Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 03 Hansard (Wednesday, 17 March 2010) . . Page.. 995 ..

happen from here. I cannot be briefed on it. I do not want to be briefed on it. The process needs to be allowed to finish. If lawyers get involved and people take action, that is out of my hands. But if there is information that I can make public around the findings of this I will make them public—and I will make them public as soon as I can.

MR SPEAKER: A supplementary, Mr Doszpot?

MR DOSZPOT: Yes, Mr Speaker. Minister, given the secrecy surrounding the review and the initial dismissal of the allegations by yourself and senior health bureaucrats, what confidence can the community have that the review will indeed get to the heart of the issues in a transparent manner if the review will be conducted in secret and the outcomes will remain secret?

MS GALLAGHER: This process has been chosen because of the repeated representations that we were given about people not wanting to come forward if they could be identified, about fear of recriminations if they participated. Health went to GSO with those issues and said, “What is the best way to proceed in terms of handling this complaint?” The Public Interest Disclosure Act was given as the framework which offered all those protections to people. In fact, it had much stronger protections than anything the Liberal Party was wanting to do. What the Liberal Party wanted to do was set up a court, have some judicial—

Mr Smyth: To have it open and public.

MS GALLAGHER: That really protects individuals, doesn’t it? And then subpoena unwilling witnesses to be trumped out in front of everybody to provide evidence against their will. That is what the Liberal Party were proposing—against their will, in public, under a system that offers them absolutely no protections at all, during or after.

Mr Hanson: That’s wrong. You know that you’re lying. You’re lying again.

MS GALLAGHER: That is what the Liberal Party wanted. They wanted it because they wanted the drama, they wanted the tabloid sensationalism and they wanted to get a doctor. I am not going to allow that.

Members interjecting—

MR SPEAKER: Order! Ms Gallagher, Mr Hargreaves has a point of order. Stop the clock.

Mr Hargreaves: Mr Speaker, I ask Mr Hanson to withdraw the accusation “lying”.

Mr Hanson: I withdraw.

MS GALLAGHER: That is the process that the Liberal Party wanted to put in place. The Public Interest Disclosure Act—and get me if I am wrong on this; go back and have a look—offers witnesses or complainants who may come forward during this process much greater protection. For example, if they are victimised or feel that they

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video