Page 3111 - Week 08 - Thursday, 25 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In fact, I am as passionate about representing my constituents and my portfolio responsibilities as Mr Barr is about the media and photo opportunities or the spin to create headlines regardless of the reality of the various releases. His narcissism is boundless and his ability to backflip is becoming legendary, thus the title: the minister for spin and media opportunities.
Finally, I would like to wrap up with some comments from Mr Tony Harris in his analysis of the ACT budget in relation to education funding. I quote from his analysis:
In general, it seems that the budget for the education function is tight—like that for health, but less so. Even with wages restraint as expected by the government, the out-year increases indicate that the forward estimates for the out-years will be a difficult to live within.
End quote and food for thought, ladies and gentlemen of the Assembly.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (11.48): I will speak briefly on this. I really wanted to dwell on only one subject. That was one that was touched on briefly by Mr Doszpot and it relates to Labor Party advertising. I thought that the display by the minister on that day started off pretty well, actually. I think he had a pretty good start when asked about using his political officers to arrange advertising in ACT government facilities. The minister came out full frontal, on the attack and very decisive. He said, “It would be improper for me as a minister to have sought advantage for my political party in relation to such request.”
Everyone agreed with him and it was heartening to hear the highly principled approach taken by Ms Davy, acting CEO of the department of education, when she said that that would be a clear conflict of interest to have allowed government sites to be used for party political advertising. It was unfortunate. Well, it was laudatory that Ms Davy was able to come back so quickly and correct the record. But the display from the minister that afternoon post the perennial bombshell was extraordinarily disappointing.
I have to comment on it because it shows the lengths to which ministers in this place will go to distance themselves from adverse comment. What happened there was that Mr Barr stood back and ensured that his former senior staff took the bullet for him on this. The rate at which Mr Barr dropped his staff in it and claimed that he had no knowledge of this backwards and forwards arrangement and discussions between his office and the former chief executive of the Department of Education and Training I find hard to believe.
We have heard over the years, Mr Speaker, of the concept of plausible deniability where you do not tell your boss things so that he can honestly say with his hand on his heart that he did not know. But on this occasion what we saw was utterly implausible deniability. This minister could not have failed to know what was going on during an election campaign. It is impossible to believe.
It is impossible to believe that his chief of staff made phone calls to his chief executive and had discussions and that they ended up with an extraordinarily lengthy
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .