Page 1156 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 6 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
have a full and comprehensive explanation. But there are still no answers. It was reported in the media in February:
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 …
.
Still there are no answers. On 23 March 2016 when the police issued their statement saying that no criminal charges would be pursued, they made a statement that did not actually clarify anything but raised other issues. On the day of the statement, the Chief Police Officer said that they were concerned about the handling of sensitive information. He said that there had been “ongoing releases of sensitive information later in the year”.
It is not clear what has happened but a second staffer has apparently passed on information to somebody who was not in the CFMEU. It was different information. But those facts are new to us. We do not know what the information was; we do not know whom it was passed to; we do not know what the intent was, other than that it is someone who should not have been in receipt of that information. My understanding is that that staffer involved is still working in the Assembly somewhere. That is the advice we have been provided with. It was reported in the media 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 notice that that staffer is in the Assembly gallery and is nodding. She believes that. She believes that the police have taken down a government minister and her senior staff. That is an extraordinary statement to make but I think it is one that needs clarification from the government. You have a former chief of staff saying that the police have acted in a way that has taken down a government minister.
Mr Corbell promised a broader conversation about the circumstances once this matter was resolved. He said at the outset:
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.
He said that at that time we would be told. Everybody, I think, is calling for answers. Everyone in the media, everyone that I speak to, wants to know what has happened. Everybody has a right. Now is the time for that explanation so that the stench around the government on this issue can be resolved. The police investigation has been concluded. These matters have been referred back to the Chief Minister. This is now in the Chief Minister’s hands. He needs to make a full explanation.
As I said, I do not want something that is limited in scope. If there is something in its nature that is operationally sensitive, I understand that. But I do not want to see the Chief Minister hiding behind that. I do not want to see the Chief Minister saying, “I
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video