[12.33 p.m.]
Ms BURNET (Clark) - Honourable Speaker, I rise to speak against this motion, and it's not because there may or may not be conflicts of interest from the former minister Ogilvie as a proxied member of this committee, but it goes to the heart of what Mr O'Byrne has said about dictating for an appointment by another party to a committee - and I think that that is an overstretch, an overreach. We've heard this is an unprecedented situation and yet we're hearing various examples of it not being an unprecedented situation of having a former minister as part of a committee, even a premier as Mr Ferguson has raised.
I think the work of committees, as every committee has to do, is about mitigating risk. You go into a committee, you are part of that, and you make decisions based on risk. I'm a member of this committee and I won't speak about the committee's deliberations, but it is a matter of going through things piece by piece that comes before us as an item for consideration.
This motion also goes to the heart of the issue around conflicts of interest. A conflict of interest is always a really difficult area to navigate because what I feel might be a conflict of interest for somebody is not necessarily what they see, but it is their call. The committee has to manage that. The committee has to work through those matters.
I think it's a pity that this has come to this House, to be honest, to be considered by the Chamber but that's part of the democratic process. It's a busy week and I would like to think that those important issues such as the Conversion Practices Prohibition Bill might have been the big focus for the Greens this week, but I'm not telling them what to do, it's just what I feel.
I think this matter regarding Ms Ogilvie being a member of the committee and deciding for the Liberal Party as to who they should or shouldn't have on the committee is too much of an overreach. I don't think it behests good governance and it stands in the way - as Mr O'Byrne said - of good Westminster process.
The matter of Ms Ogilvie being on the committee, having various experiences - some may relate to the topic that the committee will consider - could actually be an advantage to the committee. I know that's not going to necessarily be a popular thing to say - and I'm not here to be popular, by the way - it's a matter of what I feel is right and what I know is right for a committee to make the decision and for a committee to go through risks and risk management as they should.
I won't be supporting this motion from Mr Bayley, and I do look forward to getting on with the work of that committee.