Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2012 Week 5 Hansard (1 May) . . Page.. 1672..
The Assembly voted—
Ayes 10: Mr Barr Dr Bourke Ms Bresnan Ms Burch Mr Corbell Ms Gallagher Ms Hunter Ms Le Couteur Ms Porter Mr Rattenbury
Noes 5: Mr Coe Mr Doszpot Mr Hanson Mr Seselja Mr Smyth
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question now is that Mr Hanson's motion, as amended, be agreed to.
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (11.43): In closing, I thank members for their contributions, some more than others. Some very important points have been raised throughout the course of the debate, and I would like to particularly commend the points made by Mr Seselja and Mr Smyth. The point Mr Seselja made that I would like to particularly emphasise is that the individual that has falsified this data holds a very senior position at the Canberra Hospital. This person is not simply a bus driver. In fact, Ms Gallagher was basically trying to say that this is just a worker bee. It is not. It is someone, one would assume, who has been working in the ACT Health Directorate for a long period of time and who has been subjected to numerous meetings with the minister and the potential for influence through a variety of mechanisms, including through a family member of Ms Gallagher.
The question needs to be asked: has this individual acted entirely alone, in isolation, in a bubble, or has there been influence and pressure applied, either directly or indirectly, through Katy Gallagher or through the family member or through other people that we simply do not know about? It would appear that Katy Gallagher is trying to say that this person has acted in isolation. "They're our scapegoat. We're going to sacrifice them so that none of this tarnishes the government or me personally."
It is ironic that in Katy Gallagher's amendment she talks about support for the staff but, at the same time, in essence, by refusing to look at the wider aspects and whether pressure has been applied on this individual, she is sacrificing this staff member by saying already: "They're guilty. They acted in isolation. There was no pressure applied by me or my family member or anyone else. Let's find this person guilty and then let's just look at the data."
We do not accept that because we want to know why it is that a very senior administrator who has worked in ACT Health, presumably for years, has come to a point where they feel it necessary to doctor information, to falsify results, to make this government look better. That question needs to be answered. If it is not answered, we are saying we are going to hold this individual solely to account. We are going to find this individual guilty without any broader examination to find out whether pressure has been applied and what cultural issues exist that would either suggest it was not entirely this individual's fault or that there were mitigating circumstances that led to the individual making the decision.