Page 1168 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 6 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The Chief Police Officer has dealt with the specific investigation, and he has reported on that specific investigation, but the Chief Minister and the Attorney-General said there were more issues—serious issues, unprecedented issues—not related to that that went well beyond that, and that they would be reported in full and advised at the conclusion of the investigations. The Chief Police Officer has done his job. He has investigated. He has not laid charges. I understand from what the former minister has said and from what her former chief of staff has said in the media that they are not entirely satisfied with that, but he has done his work.
It is now a matter for the Chief Minister and the minister accountable to be responsible and accountable to this place, to explain to this place what was serious and unprecedented and went beyond these issues that they said they would provide a full explanation of in time when this was resolved. They categorically said that it was not related to the CFMEU leak. They categorically said it was serious. They said it was unprecedented. They said that they would tell us. Now they are hiding behind the Chief Police Officer’s statement and saying, “Because he is not giving a broader commentary or because he is not explaining matters that are not in his purview, nor will we.” The Chief Police Officer has done his job, within his purview. It would be inappropriate for him to discuss matters that are serious and unprecedented not relating to his investigation into the CFMEU.
Madam Speaker, I am not satisfied. I am not at all satisfied. We need to know what the serious and unprecedented issues are. We need to understand the broader context of everything that has happened. Indeed, there is the question that Mr Rattenbury raised: how on earth did this get into the media in the first place? How on earth was this information provided in the first place to the media, the Fin Review? They are relevant questions, perhaps.
Unfortunately a stench remains now. Questions remain. The integrity of this government will be questioned. The secretiveness of this government will be questioned. Mr Barr has made great comments about being open and accountable. This is not open. This is not accountable. As a result, reputations remain stained. The reputation of the police in this matter has been questioned by Ms Hawthorne, who is very concerned. Again, she nods from the gallery. She is very concerned that that is what has happened, and has made allegations about police conduct. I think from the minister’s speech that she has concerns. You have a former police minister quite clearly raising concerns about what has happened with regard to the police for which she was the minister until a few short months ago.
We have a situation where Ms Burch herself, I think, deserves a number of broader answers. I think that is reasonable in these circumstances where, essentially, she has been called on to resign. She is saying she has done nothing wrong, she has answered all the questions that have been asked of her. But there is no broader explanation of why she has been moved from the ministry. And while she has been removed, as she was, by the Chief Minister, the questions will hang over her head. Without an explanation, those questions—questions of integrity, questions about what happened—will forever remain over Ms Burch, as they will over Ms Hawthorne, who
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video