Page 574 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 9 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
prisoner projections for the ACT were 247 in 2009. So he knew in 2007, when he answered that question—because he has told us that we all knew and no-one should be surprised that the prisoner projections were 245—that the prison would be full the day he opened it and would be exceeding capacity within a year or two; he knew that. So that is why he has been lying. That is why he has been covering up. That is why they have been saying the capacity is 300 when it was not, because to admit earlier that the prison had a capacity for 245, whilst at the same time providing answers to Mr Seselja saying what the capacity of the jail would be in 2008 and 2009, would have proved that his saying that the capacity of the jail would meet our needs for 25 years was a lie. And it has proved to be a lie, because we now know that they are fitting bunk beds into the jail.
So he opened a jail that was imminently going to be full. He knew that when he opened it. That is why he, Mr Stanhope and others, came out and said the capacity was 300 when they knew it was not because they had provided answers that said it was not. So that is conclusive, and if anyone wants to look at those documents, I have them. Review the Hansard. Look at the questions on notice. I am happy to table them if anyone wants me to, or if the media are listening and they want to have a look at those documents—the proof categorically that Simon Corbell lied and has covered it up—I am very happy to show them to them.
The next issue of course is that of drug testing at the jail and that has been well documented. We know that it is not in dispute that the Chief Minister and Simon Corbell lied. This was the basis of a motion in September that we raised and at the time I said—
Mr Corbell: I raise a point of order, Mr Assistant Speaker.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): Mr Hanson, please. Stop the clock.
Mr Corbell: I understand I am the person who is being censured here. If Mr Hanson wants to make allegations about the Chief Minister lying or misleading, he can do so only by way of substantive motion. Otherwise, you should ask him to withdraw the comment.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: I concur with your point of order.
MR HANSON: On the point of order, Mr Assistant Speaker, Mr Stanhope has written to me and to all members admitting that he misled us. Given he has written a letter to us admitting that he misled the Assembly, that should give me the right to be able to say that he misled the Assembly. He is the one who told me he misled the Assembly.
Mr Stanhope interjecting—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: No, no, Chief Minister. Mr Hanson, I am sorry, there is no point of order. The rules are quite clear—if you wish to use the word “liar” in respect to a member opposite, you need to do it in the context of a substantive motion. You have used that phrase with respect to Mr Corbell repeatedly and I have not called you to order because you have that right to do it in a censure motion. That is not so
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video