STANDING COMMITTEE ON
PROCEDURE AND PRIVILEGES — FIFTY-SIXTH REPORT —LEGAL ADVICE
1281. Hon MICHAEL MISCHIN to the Leader of the House
representing the Attorney General:
I refer to the Attorney General's
response avoiding answering my questions of 23 October 2019.
(1) Why, when I asked
him on 16 October, ''Did the Attorney General show the letter to the
reporter before it was tabled as part of the fifty-sixth report?'', did
he not simply and honestly and forthrightly and in the spirit of transparency
and accountability to Parliament answer ''yes''?
(2) What was he afraid of revealing?
(3) If what he claims he did was proper, why did he
not admit to what he had done when I first began questioning him on 18
September about the disclosure of correspondence?
(4) If his
justification is disclosure in the public interest, why did he not make that
disclosure by way of a media release or by providing the letter to all media
agencies?
(5) Regardless of
whether he can recall any other litigant funded by the public whose actions
would allegedly fall into the same public interest category, is this the only
occasion since he became a minister that he has disclosed to the media
correspondence passing between the State Solicitor and a litigant before it was
made public by that litigant—yes or no?
Hon SUE
ELLERY replied:
I thank the honourable member for
some notice of the question.
(1) See the answer to question
without notice 1147.
(2) I do not accept the premise of
the question.
(3) See the answer to question
without notice 1013.
(4) As Attorney
General, the method of my interactions with the media on issues pertaining to
my portfolio is at my choosing.
(5) See the answer to question
without notice 1233.