Mr WOOD - 2015-02-17
My understanding is Foundation 51 was set up primarily for commercial research reports and information gathering for the CLP. You told the parliament many times Foundation 51 was a private company and you had nothing to do with it. On 8 May last year, you said:
Foundation 51 has now been shown to be an associated entity – as shown on the NT Electoral Commission webpage – and shows that 16 donors have given $285 142 to the CLP. Does this not show there is and has been a legal connection between Foundation 51 and the CLP? Could you be accused of misleading parliament, and will you now reinstate the inquiry into Foundation 51 and political donations, as you promised?
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Whilst he places it in a hypothetical context, it is a question before the House. He can make the allegation and bring forward a substantive motion, or he cannot refer to it at all.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, your question is out of order under Standing Order 112. Given it is hypothetical you may wish to rephrase the question.
Mr WOOD: I rephrased it before I wrote it so it would not be out of order. I simply asked the Chief Minister, ‘Could you be accused of misleading the parliament?’
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 112 – this invites a hypothetical and is a hypothetical question.
Madam SPEAKER: Can you please reword it, member for Nelson.
Mr WOOD: Chief Minister, in light of what you said before, did you tell the parliament the truth over this matter?
ANSWER
‘Could you be accused?’ – absolutely. These guys will accuse anyone on this side of the Chamber of anything. Look what they have done with their allegation about Jodeen Carney. There is no level they will not stoop to.
There is no alleged knowledge of the two being connected. If the Electoral Commission has made that determination, that is up to the commission. It is an independent body, and if you want to talk about Foundation 51, talk to the Electoral Commission.
I have made this point a thousand times, but I will do it again. The Palmer United Party – if there still is one – or the Labor Party and Harold Nelson Holdings, which is the Labor Party slush fund …
Ms Lawrie: We do not have a slush fund.
Mr GILES: These bodies – and the Country Liberal Party – have no connection to the operations and mechanics of government when we sit in this Chamber.
We are nominated as candidates and we run for parliament. When we come into government we operate as parliamentarians, not on behalf of the party. If you have any questions about Foundation 51, the CLP, the Labor Party, Harold Nelson Holdings, EMILY’s List or anything else, you must ask those independent bodies about how they operate. Government does not have the regulatory environment to oversee how Foundation 51 operates. If you want to ask about related entities, talk to Foundation 51 or the NT Electoral Commission. It is up to you to have a conversation with them.
- There was no legal connection between Foundation 51 and the CLP …
Foundation 51 has now been shown to be an associated entity – as shown on the NT Electoral Commission webpage – and shows that 16 donors have given $285 142 to the CLP. Does this not show there is and has been a legal connection between Foundation 51 and the CLP? Could you be accused of misleading parliament, and will you now reinstate the inquiry into Foundation 51 and political donations, as you promised?
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Whilst he places it in a hypothetical context, it is a question before the House. He can make the allegation and bring forward a substantive motion, or he cannot refer to it at all.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, your question is out of order under Standing Order 112. Given it is hypothetical you may wish to rephrase the question.
Mr WOOD: I rephrased it before I wrote it so it would not be out of order. I simply asked the Chief Minister, ‘Could you be accused of misleading the parliament?’
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 112 – this invites a hypothetical and is a hypothetical question.
Madam SPEAKER: Can you please reword it, member for Nelson.
Mr WOOD: Chief Minister, in light of what you said before, did you tell the parliament the truth over this matter?
ANSWER
‘Could you be accused?’ – absolutely. These guys will accuse anyone on this side of the Chamber of anything. Look what they have done with their allegation about Jodeen Carney. There is no level they will not stoop to.
There is no alleged knowledge of the two being connected. If the Electoral Commission has made that determination, that is up to the commission. It is an independent body, and if you want to talk about Foundation 51, talk to the Electoral Commission.
I have made this point a thousand times, but I will do it again. The Palmer United Party – if there still is one – or the Labor Party and Harold Nelson Holdings, which is the Labor Party slush fund …
Ms Lawrie: We do not have a slush fund.
Mr GILES: These bodies – and the Country Liberal Party – have no connection to the operations and mechanics of government when we sit in this Chamber.
We are nominated as candidates and we run for parliament. When we come into government we operate as parliamentarians, not on behalf of the party. If you have any questions about Foundation 51, the CLP, the Labor Party, Harold Nelson Holdings, EMILY’s List or anything else, you must ask those independent bodies about how they operate. Government does not have the regulatory environment to oversee how Foundation 51 operates. If you want to ask about related entities, talk to Foundation 51 or the NT Electoral Commission. It is up to you to have a conversation with them.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016