why he gave untrue information.
Mr Sullivan did not deny giving untrue information. He accepted the premise of my question when I asked him, “Why did you say the TOC was not in final form when only three days before it had been approved?” He accepted the premise of the question and said:
Largely because we had not revealed the TOC …
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .