Mrs HICKEY - 1996-08-15
Given the allegations made in this House and elsewhere about the flagrant breaches of privacy of Territorians' files, will the Chief Minister introduce privacy legislation, as I have committed the Labor Party to implementing in government?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I welcome this question and the opportunity to respond to the scurrilous tactic that was used this morning in Question Time, in the knowledge that it is being broadcast, to create the impression that there was some wrongdoing by the federal member for the Northern Territory. The member for Fannie Bay nods her head wisely as though to say that it is all true, as do the members for Arnhem and MacDonnell. That is all fairly predictable. This is probably the first move members opposite have agreed on this week - together, as one.
Page 1492
It is ironic that this allegation should come from that side of parliament, because we all remember the regard members opposite have for privacy. We all remember the Katherine pub and the records ...
Mr Bailey: But there is a difference.
Mr STONE: The member for Wanguri says that it was different. It is different that their election workers went on a drunken binge in a Katherine pub and left detailed information lying around as they went out the door. That was followed by the fantasy of the then Leader of the Opposition stating ...
Mr BELL: A point of order, Mr Speaker! Apart from misleading the House, the Chief Minister has just implied that members of the opposition were on a drunken binge in a Katherine pub. He knows that that is wrong, and he should withdraw it.
Mr SPEAKER: I am afraid that I did not hear that comment. It is very difficult for me to ask the Chief Minister to withdraw when I did not hear the words that you have just put to me. I ask the Chief Minister to avoid that kind of comment, as I am sure he has.
Mr STONE: It is factually correct, and I am happy to go on with it. It was the subject of a police inquiry, as the former Leader of the Opposition knows. He is the one who called for the police inquiry. He said: `I demand an inquiry because we believe that there is something terribly wrong here'.
Mr EDE: A point of order, Mr Speaker! Apart from the fact that the Chief Minister has the results of the police inquiry totally wrong, he is continuing to imply that people on this side were involved in a drunken binge ...
Members interjecting.
Mr EDE: That is what he just said, and in fact he is wrong.
Mr SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Again, I did not pick up the comments that the Chief Minister made.
Mr STONE: Mr Speaker, the facts are that ALP campaign workers left very sensitive documentation lying in a pub after a drinking session. There was a demand for a police inquiry. I acceded to it. Shock, horror! Guess what? The documents had been left in the pub after a drinking session by ALP campaign workers. The great conspiracy theory about a break-in at the office of the member for Arnhem was nothing more than a smokescreen to cover up this appalling lack of respect for the privacy of Territorians. Don't come in here and try to feign some interest in privacy.
Let us pick up what the member for Wanguri did this morning. He came in here with great drama and theatre and held up a tape. It shook in his hand. He said: `I have a transcript, together with a tape, of certain allegations that have been made'. He did not read the transcript, and now I understand why. He threw the tape around to create an impression and to let people listening to the broadcast believe it was some sort of ...
Page 1493
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: It does not even identify on the transcript the person that he nominated.
Mr Bailey: Sorry?
Mr STONE: This transcript, which you tabled, does not even have the name of the officer that you nominated. It refers to a woman's voice and it refers to a man's voice. Let us read from this damaging transcript that the member so conveniently did not read. He conveniently tried to create the impression of a conspiracy and a wrongdoing, knowing that Territorians were listening to this broadcast. He wanted to damage the member for the Northern Territory without having to put any substantial evidence on the Table in the parliament. The transcript reads:
Man's voice: It was fairly personal information, given the fact that carers information
comes from the Department of Health, the Commonwealth department.
This was at a time when we had a federal Labor government. It continues:
We are just following it through to see who would have access to it. So that's
what we are here for today is to establish whether anyone from NT Health would have
access to it. We have already spoken to over at ... He is not sure where it
went. He is still trying to find out, but he said if it would come over here, it
would just go to an assessment team for evaluation. So we are just trying to
establish ...
Woman's voice: It being ..., a request to be a carer?
Yes, and ... details as well.
Woman's voice: And [name - this is a person] details as well. In Victoria we call those carers.
It's a slightly different name here.
Man's voice: Right. Yes. So that's basically it.
The interview goes on. I am happy to keep reading it, but it does not make sense and it does not substantiate the allegation that the member made against a sitting member in another parliament. It is one of the sleaziest ...
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: He came in here with the intention of besmirching a person's name with his drama, with his waving around the tape, knowing that, if he read out the transcript, he would have been destroyed where he stood. It is absolutely despicable. A former Leader of the Opposition in this House once said that he would stoop to any tactic to get at the CLP government and, if that meant dancing with grubs, he was prepared to do that. That is exactly
Page 1494
what the member for Wanguri did here this morning. He did it with the complicity of the member for MacDonnell and the Leader of the Opposition.
You have asked me a question about privacy ...
Mr Stirling: Tell the truth ...
Mr STONE: And I have answered.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: What was the reading, Syd?
Mr Stirling: There is a bit of trouble ...
Mr STONE: What was the reading, Syd?
Mr Stirling: Oh, getting personal!
Mr STONE: Why did you run it on the day when ...
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr STONE: Don't you start. You don't hurt me. But I tell you what, you do hurt ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Nhulunbuy will withdraw that comment.
Mr STIRLING: I withdraw, Mr Speaker.
Mr STONE: What I am hurt about, Mr Speaker, is the tactic of going after someone who is not in this Chamber in such a cowardly way. The member for Wanguri misrepresented what he tabled. That is wrong.
Coming back to the privacy issue ...
Mr BAILEY: A point of order, Mr Speaker! It is my belief that the Chief Minister has just misled the parliament. He left out a crucial sentence when reading the transcript. It is a breach of privilege for him to mislead the House.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri please will resume his seat. When the Chief Minister has completed his answer, he may ask a further question if he wishes.
Mr STONE: Mr Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition ...
Mr Stirling: Read the 2 sentences that refer to Dondas.
Page 1495
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have just advised the member for Wanguri.
Mr STONE: I was asked by the Leader of the Opposition whether I would give a commitment to introduce privacy legislation. It may come as some surprise to the Leader of the Opposition that I commissioned major research on this very topic some 3 months ago, and I have already perused draft documentation which will be considered in due course by my parliamentary wing. I have done that, not because she has come in here with her sleazy tricks, but because I was deeply concerned about what the Labor Party had done with that information in the Katherine pub. I am further concerned when I see some of the mock-up information sheets that are used by Labor members, and the way that they collate information in their electorate offices about their constituents. That is what has prompted me to take the action I have taken.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: I will pick up the interjection from the member for Wanguri who claimed that I had not read 2 particular sentences. Which 2 would he like me to read? On the front page ...
Mr Bailey: Where it says: `It was someone from Dondas's campaign team, or someone claiming to be from Dondas's campaign team'.
Mr STONE: Right. The member for Wanguri was aggrieved because I did not read the beginning of the transcript:
Woman's voice: Who rang whom?
Man's voice: It was someone from Dondas's campaign team or someone claiming to be from
Dondas's campaign team.
Woman's voice: Rang ...?
Yes.
Woman's voice: Right.
That is where the rest of the transcript went from. Absolutely none of it suggests at any point, or proves in any way, that Nick Dondas, the federal member for the Northern Territory, accessed information from the Northern Territory Department of Health Services ...
Mr Reed: Or refers to the public servant you named.
Mr STONE: Or even refers to the public servant whom you have now named in this parliament. You are an absolute grub.
Page 1496
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I welcome this question and the opportunity to respond to the scurrilous tactic that was used this morning in Question Time, in the knowledge that it is being broadcast, to create the impression that there was some wrongdoing by the federal member for the Northern Territory. The member for Fannie Bay nods her head wisely as though to say that it is all true, as do the members for Arnhem and MacDonnell. That is all fairly predictable. This is probably the first move members opposite have agreed on this week - together, as one.
Page 1492
It is ironic that this allegation should come from that side of parliament, because we all remember the regard members opposite have for privacy. We all remember the Katherine pub and the records ...
Mr Bailey: But there is a difference.
Mr STONE: The member for Wanguri says that it was different. It is different that their election workers went on a drunken binge in a Katherine pub and left detailed information lying around as they went out the door. That was followed by the fantasy of the then Leader of the Opposition stating ...
Mr BELL: A point of order, Mr Speaker! Apart from misleading the House, the Chief Minister has just implied that members of the opposition were on a drunken binge in a Katherine pub. He knows that that is wrong, and he should withdraw it.
Mr SPEAKER: I am afraid that I did not hear that comment. It is very difficult for me to ask the Chief Minister to withdraw when I did not hear the words that you have just put to me. I ask the Chief Minister to avoid that kind of comment, as I am sure he has.
Mr STONE: It is factually correct, and I am happy to go on with it. It was the subject of a police inquiry, as the former Leader of the Opposition knows. He is the one who called for the police inquiry. He said: `I demand an inquiry because we believe that there is something terribly wrong here'.
Mr EDE: A point of order, Mr Speaker! Apart from the fact that the Chief Minister has the results of the police inquiry totally wrong, he is continuing to imply that people on this side were involved in a drunken binge ...
Members interjecting.
Mr EDE: That is what he just said, and in fact he is wrong.
Mr SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Again, I did not pick up the comments that the Chief Minister made.
Mr STONE: Mr Speaker, the facts are that ALP campaign workers left very sensitive documentation lying in a pub after a drinking session. There was a demand for a police inquiry. I acceded to it. Shock, horror! Guess what? The documents had been left in the pub after a drinking session by ALP campaign workers. The great conspiracy theory about a break-in at the office of the member for Arnhem was nothing more than a smokescreen to cover up this appalling lack of respect for the privacy of Territorians. Don't come in here and try to feign some interest in privacy.
Let us pick up what the member for Wanguri did this morning. He came in here with great drama and theatre and held up a tape. It shook in his hand. He said: `I have a transcript, together with a tape, of certain allegations that have been made'. He did not read the transcript, and now I understand why. He threw the tape around to create an impression and to let people listening to the broadcast believe it was some sort of ...
Page 1493
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: It does not even identify on the transcript the person that he nominated.
Mr Bailey: Sorry?
Mr STONE: This transcript, which you tabled, does not even have the name of the officer that you nominated. It refers to a woman's voice and it refers to a man's voice. Let us read from this damaging transcript that the member so conveniently did not read. He conveniently tried to create the impression of a conspiracy and a wrongdoing, knowing that Territorians were listening to this broadcast. He wanted to damage the member for the Northern Territory without having to put any substantial evidence on the Table in the parliament. The transcript reads:
Man's voice: It was fairly personal information, given the fact that carers information
comes from the Department of Health, the Commonwealth department.
This was at a time when we had a federal Labor government. It continues:
We are just following it through to see who would have access to it. So that's
what we are here for today is to establish whether anyone from NT Health would have
access to it. We have already spoken to over at ... He is not sure where it
went. He is still trying to find out, but he said if it would come over here, it
would just go to an assessment team for evaluation. So we are just trying to
establish ...
Woman's voice: It being ..., a request to be a carer?
Yes, and ... details as well.
Woman's voice: And [name - this is a person] details as well. In Victoria we call those carers.
It's a slightly different name here.
Man's voice: Right. Yes. So that's basically it.
The interview goes on. I am happy to keep reading it, but it does not make sense and it does not substantiate the allegation that the member made against a sitting member in another parliament. It is one of the sleaziest ...
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: He came in here with the intention of besmirching a person's name with his drama, with his waving around the tape, knowing that, if he read out the transcript, he would have been destroyed where he stood. It is absolutely despicable. A former Leader of the Opposition in this House once said that he would stoop to any tactic to get at the CLP government and, if that meant dancing with grubs, he was prepared to do that. That is exactly
Page 1494
what the member for Wanguri did here this morning. He did it with the complicity of the member for MacDonnell and the Leader of the Opposition.
You have asked me a question about privacy ...
Mr Stirling: Tell the truth ...
Mr STONE: And I have answered.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: What was the reading, Syd?
Mr Stirling: There is a bit of trouble ...
Mr STONE: What was the reading, Syd?
Mr Stirling: Oh, getting personal!
Mr STONE: Why did you run it on the day when ...
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr STONE: Don't you start. You don't hurt me. But I tell you what, you do hurt ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Nhulunbuy will withdraw that comment.
Mr STIRLING: I withdraw, Mr Speaker.
Mr STONE: What I am hurt about, Mr Speaker, is the tactic of going after someone who is not in this Chamber in such a cowardly way. The member for Wanguri misrepresented what he tabled. That is wrong.
Coming back to the privacy issue ...
Mr BAILEY: A point of order, Mr Speaker! It is my belief that the Chief Minister has just misled the parliament. He left out a crucial sentence when reading the transcript. It is a breach of privilege for him to mislead the House.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri please will resume his seat. When the Chief Minister has completed his answer, he may ask a further question if he wishes.
Mr STONE: Mr Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition ...
Mr Stirling: Read the 2 sentences that refer to Dondas.
Page 1495
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have just advised the member for Wanguri.
Mr STONE: I was asked by the Leader of the Opposition whether I would give a commitment to introduce privacy legislation. It may come as some surprise to the Leader of the Opposition that I commissioned major research on this very topic some 3 months ago, and I have already perused draft documentation which will be considered in due course by my parliamentary wing. I have done that, not because she has come in here with her sleazy tricks, but because I was deeply concerned about what the Labor Party had done with that information in the Katherine pub. I am further concerned when I see some of the mock-up information sheets that are used by Labor members, and the way that they collate information in their electorate offices about their constituents. That is what has prompted me to take the action I have taken.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: I will pick up the interjection from the member for Wanguri who claimed that I had not read 2 particular sentences. Which 2 would he like me to read? On the front page ...
Mr Bailey: Where it says: `It was someone from Dondas's campaign team, or someone claiming to be from Dondas's campaign team'.
Mr STONE: Right. The member for Wanguri was aggrieved because I did not read the beginning of the transcript:
Woman's voice: Who rang whom?
Man's voice: It was someone from Dondas's campaign team or someone claiming to be from
Dondas's campaign team.
Woman's voice: Rang ...?
Yes.
Woman's voice: Right.
That is where the rest of the transcript went from. Absolutely none of it suggests at any point, or proves in any way, that Nick Dondas, the federal member for the Northern Territory, accessed information from the Northern Territory Department of Health Services ...
Mr Reed: Or refers to the public servant you named.
Mr STONE: Or even refers to the public servant whom you have now named in this parliament. You are an absolute grub.
Page 1496
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016