PERSONAL EXPLANATION- Parliamentary Allowance

_{03 June, 2009}

Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (10.22 am): Over the past week I have had to endure my name being dragged through the mud and my reputation seriously damaged as Steven Wardill of the Courier-Mail has asserted that I have spent my parliamentary allowance on myself, my family and other non-work related items. These allegations have been based on a selection of my private bank statements from one of my bank accounts and a copy or partial copy of a statement I made to police last year in relation to a matter that is soon to be before the court.

I do not know how these documents came into the possession of the Courier-Mail. It could be as a result of receiving stolen property or possibly in contempt of court processes. What I do know is that they are not a complete record of activity over the relevant period. No matter how Mr Wardill came to be in possession of these documents their use by Mr Wardill and his employer has been selective, unfair and damaging to my reputation.
For example, Mr Wardill correctly identified an instance where money was transferred to my husband. He did not, however, disclose that it had also been reimbursed to the account in full. Mr Wardill never identified or wrote about inflows into the account apart from the allowances.

I am required to account to the Australian Taxation Office for the expenditure of my allowances. While I am not required to submit expense claims for reimbursement of spending to this House, suffice to say that I have never paid tax on this income and have in most years actually exceeded the allowance in electorate related expenses accepted by the ATO. This means that my allowance has been spent on electorate related matters. Further, it means that I have often supplemented the allowance from my own pocket.

These are examples of relevant facts essential to any fair, honest and accurate reporting of this matter—relevant and essential facts that the Courier-Mail has either chosen to ignore or made no effort to elicit. The deliberate attempt to destroy my reputation as an honest member of parliament is one thing. I am, however, equally concerned about Mr Wardill and the Courier-Mail’s interference in the judicial processes.

Mr Speaker, as a result of pending criminal proceedings and this House’s sub judice convention, I am restricted in what I can say about matters before the court. But I can say that it is highly likely that Mr Wardill and the Courier-Mail either deliberately or with reckless disregard have allowed themselves to become the agents of an individual who is facing criminal prosecution.

It is a sad day when journalists in this state disregard the legal system in order to obtain a sensational headline or newspaper article. I have today written to the Commissioner of Police to investigate Mr Wardill’s possession of my private papers to determine whether there has been a receipt of stolen property or breach of security in relation to court documents and also to establish if there has been a contempt of court by any person by the misuse of evidence provided for a criminal prosecution.

Further, I have asked my legal counsel to investigate the actions of the Courier-Mail in relation to my rights as a citizen. In conclusion, I would encourage all members to watch last night’s report on Media Watch, which dealt with the Courier-Mail’s conduct in this matter. Media Watch described the Courier-Mail’s reporting and treatment of me as grubby journalism. I could not agree more.

More Hansard