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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (6 May) . . Page.. 1447 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I also want to make reference, in anticipation, to a claim that Mr Kaine made yesterday about the releasing of these documents. I have not seen the Hansard yet, but I understand that he made reference, after I had made a personal explanation, to a suggestion that the documents which were tabled yesterday might have been leaked by my office. Mr Speaker, I want to comment on that. I believe that those claims are unfounded and, in fact, can be proved to be unfounded. It is certainly true that my office, members of my staff, would have seen or had access to the letter which I wrote to the Law Society about Mr Collaery, but the response by Mr Collaery to that claim - that is, to Mr Kidney, the Professional Standards Director of the Law Society - is correspondence that would remain confidential, in the ordinary course of events, between Mr Collaery and the Law Society. The Law Society certainly would not have disclosed this letter to me. The only people who would have this letter would be the Law Society - Mr Kidney in particular - and Mr Collaery. So it must, I am afraid, have been one of those two people or someone in one of their offices who released the information. It must have been.

Mr Moore: Mr Collaery would have your letter to respond to.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Collaery would have had my letter, of course, and could have released my letter, but I would not have had his letter in response to mine.

Mr Speaker, I would ask members of this place, particularly Mr Stanhope, to try to salvage a little bit of the credibility of the process used here to move motions of no confidence in members of this place. I would ask him, in particular, to withdraw this motion and to express some regret about having wasted the time of the Assembly in moving a motion of this kind. You have made an allegation on the floor of this place, and in the media, for which you have no evidence whatsoever.

Mr Berry: Wait for it.

MR HUMPHRIES: You have no evidence. Mr Berry says, "Wait for it", implying that there is some further evidence here in this matter. Mr Speaker, I have spoken in my defence. It is my entitlement, I think, to have seen that evidence. If Mr Berry has further evidence, I think in fairness he should have introduced it before now. If he has not introduced it before now - - -

Mr Berry: I have to take my turn.

MR HUMPHRIES: If it is available to the Opposition, it should have been available to Mr Stanhope in moving this motion of no confidence. Mr Speaker, I think it would be most unfair if having, at Mr Berry's insistence, spoken only once on this matter, he now introduces further evidence which I have not seen about this matter. Mr Speaker, I again point out that we are obviously going to waste a large part of this day on this matter. I have to say to them that I think it is a waste of the Assembly's time and effort, a debasement of the system for expressing displeasure at the genuine misconduct of members of this place, and unworthy of Mr Stanhope, who purports to be the man who would take over as Chief Minister and perhaps Attorney-General should there be a change of government one day.

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