Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2009 Week 07 Hansard (Tuesday, 16 June 2009) . . Page.. 2382 ..
MR SESELJA: We are going to go through the process, Katy. Isn’t that what this is about? Don’t you want to put your view? Don’t you want to put your view to us, Katy? I am looking forward to Katy putting her response to these serious issues that have been put forward. Katy does seem to think it is a joke that she politicises her department. We see it time and time again now, and it is of real concern.
There are a number of things that the Assembly needs to look at as a result of this report. We look forward to the government’s response on all of these recommendations and we look forward to the further action of the Assembly as a result.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
MR SPEAKER: Members, I have nominations for membership of the Select Committee on Privileges. I have been notified in writing of the nomination of Ms Bresnan, Mr Corbell and Mr Smyth to be members of the Select Committee on Privileges 2009.
Mr Stanhope: Before formally moving that members be appointed, may I take a point of order and seek your guidance on a matter relating to the appointment of members to this committee?
MR SPEAKER: Yes, this would be the appropriate time.
Mr Stanhope: I note that two of the members of the estimates committee that made recommendations in relation to this matter, Mr Smyth and Ms Bresnan, have been nominated by their respective parties for membership of this committee. I note, however, that the committee, in its preamble before the recommendation in relation to privileges, makes these statements:
The letter from Mr Cormack included not only his concerns about comments made by Mr Hanson, but also specified what action Mr Hanson should take.
That is not true. It continues:
The committee is concerned about departmental interference and the effect this may have on a non-executive members’ ability to perform their role. The Committee is also concerned by the directives—
I repeat the words “by the directives”—
given by a head of a department to a non-executive member.
The letter contains no directives. That statement in the report is not true.
The committee believes that the correspondence from the Chief Executive of ACT Health to Mr Hanson … may constitute a matter of privilege …