Mr BAILEY - 1996-11-26
I specifically asked the minister whether the memo was written because the deputy secretary, Graham Symons, refused the standard request to provide this information, and it was only following that refusal that the minister contacted the secretary and had him make the list available. That was the question. The minister did not answer it. Did the deputy secretary refuse this normal request? I also call on the minister to table the letter generated by him in regard to this request, as is normal practice.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I reintroduce the member to the words `truth', `fact' and `integrity'. He is again making assumptions. He made the assumption in relation to the list that was generated in response to this minute. He made the assumption that it came to my office and that it was automatically passed on to a third party - that is, the CLP. That is an assumption that has not been proven. It is an assumption that I can reject and I have rejected. Nothing on that list, with my approval or my knowledge, went beyond my office.
Members interjecting.
Mr REED: Do you want to hear the answer? You do. People listening to this broadcast would be surprised to hear that.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: Their rudeness and arrogance is not helping the debate.
I have no idea what the process was in the department when this request was made. I can only assume that this request went straight to the secretary of the department. If, by some means, I was able to say that, as far as I am aware, Mr Symons did not act as was suggested by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member would again embark on another assumption. What about the deputy assistant secretary? Would he have said no? We would end up down with the cleaning lady if we followed the process by which members opposite operate. This is
Page 1826
simply a further assumption on their part to construct the evidence to support their finding of guilt. When you investigate something, you do not establish guilt and work back from there and try to construct the evidence. That is what they are trying to do here.
Ms Martin: Table the letter.
Mr REED: That is not the way it is done. The member for Wanguri and now the member for Fannie Bay want me to table the letter that I wrote in relation to the list. That is the 1994 list, is it?
Mr Bailey: Yes.
Mr REED: I thought I mentioned it earlier. In the event that I did not, can I say that I did not use the list in 1994 ...
Mr Stirling: You said you wrote, and the pensioners were grateful.
Mr REED: The pensioners were very grateful. I was talking about the 1993 list.
Members interjecting.
Mr REED: This is the difficulty. I used specifically the example of the list that I called for in March 1993 and that I used in April 1993 and May 1993 to write to pensioners about 2 different issues. Such a list does not have a long applicability simply because pensioners come in to the scheme and there is a great rate of change to the list of people who are eligible. You can only use it for a short period because it quickly becomes dated. As for the 1994 list, there is no doubt that I sought it. This minute relates to the request from my office to provide that list.
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: I have no doubt that the list came to my office. It was not used by me because an election was called. I have said already that I did not authorise its passing from my office and, to my knowledge, it was not passed on from my office to any other party.
Page 1827
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I reintroduce the member to the words `truth', `fact' and `integrity'. He is again making assumptions. He made the assumption in relation to the list that was generated in response to this minute. He made the assumption that it came to my office and that it was automatically passed on to a third party - that is, the CLP. That is an assumption that has not been proven. It is an assumption that I can reject and I have rejected. Nothing on that list, with my approval or my knowledge, went beyond my office.
Members interjecting.
Mr REED: Do you want to hear the answer? You do. People listening to this broadcast would be surprised to hear that.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: Their rudeness and arrogance is not helping the debate.
I have no idea what the process was in the department when this request was made. I can only assume that this request went straight to the secretary of the department. If, by some means, I was able to say that, as far as I am aware, Mr Symons did not act as was suggested by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member would again embark on another assumption. What about the deputy assistant secretary? Would he have said no? We would end up down with the cleaning lady if we followed the process by which members opposite operate. This is
Page 1826
simply a further assumption on their part to construct the evidence to support their finding of guilt. When you investigate something, you do not establish guilt and work back from there and try to construct the evidence. That is what they are trying to do here.
Ms Martin: Table the letter.
Mr REED: That is not the way it is done. The member for Wanguri and now the member for Fannie Bay want me to table the letter that I wrote in relation to the list. That is the 1994 list, is it?
Mr Bailey: Yes.
Mr REED: I thought I mentioned it earlier. In the event that I did not, can I say that I did not use the list in 1994 ...
Mr Stirling: You said you wrote, and the pensioners were grateful.
Mr REED: The pensioners were very grateful. I was talking about the 1993 list.
Members interjecting.
Mr REED: This is the difficulty. I used specifically the example of the list that I called for in March 1993 and that I used in April 1993 and May 1993 to write to pensioners about 2 different issues. Such a list does not have a long applicability simply because pensioners come in to the scheme and there is a great rate of change to the list of people who are eligible. You can only use it for a short period because it quickly becomes dated. As for the 1994 list, there is no doubt that I sought it. This minute relates to the request from my office to provide that list.
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: I have no doubt that the list came to my office. It was not used by me because an election was called. I have said already that I did not authorise its passing from my office and, to my knowledge, it was not passed on from my office to any other party.
Page 1827
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016