Legislative Assembly for the ACT: Week 6 Hansard (23 June) . . Page.. 2499..
MR STANHOPE: In this instance, I chose to direct the chief executive officer to undertake an internal inquiry. I took the decision in this instance that that was appropriate on the basis of the rigorous nature of the inquiry. I was satisfied but I have indicated to the chief executive-
Mrs Dunne: Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I ask the Chief Minister to direct his comments through you as required under standing order 42.
MR STANHOPE: I was satisfied with the nature of inquiry in this particular instance. I have, as I said in answer to my question, indicated to the chief executive officer that, if there is a repeat of the seriousness of the nature of this particular inquiry, I will involve the police on the next instance.
Pharmacy Amendment Bill 2004
MRS CROSS: My question is to the Minister for Health, Mr Corbell. Minister, did you employ any coercion, bullying or similarly persuasive tactics to elicit the remarkably timely appearance of a letter to you from the chair of the Pharmacy Board, Mr Paul O'Connor, urging you not to support the Pharmacy Amendment Bill 2004-
Mr Hargreaves: Point of order, Mr Speaker: this question is anticipating something on the notice paper to do with the pharmacy bill that will be debated later on this afternoon.
MRS CROSS: No, it is not anticipating the debate-
MR SPEAKER: Would you repeat the question, please, Mrs Cross?
MRS CROSS: Repeat it?
MR SPEAKER: Yes.
MRS CROSS: Minister, did you employ any coercion, or bullying or similarly persuasive tactics to elicit the remarkably-
MR SPEAKER: Thank you for repeating that. There are some pretty strong imputations there and I order you to withdraw those.
MRS CROSS: I will withdraw and rephrase, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you.
MRS CROSS: Minister, did you at any stage use coercion or any persuasive tactics to elicit a timely appearance of the letter to you from the chair of the Pharmacy Board-
Mr Hargreaves: Point of order, Mr Speaker: that is suggesting that the minister may have used coercion.
MR SPEAKER: Order! I think you should rephrase that. I do not think you should accuse a minister of coercion. I think that is an imputation.