Mrs HICKEY - 1998-11-26
I seek leave to table a copy of a letter dated July 1993 sent to the government by Mark Textor, marked ‘personal and confidential’, which clearly describes the research the Country Liberal Party wanted.
Leave granted.
Mrs HICKEY: Textor writes of finding out, and I quote: ‘What factors are most important in influencing voter behaviour’. He advises, and I quote: ‘A campaign researcher needs regular voter contact in order to put his or her findings in their proper historical context and to properly interpret subtle changes in attitude’. This is clearly party political research, clearly being paid for by Territory taxpayers.
Chief Minister, what action will you take to ensure that the people who repeated the corrupt practice you engineered in 1990 …
Mr STONE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask for that to be withdrawn. If she is going to allege corruption, she should do it by way of substantive motion, not with throw-away remarks in Question Time where you don’t stand the scrutiny.
Mrs Hickey: I withdraw ‘corrupt’, Madam Speaker.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, what the Leader of the Opposition didn’t tell Territorians who are listening to this broadcast is that the version of polling for the CLP contains different matters, although there is some commonality, from that being prepared for government. You’ve also demonstrated that the CLP actually paid for material that it received. Now you produce a letter from Mark Textor that, in my view, makes a correct observation. I mean, where have you been? Don’t you think that governments of all political colour around Australia research the market - that is, the constituents - as to their views on whether policy is heading in the right direction or not? Don’t you think that translates into whether those governments are getting support or not and they need to take a different direction? Are you going to stand up there and tell me that Paul Keating and Bob Hawke didn’t ask the very same questions?
When you have a close look at this research, it is on issues like law and order, the railway, the direction of the economy. These are all legitimate questions to be asked by government. When you pick up the CLP one, which on your own evidence has been paid for by the CLP, it asks question about voting intention.
All you are doing here is producing bits of paper going back and forth between Mark Textor, who would have to be the most successful pollster in Australia. Let me tell you, we, on this side of the House, are very proud of him. He is so good that they enlist his services in the United States, and he is a Territory boy. We are very proud of him and what he has accomplished. If you are trying to impute some wrongdoing to him, then you’ll get as much as a fight over that as you will about your silly allegations based on the ramblings of a man who never worked for me. Andrew Coward was removed the day I became Chief Minister. I did not like him, I did not trust him. I thought he was unstable, I treated him fairly, but I got rid of him.
You can ask me questions about what I have done as a minister, or as Chief Minister, but do not get up here and try and make out that there is some sort of evil arrangement in place. Do you think that Peter Conran would be a party to this? Do you think that Peter Conran, who has the universal respect of the public service and everybody who has ever worked with him, would willingly sign off on such an arrangement if it was corrupt or improper? Is that what you are saying? Because you cannot be ‘half pregnant’ in this, and if you are going to make these allegations, then it is time that you got on with a substantive motion, and put whatever evidence you have on the table. Because you have not put up anything yet.
Leave granted.
Mrs HICKEY: Textor writes of finding out, and I quote: ‘What factors are most important in influencing voter behaviour’. He advises, and I quote: ‘A campaign researcher needs regular voter contact in order to put his or her findings in their proper historical context and to properly interpret subtle changes in attitude’. This is clearly party political research, clearly being paid for by Territory taxpayers.
Chief Minister, what action will you take to ensure that the people who repeated the corrupt practice you engineered in 1990 …
Mr STONE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask for that to be withdrawn. If she is going to allege corruption, she should do it by way of substantive motion, not with throw-away remarks in Question Time where you don’t stand the scrutiny.
Mrs Hickey: I withdraw ‘corrupt’, Madam Speaker.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, what the Leader of the Opposition didn’t tell Territorians who are listening to this broadcast is that the version of polling for the CLP contains different matters, although there is some commonality, from that being prepared for government. You’ve also demonstrated that the CLP actually paid for material that it received. Now you produce a letter from Mark Textor that, in my view, makes a correct observation. I mean, where have you been? Don’t you think that governments of all political colour around Australia research the market - that is, the constituents - as to their views on whether policy is heading in the right direction or not? Don’t you think that translates into whether those governments are getting support or not and they need to take a different direction? Are you going to stand up there and tell me that Paul Keating and Bob Hawke didn’t ask the very same questions?
When you have a close look at this research, it is on issues like law and order, the railway, the direction of the economy. These are all legitimate questions to be asked by government. When you pick up the CLP one, which on your own evidence has been paid for by the CLP, it asks question about voting intention.
All you are doing here is producing bits of paper going back and forth between Mark Textor, who would have to be the most successful pollster in Australia. Let me tell you, we, on this side of the House, are very proud of him. He is so good that they enlist his services in the United States, and he is a Territory boy. We are very proud of him and what he has accomplished. If you are trying to impute some wrongdoing to him, then you’ll get as much as a fight over that as you will about your silly allegations based on the ramblings of a man who never worked for me. Andrew Coward was removed the day I became Chief Minister. I did not like him, I did not trust him. I thought he was unstable, I treated him fairly, but I got rid of him.
You can ask me questions about what I have done as a minister, or as Chief Minister, but do not get up here and try and make out that there is some sort of evil arrangement in place. Do you think that Peter Conran would be a party to this? Do you think that Peter Conran, who has the universal respect of the public service and everybody who has ever worked with him, would willingly sign off on such an arrangement if it was corrupt or improper? Is that what you are saying? Because you cannot be ‘half pregnant’ in this, and if you are going to make these allegations, then it is time that you got on with a substantive motion, and put whatever evidence you have on the table. Because you have not put up anything yet.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016