Page 643 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 12 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: So you were not misled on that score.
MR DE DOMENICO: You did mislead us, Mr Berry.
Mr Berry: No, you were not misled. You were told.
MR DE DOMENICO: You said, "Everything is hunky-dory; all the principals, everybody, were checked out". Yet the Opposition, with limited resources, was able to find out and to tell you that Bartholomew had two prior convictions. Madam Speaker, they are the things that I have brought up in this house to show Mr Berry that the evidence he has tried to present in order to counter what we have said is not worth the paper it is written on.
MR STEVENSON (10.32): Madam Speaker, I seek leave to speak for about 60 seconds.
Leave granted.
MR STEVENSON: This is relevant to the no-confidence motion. If this no-confidence motion is passed tonight I believe that the Minister should resign. If the Minister does not resign I think the responsibility falls to the Chief Minister to require that resignation. If the Chief Minister does not require that resignation the responsibility then falls to this Assembly, as we appointed the Chief Minister, to make sure that she does, or to move a motion of no confidence in the Chief Minister. This is a general principle that is vital in parliament. The Executive must be held responsible, and all MLAs would be bound to vote. It is a general principle and I have brought it up again and again. There have been occasions in this Assembly when Ministers have been directed by motions passed by the majority of members to do certain things and they have not done so. It is not surprising that the Assembly is ignored if we do not hold the Executive accountable.
MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (10.33): I seek leave to make a short statement.
Mr Connolly: Make a long statement.
Leave granted.
MR BERRY: It may well be a long one. I have already indicated to Mrs Carnell that if she raises any matters that are new I will seek leave to speak again. I will deal with some of the matters which have been raised by members. Ms Szuty suggested that I should give some further clarification of the sequence of events which occurred following VicTAB's notice of termination on 31 January 1994.
The chronology, I am advised, is as follows: On 31 January 1994 the Victorian TAB served a notice of cancellation on ACTTAB and the Northern Territory TAB, for obvious reasons, in regard to the superTAB pooling arrangements. On 1 February 1994 Mr Neck and Mr Luff met Mr Hooke in Melbourne to seek reasons for the termination and obtained an undertaking that VicTAB would write to ACTTAB detailing terms and conditions under which ACTTAB could remain in the superTAB. On 9 February 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .