Page 1153 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 6 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(b) on 16 December 2015, Mr Barr said the matter went further than the alleged CFMEU briefing stating “I need to stress it relates to matters beyond the specific issue that was aired in the Fairfax media a day or two ago in relation to an information request from the CFMEU”;
(c) on 16 December 2015, the Attorney-General described the investigation as relating to matters that were “unprecedented”, and stated “these are serious, serious issues, and they go beyond the issues that have been reported in the media to date. This is not about a member of a Minister’s staff relaying to a stakeholder that their concerns had been raised ... these matters go beyond that. The reporting we’ve seen over the past 48 hours is not telling the full story, and the reason for that is that the police evaluation is ongoing. We need to wait for police to do their job”;
(d) on 18 December 2015, in a report entitled “Full explanation on Joy Burch resignation must await police probe” the Attorney-General is quoted as saying “I appreciate that people want to understand exactly what has occurred here, but the matters are still being investigated. They are investigated by an independent and professional police service. Let’s allow them to do their work and let’s see what the results of that are and then we will have a very good idea and clarity around what has occurred here and why it has occurred. And at that time we can have a broader conversation about the circumstances of this most unfortunate matter”;
(e) on 9 February 2016, it was reported that “The affair remains largely unexplained, with both Mr Barr and his deputy, Simon Corbell, insisting in December that the allegations against Ms Hawthorne were serious and unprecedented, warranting her departure”;
(f) on 23 March 2016, police issued a statement saying that no criminal charges would be pursued in relation to the investigation, however, police were reportedly concerned about the handling of sensitive police information in Ms Burch’s office;
(g) Assistant Commissioner Lammers said on 23 March 2016 that “there had been ongoing releases of sensitive information later in the year” and that it was “sensitive police operational information”;
(h) also on 23 March this year, it was reported that “The former staffer at the centre of the Joy Burch affair lashed out at police on Tuesday accusing them of ‘taking down’ a government minister and her senior staff”;
(i) Attorney-General Simon Corbell promised a “broader conversation about the circumstances” once the police matter was resolved;
(j) The Canberra Weekly reported on 31 March that “the community needs answers”; and
(k) there is now no longer a police investigation, and the Chief Police Officer has referred the matter to the Chief Minister for action; and
(2) calls on the Chief Minister to make a full explanation of this matter, including but not limited to:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video