Page 1157 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 6 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
cannot tell you this; I cannot tell you that.” If there is detail, that is fine, but I think that the outline of the particular instances and issues deserve a full explanation. Ultimately, the Chief Minister obviously knows what has happened. He knows the full extent of what has happened. He needs to provide now what he knows in full to this Assembly so that we can know. The only caveat—the only caveat—should be potentially some specific elements that are subject to operational security but, certainly, the broader context and the full situation should be explained. Ultimately, we have been advised by this government that these are serious issues that are unprecedented.
We know that a minister and her chief of staff have lost their jobs as a result of this. We know that the former chief of staff has said that the police have “taken down” a government minister. We know that there is another leak of information by somebody to someone else that should not have been in receipt of that information, and that that individual, as we understand, still works for the government. We have been promised a full explanation but to date we have not been provided one.
It is pretty cut and dried at the end of it, Madam Assistant Speaker. I think we all understand the circumstances in terms of the minister resigning. We have watched this play out in the media, but we have also watched the Chief Minister and the police minister give one word answers when being asked about this by journalists. That is unacceptable. That is clearly unacceptable.
If this Chief Minister is going to restore some credibility in respect of what has gone on in his government, he needs to stand up now and give a full, clear, unambiguous statement, not withholding anything other than something that might be a sensitive police operational matter. Everything else needs to be on the table. I think that by doing so he will do himself a service. I think it will restore, hopefully, some faith in the police. It might provide some clarity about actions that Ms Hawthorne, the previous chief of staff, has also asked for.
There are a lot of stakeholders in this game. It is only by providing that fulsome explanation that the police, the Chief Minister, the current police minister, the former minister and the former chief of staff can, to an extent, then continue on with their lives and that the community can have an understanding of what on earth has gone wrong at the heart of the Barr government.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Tourism and Events and Minister for Urban Renewal) (11.33): I move the amendment circulated in my name:
Omit all words after “notes”, substitute:
“(a) the ACT Police evaluation into the alleged handing of confidential information to the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union by the former Chief of Staff to the former Minister for Police and Emergency Services was completed in March 2016;
(b) no charges have been laid by police;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video