HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-05-19 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

DODGY DOCUMENTS

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite) (15:19): On Thursday 12 May, I was contacted by a journalist from The Australian who had been advised that a settlement had been reached between myself and the state of South Australia as defendants and minister Koutsantonis, Labor Party fundraiser and former senator Nick Bolkus, Labor Party secretary Michael Brown, and Labor Party treasurer John Boag as plaintiffs.

The case related to their claims that they had been defamed with regard to the use by the opposition of documents as the basis for questions and other statements; documents which turned out to have been forged by others. The Australian said it had been advised that a settlement sum had been paid by me and the state of South Australia, which was understood to be around $250,000. As that information has not come from me, I can only assume it came from another party involved in the matter, in circumstances of the terms of the settlement being subject to a confidentiality clause. This was a confidentiality clause not requested by me, but sought by others.

I can confirm that the matter has been resolved and that the plaintiffs have now discontinued their proceedings. I am extremely happy with the overall outcome and sincerely wish I was able to explain why in detail. Although someone else appears to have leaked suggested information concerning the confidential settlement, I will not. However, I will say this: the people of South Australia expect their MPs to focus their efforts on bettering the state and not on squabbles and spats amongst politicians.

As a matter of principle, and save in exceptional circumstances, taxpayers find it distasteful when MPs run about suing each other instead of resolving their differences in the parliament, thus wasting their publicly-funded time and resources and instead of getting on with the job of bettering the lives of the South Australians who elected them. In cases where an honest mistake is made and there is a prompt apology, the public may well be furious when they see politicians and political party officials seeking money and large sums of costs from the state of South Australia, provided, essentially, by taxpayers. These are the taxes paid by hardworking people.

Unlike members of the general public, ministers and MPs have the privilege of sorting out their differences in the parliament. That includes representing concerns raised by political party officials. Parliament should always be the preferred course for resolving misunderstandings or disputes, not raiding the public purse. It was and remains a particular concern for me in the present case that we had a minister of the Crown seeking compensation and substantial costs from the state of South Australia. The people of South Australia can cast their judgement on that at the next election.

In this particular matter in 2009, the opposition asked questions based on documents that had been received, which were considered at the time to be a genuine leak from a senior Labor source. That turned out not to be so. Someone with access to Labor Party documentation had gone to a great deal of trouble to set up an elaborate forgery and to falsify a story. I was opposition leader. I did not seek to find scapegoats or to spread the blame to others. I accepted responsibility.

Part of the recent discussion on this matter has included criticism of a former member of my staff as being responsible for taxpayers' liability. The staff member, Kevin Naughton, is, and always has been, bound by the confidentiality provisions of his position in the opposition leader's office. He also has not been party in any of the legal actions because of his immunity from civil liability under section 74 of the Public Sector Management Act. As a result, he cannot defend himself against the recent pointed remarks of two government ministers and others who seek to background the media. Such attacks on his integrity are unfair and without foundation, but are part of what we have come to expect from the state Labor Party: a divided party, awash with scandal and dishonour, and which has lost its legitimacy in the eyes of most South Australians.

Those who can vote can decide themselves on the motivations and appropriateness—or otherwise—of the legal actions taken by those associated with the Labor Party. The only issue remaining about the dodgy documents saga is: who forged the documents? None of us yet know the answer to that question. I remain hopeful that we will in the future. The police investigation remains open and I would encourage anyone with information about this criminal act to take that information to the Commissioner of Police, Mal Hyde. I look forward to the perpetrators being caught. Their actions are a disgrace. They have demeaned our democracy and our parliament. They need to face the full force of both the criminal and the civil law, and on that day South Australia will be a better place.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT