❓ Question regarding Minister Shave's responsibility for inaction on finance broker legislation and funding, leading to calls for his resignation. Minister Shave defends his actions by tabling documents and questioning the truthfulness of allegations.
AnsweredQoN 131Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to Mr John Urquhart’s letter of resignation from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board, which catalogues the Minister for Fair Trading’s failure to implement required legislation and funding changes and states that public comments by the minister about those changes are untrue. Will the minister now accept responsibility for his failure to act and, like Mr Urquhart, do the honourable thing and resign? Mr SHAVE
AnswerView source ↗
Mr Urquhart alleged in evidence to the Gunning inquiry that he had asked successive ministers for funding, including me. As a result, I asked the Ministry of Fair Trading to acquaint me with meetings I had with him and the requests he made for funding. Ms MacTiernan: Because you did not know. Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE replied: Mr Urquhart alleged in evidence to the Gunning inquiry that he had asked successive ministers for funding, including me. As a result, I asked the Ministry of Fair Trading to acquaint me with meetings I had with him and the requests he made for funding. Ms MacTiernan: Because you did not know. Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr Urquhart alleged in evidence to the Gunning inquiry that he had asked successive ministers for funding, including me. As a result, I asked the Ministry of Fair Trading to acquaint me with meetings I had with him and the requests he made for funding. Ms MacTiernan: Because you did not know. Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Ms MacTiernan: Because you did not know. Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
[See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me.
I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me.
Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me.
[See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
[See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE replied: Mr Urquhart alleged in evidence to the Gunning inquiry that he had asked successive ministers for funding, including me. As a result, I asked the Ministry of Fair Trading to acquaint me with meetings I had with him and the requests he made for funding. Ms MacTiernan: Because you did not know. Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr Urquhart alleged in evidence to the Gunning inquiry that he had asked successive ministers for funding, including me. As a result, I asked the Ministry of Fair Trading to acquaint me with meetings I had with him and the requests he made for funding. Ms MacTiernan: Because you did not know. Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Ms MacTiernan: Because you did not know. Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: No, I wanted to put the correct version on the record. Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Dr Gallop: Are you saying Mr Urquhart is not telling the truth? Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: I am stating what the department told me. On 4 September 2000, the chief executive of Ministry of Fair Trading, Mr Walker, sent me a memorandum that states - That you note the following information regarding requests made by the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board and the Ministry for additional funding for finance broking issues since 1997. I became the Minister for Fair Trading in 1997. The memorandum states - I refer to your memorandum of 4 September 2000 for information regarding requests received from the Finance Brokers Supervisory Board for extra funding for finance broking issues. The memorandum states that funding was provided whenever it was requested. I table that advice. [See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
[See paper 206.] Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: Mr Urquhart also raised the issue of overvaluations in the real estate industry and I asked the chief executive of the Ministry of Fair Trading about it. That advice is dated 4 September and states - OVER VALUATIONS IN THE FINANCE BROKING INDUSTRY - GENERAL LEVEL OF AWARENESS I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me. I table the letter. [See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
I refer to your recent request regarding evidence before the Gunning Committee of Inquiry in relation to the level of awareness, within the Ministry, of over valuations within the finance broking industry. I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me.
I can confirm that Mrs Jane Brazier, the responsible Director for finance broking industry matters from February 1997 to June 1999, advised the Gunning Committee in her evidence on 8 June 2000 that she did not perceive over valuation to be a problem of general significance within the industry. Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me.
Should you require any additional information in relation to this issue please do not hesitate to contact me.
[See paper No 207.] Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: I was also fortunate enough to come across a letter that Mr Fidge wrote to the Gunning inquiry concerning some allegations that were made about me. Now that Mr Fidge has given evidence, it is appropriate that I table that letter. I suspect that Mr Fidge did not write this letter, but that will be a matter for the upper House to determine. Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Several members interjected. Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: Members opposite do not like to hear the truth. I will quote the letter drafted for Mr Fidge to sign. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: The comments made by the member for Fremantle should be withdrawn. Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr McGinty: Calling him a gutless coward? You would agree with that, wouldn’t you? The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! The member for Fremantle should realise that I am on my feet. We all know that at times some pretty tough things are said in this place, but one of our rules is that members must not impugn other members. I do not believe that the comment impugns the minister. At times members need to be careful about what they say. I did not hear the initial comment and I am not sure that Hansard did either; however, it has been heard now and is now on the record. I will not ask the member for Fremantle to withdraw it. It is not a nice comment but I do not believe it impugns the minister. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr SHAVE: The letter, which was prepared for Mr Fidge, states - “even your father-in-law Don, has money invested with a finance broker and he’s ill and he’s having a problems getting his money back.” Mr Shave told us “if people go in for this sort of thing they deserve to get their fingers burnt.” This sits very nicely with members opposite who have been suggesting that I went out of my way to help my former father-in-law. The letter prepared for Mr Fidge, dated 19 June 2000, mentions a meeting relating to the matter taking place on 25 June 1999. I previously pointed out in this House that on 25 June, Mr Walker was at a medical board meeting and Mr Mitchell was sitting an exam at the University of Western Australia. Not only is the content wrong, but also the date is wrong. I am sure we can overlook that if we are imaginative enough. I table the letter. [See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
[See paper No 208.] Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Mr SHAVE: The Gunning inquiry report outlined what happened in regard to this matter. The Government supports the recommendations of the Gunning inquiry; and, contrary to what members of the Opposition say, it has sympathy for the people who lost their money. The Government will quickly implement those recommendations.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.