Ms MANISON - 2015-08-27
You have alleged that the Electoral Commission has orchestrated a leak that has compromised the integrity of the current redistribution. You said this must be investigated. Did you have evidence of this very serious allegation, and have you referred that evidence to the police or Commissioner for Public Interest Disclosures for investigation? Or was this an attempt to bully the Redistribution Committee into complying with your redistribution plans?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I do not understand the intent of the question. Everyone is aware a redistribution proposal has been released by the Electoral Commissioner, who is independent of government, similar to the Commissioner for Public Interest Disclosures, the Ombudsman, and the Auditor-General, whom you have said are biased.
The Electoral Commissioner issued a report which this side of the Chamber does not agree with. We have made a submission to the Augmented Redistribution Committee and we had an opportunity to meet with that augmented committee to state our case for why there needs to be a change.
As part of the first proposal, there was a change based on the changing demographics in the Northern Territory. The number of people in Palmerston is clearly growing. Electoral redistributions are simply a matter of mathematics, numerical equations and formulae. We understand there are more people in Palmerston. On anyone’s guide Palmerston needs a greater level of representation for its seats. I do not believe there should be fewer than three seats in Alice Springs. That is my position and I put it to the committee.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The Chief Minister made very serious allegations. Have you provided that information?
Madam SPEAKER: Sit down. It is not a point of order.
Mr GILES: There were no serious allegations.
Ms MANISON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. There are some very direct questions about whether you have any evidence of this very serious allegation, which you included in your document to the Redistribution Committee. It said:
Did you have any evidence around that?
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Wanguri. Chief Minister, can you answer the question?
Mr GILES: The evidence is that I read in the paper that the proposal to get rid of Araluen would happen. It was in the media before it was released publicly. That is a fair amount of evidence. I disagree with the decision in the original draft proposal to remove the seat of Araluen, meaning Alice Springs would go back to having two seats.
I wrote in the letter that there has been a proposal. I met with the augmented Redistribution Committee, as have a few people in this Chamber who have made submissions to date. That needs to be reconsidered. As we all know, the Electoral Commissioner is independent of government and we will see what is handed down whenever the final report is handed down.
You are chasing a rat up a drain pipe which is going nowhere. It was in the public domain before it was released. I was not happy about it. That is the wrong approach to take in this regard, especially for an independent report. It lost the confidence of many in our community in how some decisions of the Electoral Commission are made. There are many people in the community who think that way now. We will wait to see what is in the final report.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I do not understand the intent of the question. Everyone is aware a redistribution proposal has been released by the Electoral Commissioner, who is independent of government, similar to the Commissioner for Public Interest Disclosures, the Ombudsman, and the Auditor-General, whom you have said are biased.
The Electoral Commissioner issued a report which this side of the Chamber does not agree with. We have made a submission to the Augmented Redistribution Committee and we had an opportunity to meet with that augmented committee to state our case for why there needs to be a change.
As part of the first proposal, there was a change based on the changing demographics in the Northern Territory. The number of people in Palmerston is clearly growing. Electoral redistributions are simply a matter of mathematics, numerical equations and formulae. We understand there are more people in Palmerston. On anyone’s guide Palmerston needs a greater level of representation for its seats. I do not believe there should be fewer than three seats in Alice Springs. That is my position and I put it to the committee.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. The Chief Minister made very serious allegations. Have you provided that information?
Madam SPEAKER: Sit down. It is not a point of order.
Mr GILES: There were no serious allegations.
Ms MANISON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. There are some very direct questions about whether you have any evidence of this very serious allegation, which you included in your document to the Redistribution Committee. It said:
- Our disappointment was further exacerbated by the impact of an unprofessional orchestrated leak to the media regarding your recommendation to abolish the division of Araluen …
Did you have any evidence around that?
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Wanguri. Chief Minister, can you answer the question?
Mr GILES: The evidence is that I read in the paper that the proposal to get rid of Araluen would happen. It was in the media before it was released publicly. That is a fair amount of evidence. I disagree with the decision in the original draft proposal to remove the seat of Araluen, meaning Alice Springs would go back to having two seats.
I wrote in the letter that there has been a proposal. I met with the augmented Redistribution Committee, as have a few people in this Chamber who have made submissions to date. That needs to be reconsidered. As we all know, the Electoral Commissioner is independent of government and we will see what is handed down whenever the final report is handed down.
You are chasing a rat up a drain pipe which is going nowhere. It was in the public domain before it was released. I was not happy about it. That is the wrong approach to take in this regard, especially for an independent report. It lost the confidence of many in our community in how some decisions of the Electoral Commission are made. There are many people in the community who think that way now. We will wait to see what is in the final report.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016