2015-09-17
Mr BARBER (Northern Metropolitan) — I was not seeking to write the dust jacket blurb for the bestseller that Mr Davis has already got penned on this matter. I was simply pointing out that a prima facie case exists that, if not refuted, would represent a relevant offence, and that is what it is that requires an investigation.
In relation to the audit committee it may very well be wise that the Presiding Officers have asked Parliamentary Services to check its own internal processes, which is specifically what an audit committee is responsible for. The Leader of the Government said, 'Why didn't you deal with this yesterday?'. In fact it would have required notifying other parties the previous Wednesday that we were going to do it. I have been simply giving Parliamentary Services and others the benefit of the doubt that they would come forward and tell us what it was that was intended by way of an internal investigation. I learnt that from the Speaker of the lower house during question time today, and it is that as well as the information that continues to come out today, even as we sit here, that has led me to this course of action.
We read in the Herald Sun story that there were some Labor members who did not want to participate in this particular scheme as it was set up and some others who, perhaps against their judgement, were forced to do so. Since this is a matter of the conduct of members, not a particular statement by a government leader, it is important that we get further and deeper into this matter. The misuse of parliamentary resources is a breach of the code of conduct that has been established by the lower house Privileges Committee in relation to Mr Shaw, and since a simple calculation shows us this involves a large amount of dollars, it is a serious matter that has to be addressed.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned until later this day.