Matter of Privilege

MATTER OF PRIVILEGE

The SPEAKER: I respond to the matter of privilege raised by the member for Mitchell earlier today in which he claims that the Premier misled the house. The member for Mitchell alleges that the contents of the Premier's ministerial statement made to the house on 26 February in relation to the report of Mr Alan Clayton into the operations of WorkCover is not consistent with the actuality of the bill introduced by the Minister for Industrial Relations on 28 February, as it relates to the provision for weekly payments for compensable disabilities.

First, the member for Mitchell suggested that the ministerial statement made by the Premier was a statement of the government's legislative intent. It is clear from a reading of the ministerial statement in Hansard that the Premier was outlining the recommendations made by Mr Clayton, not providing the house with the government's policy position or proposed legislation.

In relation to the specific matter that the member for Mitchell has raised, he claims that the Premier's statement is inconsistent with clauses 4 and 5 of schedule 1 of the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation (Scheme Review) Amendment Bill. However, the passage of the Premier's statement quoted by the member to the house relates to weekly payments under clause 4 subclause (1)—not, as the member suggests, subclause (2), which relates to a review of payments.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Therefore, I can find no basis for giving precedents which would enable the member for Mitchell or any other member to pursue this matter immediately as a matter of privilege. It cannot 'genuinely be regarded as tending to impede or obstruct the house in the discharge of its duties'. However, my ruling does not prevent the member for Mitchell or any other member from pursuing the matter by way of substantive motion.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The Speaker is on his feet.

[Sitting suspended from 13:01 to 14:00]