House debates

Thursday, 7 September 2006

Personal Explanations

3:38 pm

Photo of Chris BowenChris Bowen (Prospect, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.

Photo of David HawkerDavid Hawker (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Photo of Chris BowenChris Bowen (Prospect, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Yes, by the Prime Minister.

Photo of David HawkerDavid Hawker (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Please proceed.

Photo of Chris BowenChris Bowen (Prospect, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

In question time today the Prime Minister indicated that I had left information out of my question to him yesterday on behalf of my constituent Mr Majstrovic. Specifically, he claimed that I did not reveal that the CFMEU had launched an unfair dismissal claim for him. The Prime Minister also indicated that I did not reveal that Mr Majstrovic has received $10,000 in compensation. I checked during question time, and I am advised that Mr Majstrovic received no compensation and the first he has heard of $10,000 in compensation was the Prime Minister’s answer today. In addition, the sworn affidavit I tabled in the House yesterday was from the unfair dismissal claim lodged on behalf of Mr Majstrovic. However, Formbrace has refused to appear before the AIRC because it claims—

Photo of David HawkerDavid Hawker (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The member is now debating his personal explanation. He is to show where he has personally been misrepresented. He will not debate the issue.

Photo of Chris BowenChris Bowen (Prospect, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister claimed that I did not reveal that the CFMEU had launched an unfair dismissal claim. However, the sworn affidavit that I lodged in the House yesterday was from that claim. The employer refuses to appear before the AIRC because the employer claims to have 97 employees and therefore to be exempt under the government’s extreme laws.

Photo of David HawkerDavid Hawker (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member will not debate his personal explanation.