Page 5497 - Week 13 - Thursday, 17 November 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We are here today because the attorney made a mistake. I think this is what happened. I have worked in an Attorney-General’s office; I know how busy it is. I think that an official wrote a speech and the attorney stood up and read it. He probably had not read it beforehand. He read it and he took it as gospel because the official had written it there. This happens all the time. The Attorney-General is a busy person. But when this issue was raised, he should not have repeated it; he should have come back and withdrawn. What he said on 27 October was clearly wrong. It was clearly wrong. To repeat it yesterday was more than doubling the offence. He knew that it was wrong and he wilfully went out and repeated it.
Mr Speaker, the case is clear; the case is straightforward. Mr Corbell has a track record of saying the wrong thing—overreaching and not being prepared to withdraw. All the members in this place saw his discomfort yesterday when Mr Doszpot challenged him about what was actually said in the inquiry in 2009. We all heard that he could not point to anything where the DPP had expressed a view. The case is clear. The Attorney-General should not have made the comments he did. I am quite prepared to accept that he just read a speech that someone prepared for him. But then he should just say that. He should say, “I read the speech; I accepted that what was in the speech was correct.” He was challenged on this on two separate occasions and he did not take the opportunity to correct the record and make it perfectly clear that the DPP was not meddling in policy.
This is what it is about. He is trying to tie himself to the DPP. He is so insecure as the Attorney-General that he always needs some other authority. He needs some other authority; he needs respect. He needs to be treated with respect; he demands to be treated with respect because he is the first law officer. He does not act like one. He does not act with honour; he does not act with integrity. Therefore this minister should be censured.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (10.19): There is absolutely no substance to this censure motion this morning. In fact, it is one of the most contrived and fabricated censure motions we have ever seen in this place. Mrs Dunne talked about my having a track record. The only people that have a track record in this place are the Canberra Liberals. They have a track record for fabricating and manufacturing censure motions basically every sitting week in this place for the past three years. And it is because—
Members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, members. Order, members.
Members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Mr Corbell, one moment, thank you. Mrs Dunne was predominantly heard in silence. There were a few interjections, but we have just had four members shouting at Mr Corbell at once across the chamber. It is really beyond the pale. Mr Corbell, you have the floor.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video