Mr STIRLING - 2000-05-18
Last Wednesday on the ABC’s Morning Program he claimed: ‘When I became aware of it, I moved the appointment under general terms’. Yesterday’s documents tabled by the Attorney-General reveal that on 30 November last year, far from standardising this deal, you gave the Chief Magistrate a $12 500 pay rise to $206 186 and you backdated it by 8 months. You had the opportunity to come clean about this $12 500 pay hike over a week ago. Why did you hide this secret deal, and why today on 8DDD did you describe it as a flow-on when in fact you backdated it 8 months? It seems to be a flow-back as much as a flow-on.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker,I do not believe the shadow attorney-general can be trusted on this subject at all, because he would not be making these allegations and asking me these questions if he could be trusted.
The issue being referred to, I believe, is the adjustment to the terms and conditions that were made late last year for the Chief Magistrate. This is the change that was referred to by Fred McCue this morning. I answered that completely, and I would imagine that most people who listened to that would have understood, and that is that the terms and conditions ...
Ms Martin: So that is why you rang back?
Mr Stirling: Because you are not very good at explaining things.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: Oh, sticks and stones may break my bones!
Mr Stirling: Your words.
Mr BURKE: We all do our best in life. I am sorry, I do not have a photographic memory and can recall every piece of paper that passes my desk.
As I explained today, the original terms and conditions that were set for the Chief Magistrate included a provision that any increases in salaries that were decided for Chief Magistrates would flow through to him during the period of his contract. Those conditions occurred during the period, and therefore there was an automatic flow-on, and that was the document that I signed.
There was no ability for me, even if I wanted - and I did not, I had no reason – to interfere with those arrangements, and it would have been quite wrong, frankly, to interfere with what were clear terms and conditions set when he was appointed.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker,I do not believe the shadow attorney-general can be trusted on this subject at all, because he would not be making these allegations and asking me these questions if he could be trusted.
The issue being referred to, I believe, is the adjustment to the terms and conditions that were made late last year for the Chief Magistrate. This is the change that was referred to by Fred McCue this morning. I answered that completely, and I would imagine that most people who listened to that would have understood, and that is that the terms and conditions ...
Ms Martin: So that is why you rang back?
Mr Stirling: Because you are not very good at explaining things.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: Oh, sticks and stones may break my bones!
Mr Stirling: Your words.
Mr BURKE: We all do our best in life. I am sorry, I do not have a photographic memory and can recall every piece of paper that passes my desk.
As I explained today, the original terms and conditions that were set for the Chief Magistrate included a provision that any increases in salaries that were decided for Chief Magistrates would flow through to him during the period of his contract. Those conditions occurred during the period, and therefore there was an automatic flow-on, and that was the document that I signed.
There was no ability for me, even if I wanted - and I did not, I had no reason – to interfere with those arrangements, and it would have been quite wrong, frankly, to interfere with what were clear terms and conditions set when he was appointed.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016