Mr EDE - 1995-11-30
Yesterday, the Chief Minister listed 6 amounts, totalling $47 860, funded by the government on cost agreements on behalf of ministers. After Question Time, he advised that this amount was current as of November 1994 and that another matter had been finalised since. I want to be fair. The Chief Minister did tell us that it was Minister Manzie who was involved
Page 1093
in that latter action. He said that he will tell us the amount involved now that the action is completed, and I am not referring to that particular item because I have a commitment on that. However, will the Chief Minister advise which ministers were involved in each of the other actions that have been detailed, and whether those actions were against the media, other politicians or other Territorians?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition has asked this question because it takes me to what he said on Channel 8 news last night, following on from a response that I made. I said: `But there have also been many occasions where ministers' requests for indemnification have been refused by Cabinet', which is true. The Leader of the Opposition went on to say:
So it is not an automatic thing. It is big government using the money that they are provided with by
taxpayers to prosecute and persecute individual Territorians, and that is wrong.
The Leader of the Opposition sits there and nods his head.
Mr Ede: Yes.
Mr STONE: Just who are these `individual Territorians'? The Leader of the Opposition asks me this morning to detail the names of ministers and the actions concerned. Let us take one example, that involving the Leader of Government Business.
Mr Ede: Let us take them all.
Mr STONE: No. You went on television and told Territorians that this was all about persecuting individuals. I will tell you what this is all about. This is all about ensuring that people are responsible for their actions. In this case, it was Jamie Johnson, your endorsed candidate, who made scurrilous and outrageous allegations about my colleague ...
Mr Bailey: Something you do all the time.
Mr STONE: We will come to you in a minute.
This is what he had to say ultimately, in writing to my colleague:
I am writing at your request to acknowledge your concern at statements published in the edition of
Changing Times published in February this year. I accept that any allegation that you obtain improper
financial advantage in respect of the proposal to create the Mary River National Park from your position
as minister would be untrue.
Mr Ede: A good example.
Page 1094
Mr STONE: A good example. An example where costs were actually recovered. These are independent Territorians.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: I will give some more examples because a very important principle of public policy is involved here.
Mr Bailey: But you can use money to persecute other Territorians.
Mr STONE: You say `persecute' ...
Mr Bailey: Yes.
Mr STONE: A minister of the Crown is a sitting target and, if people think that they can make ...
Mr Coulter: And his kids and his wife.
Mr Bell interjecting.
Mr STONE: ... and they are invariably people from that side of politics, and it invariably coincides with an election ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Bailey: You are the only crowd ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: If you believe that you can make scurrilous, untrue, damaging statements about an individual, and if you think that you can get away with causing the hurt that that person and their family suffer and that the minister should just cop it on the chin, well it ain't so - and it ain't so in any jurisdiction.
Mr Bailey: We have to.
Mr STONE: And that ...
Mr Bell: You have been on the phone to John Sharp today.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: The member for Wanguri interjects, `We have to'. No one stops him initiating an action.
Mr Bailey: No one stops me from doing so out of my own pocket, not out of the taxpayers' pocket.
Page 1095
Mr STONE: We have here a classic example of a scurrilous allegation, made by an ALP endorsed candidate, that was untrue and admitted to be untrue ...
Mr Bailey: Because he could not afford to go to court and lose his house in order to obtain legal aid.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri is continuing to interject. I ask him to cease.
Mr STONE: What about the celebrated case of Cavanagh v Northern Territory News Services Limited in which the former Chief Minister counter claimed? You remember Mr Cavanagh don't you? I think he was tied up with you lot too ...
Mr Ede: Which Cavanagh?
Mr STONE: Barry Cavanagh. You do not remember him? This is what was said about that matter in the judgment that was delivered in the Supreme Court: `The plaintiff clearly had a motive to make spiteful allegations about the government and the Treasurer'.
Members opposite may laugh. That judgment was entered ...
Mr Ede: The poor little kids.
Mr STONE: Do you intend to reflect on the judgment of the Supreme Court? That is what you are doing.
Mr Bell: You do it most days, Shane.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: I am glad that the member for MacDonnell has interjected because there is the other celebrated case involving the member for Sanderson and Rhonda. Who drove that? Who sat with the woman and gee-ed it up?
Mr Bell: Rhonda?
Mr STONE: You. Go back and read the material.
Mr Bell: I have.
Mr STONE: You have yet to apologise for what you did. You have yet to get to your feet and say to my colleague that you are sorry for the hurt that he suffered and the distress you caused to his wife and kids. You have never done that, notwithstanding that he has a judgment against that particular defendant in the particular matter that you drove ...
Mr BELL: A point of order, Mr Speaker!
Page 1096
Mr Manzie: It hurts him. He has never been able to apologise. He has never been big enough.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BELL: Mr Speaker, if the Chief Minister wants to make those sorts of allegations here, which are being broadcast over the radio, he has to make them by way of a substantive motion. They reflect on my integrity and they are subject to ...
Members interjecting.
Mr BELL: I hope the Chief Minister has the guts to move such a motion. He is making massive allegations against me and ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BELL: He and his colleagues have been using massive amounts of public money to accrue a private benefit to themselves. The Chief Minister weeps crocodile tears about being cruelly defamed. The fact is that government members are well paid for it too - far better paid than we are on this side of the House, and they are in a far better position to bring actions like that from their private resources, let alone the bottomless pit of the government ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member for MacDonnell come to his point of order. I am not aware of the words at which he takes offence.
Mr BELL: My point of order is that, if the Chief Minister wants to make these reflections on myself and my character, he should do so by way of substantive motion.
Mr SPEAKER: Would the member for MacDonnell like to enlighten me as to the words at which he takes offence?
Mr BELL: The Chief Minister was saying that I had been ...
Mr Coulter: That Mr Mulholland found that he did not have a role to play in ...
Mr BELL: ... privileges of this parliament, refusing to apologise, making an attempt to use the cloak of privilege to reflect on the member for Sanderson. If he wants to do that, he should be doing so by way of a substantive motion.
Mr SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Mr STONE: For the member for MacDonnell to say that we on this side accrue a benefit in defending our reputations and the feelings of our families is an absolute nonsense!
Mr Bell: At the taxpayers' expense!
Page 1097
Mr STONE: I could take you through ...
Mr Bailey: Will you fund me when I am defamed by your side?
Mr Palmer: You cannot be defamed.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chief Minister has the floor. He is attempting to answer a question that has been asked of him, and I would appreciate reasonable silence.
Mr STONE: I think that is the best interjection in years.
Mr Coulter: Absolutely.
Mr STONE: Absolutely. I hope that the member for MacDonnell is writing that down if he is preparing for his usual performance for tonight.
In any event, I could take members through each of these matters. On each and every occasion, there has been a justifiable defence of someone's reputation, and the perpetrator comes invariably from that side of politics.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: ... you cannot have it both ways.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: It is an important issue of public policy for a minister to be able to get on with his job, without the fear of - and I quote it again, `a motive to make spiteful allegations about the government and the Treasurer' - lies, untruths, and misrepresentations being perpetrated in the community.
Mr Bailey: Will you fund my case when I am defamed?
Mr Ede: Is that Perron?
Mr STONE: Yes.
Mr Ede interjecting.
Mr STONE: You can laugh, but there is a decision of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory that disagrees with you. That is your problem.
Mr Ede: It should be up before the High Court today.
Mr STONE: When you start to receive letters of apology, written by your endorsed candidates, saying that they had it wrong and it was untrue ...
Page 1098
Mr Bailey: They have no choice!
Mr Ede interjecting.
Mr STONE: ... without any regard for the hurt and the distress that it caused.
The Leader of the Opposition has 2 sets of standards. His own ministerial officer was funded in an action against the then president of the CLP. That shows how even-handed we are.
Mr Ede: That is not right! That is a lie!
Members interjecting.
Mr Manzie: He was the bloke who was working for you.
Mr Bailey: He was not working for him.
Mr Ede: He was not on my staff, he was not working for me and he never had.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: The point is who it was against.
Mr Bailey: A public servant, not a politician.
Mr STONE: It is a demonstration that, without fear or favour, when it comes to public servants, to policemen and women, and to ministers of the Crown, the Northern Territory government will stand behind people when they have been cruelly and maliciously defamed. It is that simple.
Page 1099
Page 1093
in that latter action. He said that he will tell us the amount involved now that the action is completed, and I am not referring to that particular item because I have a commitment on that. However, will the Chief Minister advise which ministers were involved in each of the other actions that have been detailed, and whether those actions were against the media, other politicians or other Territorians?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition has asked this question because it takes me to what he said on Channel 8 news last night, following on from a response that I made. I said: `But there have also been many occasions where ministers' requests for indemnification have been refused by Cabinet', which is true. The Leader of the Opposition went on to say:
So it is not an automatic thing. It is big government using the money that they are provided with by
taxpayers to prosecute and persecute individual Territorians, and that is wrong.
The Leader of the Opposition sits there and nods his head.
Mr Ede: Yes.
Mr STONE: Just who are these `individual Territorians'? The Leader of the Opposition asks me this morning to detail the names of ministers and the actions concerned. Let us take one example, that involving the Leader of Government Business.
Mr Ede: Let us take them all.
Mr STONE: No. You went on television and told Territorians that this was all about persecuting individuals. I will tell you what this is all about. This is all about ensuring that people are responsible for their actions. In this case, it was Jamie Johnson, your endorsed candidate, who made scurrilous and outrageous allegations about my colleague ...
Mr Bailey: Something you do all the time.
Mr STONE: We will come to you in a minute.
This is what he had to say ultimately, in writing to my colleague:
I am writing at your request to acknowledge your concern at statements published in the edition of
Changing Times published in February this year. I accept that any allegation that you obtain improper
financial advantage in respect of the proposal to create the Mary River National Park from your position
as minister would be untrue.
Mr Ede: A good example.
Page 1094
Mr STONE: A good example. An example where costs were actually recovered. These are independent Territorians.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: I will give some more examples because a very important principle of public policy is involved here.
Mr Bailey: But you can use money to persecute other Territorians.
Mr STONE: You say `persecute' ...
Mr Bailey: Yes.
Mr STONE: A minister of the Crown is a sitting target and, if people think that they can make ...
Mr Coulter: And his kids and his wife.
Mr Bell interjecting.
Mr STONE: ... and they are invariably people from that side of politics, and it invariably coincides with an election ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Bailey: You are the only crowd ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: If you believe that you can make scurrilous, untrue, damaging statements about an individual, and if you think that you can get away with causing the hurt that that person and their family suffer and that the minister should just cop it on the chin, well it ain't so - and it ain't so in any jurisdiction.
Mr Bailey: We have to.
Mr STONE: And that ...
Mr Bell: You have been on the phone to John Sharp today.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: The member for Wanguri interjects, `We have to'. No one stops him initiating an action.
Mr Bailey: No one stops me from doing so out of my own pocket, not out of the taxpayers' pocket.
Page 1095
Mr STONE: We have here a classic example of a scurrilous allegation, made by an ALP endorsed candidate, that was untrue and admitted to be untrue ...
Mr Bailey: Because he could not afford to go to court and lose his house in order to obtain legal aid.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri is continuing to interject. I ask him to cease.
Mr STONE: What about the celebrated case of Cavanagh v Northern Territory News Services Limited in which the former Chief Minister counter claimed? You remember Mr Cavanagh don't you? I think he was tied up with you lot too ...
Mr Ede: Which Cavanagh?
Mr STONE: Barry Cavanagh. You do not remember him? This is what was said about that matter in the judgment that was delivered in the Supreme Court: `The plaintiff clearly had a motive to make spiteful allegations about the government and the Treasurer'.
Members opposite may laugh. That judgment was entered ...
Mr Ede: The poor little kids.
Mr STONE: Do you intend to reflect on the judgment of the Supreme Court? That is what you are doing.
Mr Bell: You do it most days, Shane.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: I am glad that the member for MacDonnell has interjected because there is the other celebrated case involving the member for Sanderson and Rhonda. Who drove that? Who sat with the woman and gee-ed it up?
Mr Bell: Rhonda?
Mr STONE: You. Go back and read the material.
Mr Bell: I have.
Mr STONE: You have yet to apologise for what you did. You have yet to get to your feet and say to my colleague that you are sorry for the hurt that he suffered and the distress you caused to his wife and kids. You have never done that, notwithstanding that he has a judgment against that particular defendant in the particular matter that you drove ...
Mr BELL: A point of order, Mr Speaker!
Page 1096
Mr Manzie: It hurts him. He has never been able to apologise. He has never been big enough.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BELL: Mr Speaker, if the Chief Minister wants to make those sorts of allegations here, which are being broadcast over the radio, he has to make them by way of a substantive motion. They reflect on my integrity and they are subject to ...
Members interjecting.
Mr BELL: I hope the Chief Minister has the guts to move such a motion. He is making massive allegations against me and ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BELL: He and his colleagues have been using massive amounts of public money to accrue a private benefit to themselves. The Chief Minister weeps crocodile tears about being cruelly defamed. The fact is that government members are well paid for it too - far better paid than we are on this side of the House, and they are in a far better position to bring actions like that from their private resources, let alone the bottomless pit of the government ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member for MacDonnell come to his point of order. I am not aware of the words at which he takes offence.
Mr BELL: My point of order is that, if the Chief Minister wants to make these reflections on myself and my character, he should do so by way of substantive motion.
Mr SPEAKER: Would the member for MacDonnell like to enlighten me as to the words at which he takes offence?
Mr BELL: The Chief Minister was saying that I had been ...
Mr Coulter: That Mr Mulholland found that he did not have a role to play in ...
Mr BELL: ... privileges of this parliament, refusing to apologise, making an attempt to use the cloak of privilege to reflect on the member for Sanderson. If he wants to do that, he should be doing so by way of a substantive motion.
Mr SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Mr STONE: For the member for MacDonnell to say that we on this side accrue a benefit in defending our reputations and the feelings of our families is an absolute nonsense!
Mr Bell: At the taxpayers' expense!
Page 1097
Mr STONE: I could take you through ...
Mr Bailey: Will you fund me when I am defamed by your side?
Mr Palmer: You cannot be defamed.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chief Minister has the floor. He is attempting to answer a question that has been asked of him, and I would appreciate reasonable silence.
Mr STONE: I think that is the best interjection in years.
Mr Coulter: Absolutely.
Mr STONE: Absolutely. I hope that the member for MacDonnell is writing that down if he is preparing for his usual performance for tonight.
In any event, I could take members through each of these matters. On each and every occasion, there has been a justifiable defence of someone's reputation, and the perpetrator comes invariably from that side of politics.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: ... you cannot have it both ways.
Members interjecting.
Mr STONE: It is an important issue of public policy for a minister to be able to get on with his job, without the fear of - and I quote it again, `a motive to make spiteful allegations about the government and the Treasurer' - lies, untruths, and misrepresentations being perpetrated in the community.
Mr Bailey: Will you fund my case when I am defamed?
Mr Ede: Is that Perron?
Mr STONE: Yes.
Mr Ede interjecting.
Mr STONE: You can laugh, but there is a decision of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory that disagrees with you. That is your problem.
Mr Ede: It should be up before the High Court today.
Mr STONE: When you start to receive letters of apology, written by your endorsed candidates, saying that they had it wrong and it was untrue ...
Page 1098
Mr Bailey: They have no choice!
Mr Ede interjecting.
Mr STONE: ... without any regard for the hurt and the distress that it caused.
The Leader of the Opposition has 2 sets of standards. His own ministerial officer was funded in an action against the then president of the CLP. That shows how even-handed we are.
Mr Ede: That is not right! That is a lie!
Members interjecting.
Mr Manzie: He was the bloke who was working for you.
Mr Bailey: He was not working for him.
Mr Ede: He was not on my staff, he was not working for me and he never had.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: The point is who it was against.
Mr Bailey: A public servant, not a politician.
Mr STONE: It is a demonstration that, without fear or favour, when it comes to public servants, to policemen and women, and to ministers of the Crown, the Northern Territory government will stand behind people when they have been cruelly and maliciously defamed. It is that simple.
Page 1099
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016