❓ Question regarding the date the Premier was informed about unpaid superannuation entitlements of the Minister for Police's former staff. The Premier's response defends the Minister and questions the reliability of memory, referencing a past incident involving the Leader of the Opposition.
AnsweredQoN 32Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MINISTER FOR POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES - STAFF SUPERANNUATION PAYMENTS
I refer to yesterday’s statement by the Minister for Police and Emergency Services in this house, which is now at odds with public comments made today by former staff of his, demonstrating again that he did mislead the Parliament. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : That is clearly an assertion relating to the minister and should not rightly be part of the question. The SPEAKER : I cannot see anything wrong with the structure of that question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : Can the Premier advise the house on what date the Minister for Police was first told that any of his former staff members had not been paid their superannuation entitlements and the name of the person who first advised him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
I refer to yesterday’s statement by the Minister for Police and Emergency Services in this house, which is now at odds with public comments made today by former staff of his, demonstrating again that he did mislead the Parliament. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : That is clearly an assertion relating to the minister and should not rightly be part of the question. The SPEAKER : I cannot see anything wrong with the structure of that question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : Can the Premier advise the house on what date the Minister for Police was first told that any of his former staff members had not been paid their superannuation entitlements and the name of the person who first advised him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question and for some notice of it. Firstly, in relation to the point of order that was taken, whilst obviously you have ruled on it, Mr Speaker, I do not accept that the minister has misled the Parliament. I make that clear. I repeat what I said in answer to the first question. I consider this to be a serious issue. The government has admitted as much. The Minister for Police made a mistake. He is embarrassed by that mistake. He sought to rectify that mistake independent of anything that happened in this Parliament last year. He has provided a statement to the Parliament. Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : I cannot see anything wrong with the structure of that question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : Can the Premier advise the house on what date the Minister for Police was first told that any of his former staff members had not been paid their superannuation entitlements and the name of the person who first advised him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question and for some notice of it. Firstly, in relation to the point of order that was taken, whilst obviously you have ruled on it, Mr Speaker, I do not accept that the minister has misled the Parliament. I make that clear. I repeat what I said in answer to the first question. I consider this to be a serious issue. The government has admitted as much. The Minister for Police made a mistake. He is embarrassed by that mistake. He sought to rectify that mistake independent of anything that happened in this Parliament last year. He has provided a statement to the Parliament. Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question and for some notice of it. Firstly, in relation to the point of order that was taken, whilst obviously you have ruled on it, Mr Speaker, I do not accept that the minister has misled the Parliament. I make that clear. I repeat what I said in answer to the first question. I consider this to be a serious issue. The government has admitted as much. The Minister for Police made a mistake. He is embarrassed by that mistake. He sought to rectify that mistake independent of anything that happened in this Parliament last year. He has provided a statement to the Parliament. Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
I thank the member for the question and for some notice of it. Firstly, in relation to the point of order that was taken, whilst obviously you have ruled on it, Mr Speaker, I do not accept that the minister has misled the Parliament. I make that clear. I repeat what I said in answer to the first question. I consider this to be a serious issue. The government has admitted as much. The Minister for Police made a mistake. He is embarrassed by that mistake. He sought to rectify that mistake independent of anything that happened in this Parliament last year. He has provided a statement to the Parliament. Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher -
Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher -
. . . Liberal frontbencher -
Liberal frontbencher -
. . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . .
Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . .
The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : I cannot see anything wrong with the structure of that question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : Can the Premier advise the house on what date the Minister for Police was first told that any of his former staff members had not been paid their superannuation entitlements and the name of the person who first advised him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question and for some notice of it. Firstly, in relation to the point of order that was taken, whilst obviously you have ruled on it, Mr Speaker, I do not accept that the minister has misled the Parliament. I make that clear. I repeat what I said in answer to the first question. I consider this to be a serious issue. The government has admitted as much. The Minister for Police made a mistake. He is embarrassed by that mistake. He sought to rectify that mistake independent of anything that happened in this Parliament last year. He has provided a statement to the Parliament. Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question and for some notice of it. Firstly, in relation to the point of order that was taken, whilst obviously you have ruled on it, Mr Speaker, I do not accept that the minister has misled the Parliament. I make that clear. I repeat what I said in answer to the first question. I consider this to be a serious issue. The government has admitted as much. The Minister for Police made a mistake. He is embarrassed by that mistake. He sought to rectify that mistake independent of anything that happened in this Parliament last year. He has provided a statement to the Parliament. Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
I thank the member for the question and for some notice of it. Firstly, in relation to the point of order that was taken, whilst obviously you have ruled on it, Mr Speaker, I do not accept that the minister has misled the Parliament. I make that clear. I repeat what I said in answer to the first question. I consider this to be a serious issue. The government has admitted as much. The Minister for Police made a mistake. He is embarrassed by that mistake. He sought to rectify that mistake independent of anything that happened in this Parliament last year. He has provided a statement to the Parliament. Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : Because complaints went to the ATO. That is why he sought to rectify it. He didn’t say, “My goodness, I haven’t been paying super, I better do something about it.” Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : Members! I call the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : As I said this morning, I listened to the interview of the young lady in question, Hayley, on the radio. I do not discount what she is saying, that she spoke to the minister. I ask this question of everybody. Members heard what I had to say about it this morning. We speak to thousands of people over the course of a year when we go about our business. I cannot recall the detail of every single meeting, even if it is a structured meeting with an agenda that might last for 30 minutes. Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : It is a Carmen Lawrence defence. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, it is not. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to interject, I will ask him a question. Will he answer it? Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : You know my policy. I will put it in writing for you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The Leader of the Opposition’s intelligence has advanced so that he is able to say, “You know my policy.” Structured meetings, let alone the incidental contact we have with people all over the community, occur every day. The meeting that was the subject of Hayley’s commentary this morning was not a structured meeting, as I understood what she was saying. There was nothing to it other than her raising it with the minister. I did not hear of any response back to that. Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr P.D. Omodei : If one of your staff came to you with the same question, would you take notice of it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It would depend on the circumstance. I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that one or the other is lying. I do not think anybody would. Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr M.J. Birney : It would not have to be a structured meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The member is right; it does not have to be a structured meeting. I am making the point: all sorts of occasions arise during which people’s recall is at variance. For a start, I refer to one or two occasions that might be familiar to the Leader of the Opposition. An article written in the Sunday Times on 5 June last year referred to whether the Leader of the Opposition could recall drinking at Parliament House on the night he got into some difficulty with the law. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : What is the relevance of the answer to the question - 94? The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : The member, in indicating a section of standing orders, is not raising a point of order. The Premier is making a case in response to the question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article reads - Mr Birney first said he had a couple of light beers with a couple of journalists and Deputy Opposition Leader - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article was referring to the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Paul Omodei. It continues - Then he said three or four light beers. Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher - Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI : Standing order 94 states - A member’s speech must be relevant to the question under discussion. The SPEAKER : Order! The Premier is referring precisely to the question and is giving an example. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Liberal frontbencher Troy Buswell yesterday confirmed Mr Birney was drinking red wine at Parliament House before he went drinking in a Subiaco pub with Mr Omodei . . . If that does not illustrate a variance of recollection, I do not know what does. Then of course there were the circumstances in which the member for Warren-Blackwood lost his job as Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Sunday Times of 27 November reflects what I am sure the gentlemen opposite will agree are different recollections. It reads - He said he had asked Mr Birney twice for his old job back -- once on November 18 after the court judgment, and again in a meeting with the leader on Tuesday -- but on each occasion Mr Birney had turned him down. . . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . . That was a very important meeting! Point of Order Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN : As the manager of opposition business said earlier, the answer has no relevance. I asked the question. My question simply was: who told the minister - The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Twice he denied that he had drunk red wine. Then he couldn’t remember. And then he said: “I certainly didn’t have two or three glasses of red wine.” Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher -
Mr Birney said yesterday his response that he had a couple of Hahn Premium Lights was correct. . . . Liberal frontbencher -
. . . Liberal frontbencher -
Liberal frontbencher -
. . . Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . .
Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his job back . . .
The SPEAKER : Order! The opposition has raised that same point of order three times. I do not wish to rule on the same point of order on three occasions. The member asked a question about recollection and the Premier is answering it. Members may not like the way he is answering it; they might disagree with it, but he is answering it in the way he considers appropriate. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The article continues - Mr Birney denied his former deputy had asked for his old job back and said Mr Omodei was well aware that he did not have the power to reinstate him . . . That is not a trifling matter. I would have thought it would be a matter of great significance to both men, as well as to the state Liberal Party. The article contains a totally contrary recollection of what was said in that meeting. I refer, finally, to the communication between the Leader of the Opposition and Hon Barry House about Mr House’s demotion from the education and training portfolio. Mr Birney said in a press release that Mr House had asked to spend more time servicing his electorate. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY : This is not relevant to the question. We will be dissenting very shortly. The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
The SPEAKER : Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to be removed from this place, he can raise a fourth point of order on a matter on which I have already said I do not wish to hear a third point of order. However, if he does so, he will suffer the consequences. I urge the Premier to finish his answer quickly. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I will finish very shortly. The article reads - “Is that what he said, is it?,” Mr House said when told of the media release. Mr House said that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr Birney three weeks ago about the education portfolio and that there had been no discussion along the lines that the Leader of the Opposition had asserted. Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
Did we hear something this morning about strike one, strike two and strike three? I have just delivered three strikes, and the Leader of the Opposition is out. He has left his seat and gone elsewhere in the chamber. He can dish it out but he cannot take it. An assertion is being made that the matter was raised during an incidental contact with the member for Ballajura. The member for Ballajura says that he cannot recall that contact. I have given three examples of very significant matters that were raised directly with the Leader of the Opposition. As strange as it may seem, his recollection is totally at variance with that of three members of his own party, including the two members who are sitting on either side of him. Members opposite should get their heads together and get their stories straight. I have answered the question and so, by the way, has the member for Ballajura.
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.