Tuesday, 30 August 2022

 Dr READ (Brunswick) (14:23): My question is for the Premier. In Queensland ministers are required to publicly report portfolio-related meetings and events every month. In New South Wales the diaries of ministers are made public every three months. But Victorians do not get to see who a minister is meeting and who they are not meeting in the lead-up to important decisions, so we do not get to see how power and influence are wielded in this state. Requiring ministers to publish diary summaries does not require legislation. The Premier could simply direct that it be done, so will the Premier do so?

Members interjecting.

 Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:23): I thank the member for Brunswick for his question. I got some assistance from behind me here, I have got some assistance over here from the National Party. The member for Brunswick will be pleased to know I am not going to use any of that material in responding to his question because his question is a serious one. It is about probity; it is about integrity and all of those issues, and I do not doubt for a moment his commitment to those matters. All I would say to the member for Brunswick is this: there are a number of matters that are before integrity agencies at the moment, and it is the government’s expectation that some of this material will be canvassed and covered and may be the subject of recommendations that will be made by those agencies. We are appropriately awaiting those reports, and we will respond in due course.

 Dr READ (Brunswick) (14:24): I thank the Premier for his answer. The people of New South Wales and Queensland have had access to ministerial diaries for years. It is a basic level of ministerial probity. For some reason Victoria has not had access to this—long before those inquiries began. There is nothing in opening diaries that requires an integrity agency to rule upon. It is something that could be decided this afternoon and enacted tomorrow. Is there any good reason to wait for an integrity agency to advise us to do so?

 Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:25): I thank the member for Brunswick for his supplementary question. The issue is not advanced by a quarrel. I would simply say to the member for Brunswick that I am not aware of what those integrity agencies will in fact recommend.

A member interjected.

Mr ANDREWS: Goodness me! For the benefit of the honourable member opposite, I will clear it up. We think there is every chance, given some of the work they are doing, that they will make recommendations about these issues. Have I got those recommendations? No. Will I wait for those recommendations? Yes. Y-E-S. Is it clear now?

A member interjected.

Mr ANDREWS: It is not, apparently. I do not know if I can do any better than that. I have tried as hard as I can to clear it up for you, mate, but I am sorry, we will wait to see pertinent, potentially relevant, recommendations. They might not just apply to ministers; they might apply to shadow ministers as well.

The SPEAKER: I ask members to direct their comments through the Speaker.