Page 4354 - Week 10 - Thursday, 22 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
for Police and Emergency Services) (3.48): This is a clear case of misleading conduct, and that is the whole purpose of the censure today. Mr Smyth was misleading. He went out into the community and deliberately sought to perpetuate a claim which he knew to be false. That is what he did. And what was the falsehood? The falsehood was the claim that the Chief Minister had acted improperly. The falsehood was the claim that she had acted in a seriously improper manner and that that matter had been proven.
The fact is that it has not been proven. The fact is that it is up to a committee of this place to determine whether or not there have been any improper actions on the part of the Chief Minister. We know what the Chief Minister’s view is on these matters; she has put that clearly on the record and it will be for the committee to determine those matters.
What Mr Smyth did was to decide that he was judge, jury and executioner. He decided that he knew what had happened and he decided that he was going to go out and compromise the conduct of that Assembly inquiry by making the assertion that the Chief Minister had already been concluded to have acted improperly. Let us look at what he says in the media statement:
So clear was the improper behaviour—
No suggestion that this is a matter to be investigated; no suggestion that this is a question to be tested. He said:
So clear was the improper behaviour—
And he went on to say:
… if left unchecked, could create further serious interference in the future.
There it is: he decided that the interference was serious and he decided that the behaviour was improper—when these are questions for the Assembly’s privileges committee to determine. But, no, Mr Smyth does not care about that, because he is simply interested in smearing the reputation of the Chief Minister, for his own base political purposes. He has to be held to account for that. You cannot walk out of this place, knowing how this place operates, knowing what questions are currently before an Assembly committee, and assert something beyond the facts. And that is what he did. He knowingly and deliberately went out into the community and asserted, in a misleading fashion, an attributed behaviour to the Chief Minister which is in dispute and which is a matter for a committee of this place to determine.
We have to respect the processes of this Assembly. We have to allow the processes of the committee to be conducted appropriately.
Mr Seselja: On a point of order—
MR SPEAKER: One moment, Mr Corbell. The clocks, thank you. Mr Seselja.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video