❓ Barnett questions Energy Minister Ripper about Western Power MD van der Mye's travel expenses. Ripper avoids directly answering, accuses Barnett of inaccuracies, and defends van der Mye, citing advice from Western Power's chairman.
AnsweredQoN 980Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to his comments on Radio 6PR on 15 August 2003 regarding the new Managing Director of Western Power, who leaves work as early as Wednesday to travel to Melbourne and returns to work as late as Monday the following week. The minister said I said that - . . . taxpayers fund the cars which Dr van der Mye uses to go to the airport. Wrong. Dr van der Mye pays for that personally. (1) Can the minister confirm that Western Power paid for the managing director’s limousine services on a number of occasions? (2) Can the minister further confirm that the managing director did not reimburse Western Power for the cost of these limousine services until the same week this matter was raised in the Parliament, and only after an internal audit by Western Power? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I invited Dr Stephen van der Mye to Parliament House for dinner on Tuesday night. I had hoped we would run into the Leader of the Opposition so that he could talk to Dr Stephen van der Mye and, if he wished, question him about any problems he might have. Regrettably, the Leader of the Opposition was not in the dining room. Perhaps he was in the bar. Points of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have two points of order. First, Speakers have always ruled that it is unparliamentary to suggest that members in this House are drinking in the bar. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
(2) Can the minister further confirm that the managing director did not reimburse Western Power for the cost of these limousine services until the same week this matter was raised in the Parliament, and only after an internal audit by Western Power? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I invited Dr Stephen van der Mye to Parliament House for dinner on Tuesday night. I had hoped we would run into the Leader of the Opposition so that he could talk to Dr Stephen van der Mye and, if he wished, question him about any problems he might have. Regrettably, the Leader of the Opposition was not in the dining room. Perhaps he was in the bar. Points of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have two points of order. First, Speakers have always ruled that it is unparliamentary to suggest that members in this House are drinking in the bar. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I invited Dr Stephen van der Mye to Parliament House for dinner on Tuesday night. I had hoped we would run into the Leader of the Opposition so that he could talk to Dr Stephen van der Mye and, if he wished, question him about any problems he might have. Regrettably, the Leader of the Opposition was not in the dining room. Perhaps he was in the bar. Points of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have two points of order. First, Speakers have always ruled that it is unparliamentary to suggest that members in this House are drinking in the bar. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
(1)-(2) I invited Dr Stephen van der Mye to Parliament House for dinner on Tuesday night. I had hoped we would run into the Leader of the Opposition so that he could talk to Dr Stephen van der Mye and, if he wished, question him about any problems he might have. Regrettably, the Leader of the Opposition was not in the dining room. Perhaps he was in the bar. Points of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have two points of order. First, Speakers have always ruled that it is unparliamentary to suggest that members in this House are drinking in the bar. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
(2) Can the minister further confirm that the managing director did not reimburse Western Power for the cost of these limousine services until the same week this matter was raised in the Parliament, and only after an internal audit by Western Power? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I invited Dr Stephen van der Mye to Parliament House for dinner on Tuesday night. I had hoped we would run into the Leader of the Opposition so that he could talk to Dr Stephen van der Mye and, if he wished, question him about any problems he might have. Regrettably, the Leader of the Opposition was not in the dining room. Perhaps he was in the bar. Points of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have two points of order. First, Speakers have always ruled that it is unparliamentary to suggest that members in this House are drinking in the bar. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I invited Dr Stephen van der Mye to Parliament House for dinner on Tuesday night. I had hoped we would run into the Leader of the Opposition so that he could talk to Dr Stephen van der Mye and, if he wished, question him about any problems he might have. Regrettably, the Leader of the Opposition was not in the dining room. Perhaps he was in the bar. Points of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have two points of order. First, Speakers have always ruled that it is unparliamentary to suggest that members in this House are drinking in the bar. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
(1)-(2) I invited Dr Stephen van der Mye to Parliament House for dinner on Tuesday night. I had hoped we would run into the Leader of the Opposition so that he could talk to Dr Stephen van der Mye and, if he wished, question him about any problems he might have. Regrettably, the Leader of the Opposition was not in the dining room. Perhaps he was in the bar. Points of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have two points of order. First, Speakers have always ruled that it is unparliamentary to suggest that members in this House are drinking in the bar. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The second point of order is just as serious. Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.R. Quigley interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I believe the minister is referring to an uncorrected copy of Hansard . Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is no point of order. It is a waste of the time of this House for the member to suggest there is a point of order when there is none. There is no point of order relating to the member’s claim that the minister is quoting from a “blue”. The document in the minister’s hand did not relate to what he was talking about. The member is jumping at shadows, and that is indicative of his abuse of the procedures of this House by taking points of order. The member for Hillarys claimed that the minister said something which he did not say. How can the member take a point of order when he jumped to a conclusion. He might have an opinion about what the Leader of the Opposition’s habits might be, but that is not what the minister said. He suggests that there is a point of order because of his assumptions about the Leader of the Opposition, but there is no point of order. Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: Regardless of whether the minister indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had been drinking, the insinuation is there. It would be taken for granted by the majority of people who read “in the bar”. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Mr J.L. BRADSHAW: That was the slur that the minister tried to put across in this Parliament. The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The SPEAKER: First, the number of interjections that went on during the point of order is unacceptable. The fact that so many members were interjecting is the only reason that members were not called to order individually. What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
What the minister said about the Leader of the Opposition being in a particular place in this House does not imply that something else was taking place. Therefore, that part of the point of order is not founded. Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Members cannot refer to evidence that is printed in the blue. Presumably, if the Premier was talking about doing that or thinking about doing it, he should not have done so. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr E.S. RIPPER: May I first of all thank you, Mr Speaker, for the promotion, but I do not think the Premier agrees. You referred to me as Premier. I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
I do not intend to quote from the blue, but I used the blue to remind myself that the Leader of the Opposition has already been wrong on three points on this matter. The Leader of the Opposition asserted that Dr van der Mye spent as much time in Melbourne as in Perth. That is totally wrong and false. The Leader of the Opposition implied that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer funds for his travel to Melbourne. That is totally wrong. The Leader of the Opposition has also made the wrong assertion that Dr van der Mye used taxpayer or Western Power funds to pay for the private charter cars that he used to travel to and from the airport. That is wrong. It was wrong last week when the Leader of the Opposition raised it and it is wrong again this week. I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
I have the advice of the chairman of Western Power on the matter. Just in case the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues want to insult someone else, the chairman is Malcolm McPherson, who was appointed chairman of Western Power by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Energy. If I get advice from the chairman of Western Power that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire of those charter cars, I think I am entitled to rely on that advice, come to the House and put that position. Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
Let us look at this matter. The Opposition has got wrong three critical facts on this matter. Opposition members came back into this House with another attack on Dr van der Mye. They were wrong before, so the Leader of the Opposition should present the evidence. He should come forward with documents and whatever evidence he thinks he has that would justify making such an assertion to the House. If he presents evidence, I will certainly have the matter investigated. I have advice from the chairman of Western Power that what the Leader of the Opposition says is wrong. The advice is that Dr van der Mye has paid for the hire cars. That advice was given to me during a conversation with the chairman of Western Power. The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
The Opposition is desperate to discredit the managing director of Western Power. The Opposition has made false assertions in this House. It has put out press releases before opposition members have answers to those assertions. They have been proven wrong. Now they come back again with another set of assertions. They have put questions to journalists and asked journalists to ask questions of Western Power. When the journalists have come back with answers that do not suit opposition members, they have suggested more questions to the journalists. They are desperate to discredit a man whose expertise is required by Western Power and Western Australia at this time of reform.
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.