Ms BADGER question to MINISTER for POLICE, FIRE and EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, Mr ELLIS
We’ve just heard you weaponise horrific and harrowing events of a Tasmanian known to some in this Chamber, to deflect from your own behaviour. This is so far below the expected behaviour of a minister of the Crown. We’ll give you another chance today, minister. Will you apologise for your inappropriate behaviour to the journalist?
ANSWER
Look, I was asked by the journalist about what happened to Mr Whelan, and I responded like a lot of members of parliament would when they see a horrific crime that happens to a victim. I don’t know if you’ve met with Mr Whelan since the attack on him?
Ms Badger – I haven’t seen Mr Whelan in a few years, but I do know who he is, so I would be very careful –
The SPEAKER – Order. Honourable minister, through the Chair, please, it is not for you to invite questions.
Mr ELLIS – Thank you, Speaker. I suppose what I’m trying to get across is, I don’t know anyone whose heart wouldn’t be touched by what happened to Mr Whelan.
Ms Badger – There’s no dispute about that.
The SPEAKER – Order. Order.
Mr ELLIS – I think the natural response for a lot of people is to be protective of him, particularly when questions are asked about should his possession of police‑approved, lawful firearms be the cause of what happened to him.
Members interjecting.
Mr ELLIS – I think it’s important that we recognise that that’s a natural feeling that often we all feel when we’re speaking with victims of crime and about victims.
Ms Badger – You don’t protect someone by attacking someone else, minister.
The SPEAKER – Honourable member for Lyons, Ms Badger, this is your second warning.
Mr ELLIS – I mentioned before, we need to do more with moderation, and we’ve accepted that and we’ve apologised to the journalist directly. I know there are challenges in that space, but we’re looking to continue to do that. Certainly, the overwhelming response from the community was also very clear. They didn’t think the question was fair and they were supportive of Mr Whelan, because they know what happened to him is wrong. The question probably missed the mark, in my view. Other people might disagree. I think we can all fairly say when we have a victim of crime who’s been the subject of such a horrific attack, that there is a natural reaction from all of us to empathise and to support him and to not say that what he possessed lawfully was the cause of what happened to him.
Really the question is: how can we hold those offenders to account? There’s obviously a court process underway. If members in this place haven’t met with Mr Whelan, I’m sure it’s an important conversation, because we have legislation coming up to bring in tougher penalties for exactly the kind of people that committed this horrific crime against Mr Whelan. I know he has strong views about the need for them as well. If that isn’t a conversation that people have had and they have strong views, I’d encourage it. He’s a good man. He’s recovering well, and I thank the community for the amazing support that they provided to him in this process and helping him get back on his feet. He didn’t deserve what happened to him and I’m so grateful for the thousands of everyday Tasmanians who are supporting him as well.
Members interjecting.
Mr Abetz – Well said.
Mr Bayley – Shame.
Dr Woodruff – Shame.
The SPEAKER – Order, order. The only one who has the call right now is the honourable member for Lyons, Ms Badger.
Supplementary Question
Ms BADGER – The only thing I think Mr Ellis and I could ever agree on is that there is absolute empathy for Mr Whelan’s circumstances, and I’m sure everyone in this Chamber stands by him.
Minister, you went on to post about the question from the journalist on social media. That’s a lot more than a simple reaction to being protective. Final chance: will you apologise to the journalist for your behaviour?
Mr ELLIS – I was asked a question at a press conference. Many people provide that, particularly when we have strong views about the standards of decency which we all want to see and the strong belief that we have that victims are not the problem; it’s the people that commit the crimes who are the problem. Now, again, I know members in this place who regularly share their media appearances on social media. Indeed, most media appearances are broadcast anyway, so if I was asked that question on radio and provided the same response, every member of the public would be able to hear that as well. As I mentioned before, we should all really feel for Mr Whelan, and we should all believe that he’s not the problem, and the fact that he’s a law‑abiding firearms owner is not the problem as well. Whether he owns one or 100 firearms, the question that we should ask is, is he going okay and what more can we do to support him?
Members interjecting.
The SPEAKER – The honourable minister’s time has expired. Order.
