Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (10 December) . . Page.. 4793 ..

Mr Moore: What page is that?

MR BERRY: Page 138.

Mrs Carnell: Which bit of page 138 - the bit that says, "I see no obvious illegality in the practice."?

MR SPEAKER: Mr Berry, do not provoke them on it, and members will stop interjecting. The Chief Minister was heard in silence yesterday. I expect the same courtesy, if that is possible, to be extended to the Leader of the Opposition.

MR BERRY: Paragraph 380 reads:

By supplementary statement of 18 November 1997, Mr Glanville records that he became aware in late 1996 that the Club was paying a rebate based on turnover to the two punters. He believes that he learned that from Mr Smeed, and before being told, had been unaware that Mr Smeed was making the turnover figures of the two punters available to Mr Alexander.

That suggests to me that Mr Smeed is in it up to his ears. If that is not an indictment, what is? This report damns existing members of ACTTAB and it casts a great shadow over the ACTTAB board. It has been ignored in the discussion about this issue. Alexander made it clear in public reports I heard of him and from him that inducements were being paid, but still the denials flew about. This makes it clear that Mr Smeed was in it. It makes it clear that Mr Glanville was aware of it in late 1996.

There are some other interesting aspects of this report. One of the key sentences in paragraph 382 has been struck out, without explanation, in the list of errata. I will read onto the record the sentence that was struck out:

Mr Glanville says that he did not become aware of the incentives until it became public knowledge.

Mr Burbidge then said:

Whilst my own untutored and imperfect understanding of the racing world causes me to feel scepticism about the likelihood of this situation, I am certainly not prepared to find that this evidence is not true.

He then said:

There is no contradictory evidence.

That is a curious statement. At least to the casual observer it casts a cloud over the operations of the ACTTAB board. It makes it abundantly clear that Mr Smeed was involved in inducements being paid to punters in the ACT and that the board had charge of Mr Smeed. The board is a board of this Government. Are you sorry this happened? I am sorry it happened. It is a great shame that it happened, but Ministers and boards are sometimes misled or not told interesting information.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .