TREASURER'S REMARKS

The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (14:35): My question, again, is to the Treasurer. Is the reason the Treasurer went public on 2 June about his knowledge of the Adelaide Oval cost increase prior to the election because he became aware that Ian McLachlan told the media that day that he had sent a number of clear signals about the Adelaide Oval cost increase to the government steering committee in February prior to the election?

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Treasurer, Minister for Federal/State Relations, Minister for Defence Industries) (14:36): Can I say, first, that I have certainly referred already publicly to Mr McLachlan's interview that morning. I just offer a word of caution there in that I am aware that comments made by Mr McLachlan were refuted by Bruce Carter, the chairman of our steering committee—

The Hon. I.F. Evans: After you reacted to them.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: After who reacted to them?

The Hon. I.F. Evans: After you reacted to them.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Sorry, me?

The Hon. I.F. Evans: Yes.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I did not react to them: that was Mr Carter.

The Hon. I.F. Evans: You didn't react to Mr McLachlan's comments?

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Mr Carter rejected that element of Mr McLachlan's contribution that—

The Hon. I.F. Evans: That was after.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Davenport has already asked the question.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I will try to do this again, Madam Speaker. They asked a serious question; I am attempting to give a serious answer. I would appreciate doing that with some degree of cooperation from members opposite. Certain comments by Mr McLachlan about what Mr Carter was advised were refuted by Mr Carter, I am aware, and Mr Carter received a letter from Mr McLachlan retracting and withdrawing those comments; and I understand that apology was read on ABC, and it may have been in The Advertiser; I am not sure.

I have already said publicly that the comments of Mr McLachlan that morning were one of the reasons that prompted me to act on that day. I said that at the press conference on the day. I do not know what sort of research members opposite are doing. I guess today there would have been a no-confidence motion had it not been overwhelmed by a national political event, but they are really trying to ask the same question in about 15 different ways.