Page 5507 - Week 13 - Thursday, 17 November 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Yes, there is flexibility but it does not say whether at the top end it is adequate. The DPP actually goes on to say:
I prefer to do any commentary on the level of sentences through the courts.
He does not back Mr Corbell up. Mr Corbell comes into this place and twists these words, as he does so often. The word “flexibility” is ambiguous at best. In the full context of the paragraph it says, “Yes, you can get off or you can get 15 years.” He does not say whether that is adequate or not. The flexibility in this case refers to the range. Indeed, in that regard the DPP is right—there is flexibility for judges, but he offers no comment.
As he does so often, Mr Corbell comes in and twists his way out of these charges. I draw this to the attention of the Greens. Have you read what he tabled yesterday? Have you asked him, for example, for the other statements, the specific statements? There is nothing specific in the only line that Mr Corbell can point to because it does not exist. That is the problem. He hides behind public servants when he gets it wrong. If it was an accident, let him apologise and move on. We saw yesterday the three occasions with the RSPCA. We now have numerous occasions where Mr Corbell twists what the DPP says and the Greens let him off.
Ms Hunter, you can speak again and show me where the specific statements are. You cannot do that because they do not exist. That is why Mr Corbell must be censured. I got censured for a press release because “the vibe” in a press release was wrong. That is the standard. If I get done for “the vibe”, what does a minister get done for in this place? Apparently nothing. That is the problem. The standard here is set so low that in effect there is no standard now. These ministers will not be held to account by the Greens.
We will endeavour in opposition to do the best that we can. Mr Corbell, you can have as much time as you like to come and quote the specific statements that you refer to in this answer written to the Assembly yesterday—or indeed you have misled again. That is the problem, Mr Speaker. We will not resile from moving motions of censure on ministers who mislead. The motions of censure will stop when the minister tells the truth.
Minister Corbell has the worst record in this place for persistent and wilful misleading of the Assembly, and it continues. The Greens aid and abet in that continuance of denigrating the integrity of this place. This place deserves respect. Mr Corbell does not. Mr Corbell, again in his answer yesterday, lied to this place and it was a bald-faced lie. He cannot point to a single statement that is specific and he should withdraw this as well.
Mr Hargreaves: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, Mr Smyth has just indicated across the chamber that yesterday Mr Corbell lied to this place. There was a motion debated yesterday and that has concluded. At best, that is a reflection on a vote in this place. He is debating points of yesterday. That debate has concluded and he should therefore withdraw that comment.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video