Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well we know the Deputy Chief Ministers staring down these
calls for his resignation over the latest shares scandal of
the Northern Territory. Chief Minister Evil Laula yesterday defending her
deputy after it was revealed that he'd purchased shares in
a major liquor and grocery wholesaler that supplies alcohol to
central Australian bottle shops. It has now been revealed that
(00:20):
he owned over four hundred dollars in shares. The Deputy
Chief Minister Chancey Paike joins me on the line right now,
Good morning to you.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Good morning Katie.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
Now, Deputy, why did you buy those shares?
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Yeah, look like most people who meet with their financial
planners and accountants, I was asked, are encouraged to consider shares.
So look, I purchased a range of shares through my bank.
Some of them happened to be met Cash, which supplies groceries,
hardware and liquor right across Australia. That was four hundred
(00:55):
and thirty six dollars and sixty cents to be precise.
And other shares were in environmental sustainability, so.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
You did purchase them. They weren't gifted to you.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
No, that's correct. As I said, I purchased shares in
met Cash and an environmental sustainability and.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
That followed financial advice. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Look like everyone who meets with their financial planners and
accountants being encouraged to consider that as an option. And
then I did that through my bank, so they.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Would declared on May nineteenth, twenty twenty two, two months
before the stronger futures legislation ended. I mean, did you
buy those shares in particular because you thought they'd be
a valuable investment.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
Katie, There was four hundred and thirty six dollars worth.
The met Cash is a three point eight billion dollar company,
so I was certainly not buying those to get rich
off them.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
I also, you did say that you sought financial advice,
and that the financial advice was to purchase shares. So
I'm just trying to ascertain why exactly those those shares.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
Yeah, of course, I you know, went through through my bank,
and there were a whole range of shares that were
available at the time to be acquired. And as I said,
I acquired four hundred and thirty six dollars worth of
met Cash and also environmental environmental sustainability shares, and you know,
I think it's important. I had always complied with the
(02:22):
Ministerial Code of Conduct of the legislatation.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
Look, I'll get to that in just a moment, but
I'm keen to find out did you make any profit
from them?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Look? Those shares were sold for you know, for that
now they would be worth in today's exchange rate four
hundred and sixty dollars. So no, I didn't profit off
those shares.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
So if you didn't buy them for profit, but you
did buy them through financial advice, I'm like, what exactly
is the reason that you purchased them? Were you wanting
to support met cash?
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Oh? Look, acquiring shares and working with financial planners and
accountants is a diversification of my financial portfoil.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Yeah, but I guess you know, for most normal people
out there listening this morning, there are others that would
have shares. I know that, you know, I'm family members
of mine have shares. The main reason that you usually
buy them is a because you want to support a
company or be because you think they're going to make profit.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Ye and Katie, as I said, being based on a
relationship and conversation that I had with my financial planner
and accountants.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Okay, so did you at any point think that this
may not be an appropriate investment given the fact that
met Cash supplies both groceries and alcohol to NT communities
and you were the Minister for town camps.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Look, met cash is a major national supplier of groceries,
hardware and liquor. It supplies products right across the country,
not just Central Australia. And as I've said, I've always
complied with the ministeri or code of conduct and the
legislative disclosure of interest.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
But did you at any point think that it might
not be appropriate? I mean, you are the Minister for
town camps, you were at the time, and we are
talking about a supplier to those town camps.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Look, Katie, it's a supplier to grocery, hardware and other
outlets throughout the country.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Including town camps, including town camps, and they did have
that contract from what I understand.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
I'm not sure what contact your referralal.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Contracts within communities to supply groceries. So what I'm trying
to ascertain again is you know, did you at any
point think, hang on a sec this might not be
an appropriate transaction to make. Maybe I need to look
at Shees in another organization or another company.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
Just to be clear, Katie, there are no supermarkets or
bottle shops in town camps. And I have always complied
with the Ministerial Code of Conduct and the disclosure of
interest and I will always continue. I'll always continue to
ensure that I have disclosed where there is a perceived
(04:56):
or possible.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
Do you accept then do you accept then that there
is a perceived conflict of interest?
Speaker 2 (05:03):
As I said, Katie, I have always disclosed, whether it's
in a meeting with my colleagues, whether it's in a
meeting with a stakehold or interest group across the territory,
where there is any possible or potential or right conflict.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
Well, so with that on that, did you declare this
conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest when
you were having those discussions about the stronger Futures legislation
with your cabinet colleagues.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
Again, Katie, just to be clear for everyone chuned in,
no decision was made by the Northern Territory government on
stronger futures because that's not territory law. That was a
decision that the Morrison government decided to let lapse.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
There was definitely calls though at the time. I mean,
we all know what happened a year ago in Alice Springs.
We all understand exactly what had gone on. We understand
that there's both levels of Parliament obviously involved in that.
But the question here is did you tell your cabinet
colleagues that you had those shear is when you were
at the table discussing these policies.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Katie, no decision was made by the Northern Territory government
around Stronger.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Futures, Okay, Deputy Chief Finister, it's a yes no question.
Did you tell your cabinet colleagues, Katie.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
I've always disclosed where there is a potential, perceived or real.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
Conflict, So when you were having meetings, So when you
were having those cabinet discussions about the Stronger Futures legislation,
you said, hey, guys, I think it's appropriate that you
know that I have these shares.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
In met cash and Katie, my position yes or not,
stronger future, yes or not in the Northern Territory.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Deputy Chief Finister, yes or no?
Speaker 2 (06:40):
And I don't support race based policy.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
So yes, it's a yes or no question. Did you
disclose it to your cabinet colleagues, Katie, to their faces?
Did you disclose it?
Speaker 2 (06:52):
I'm going to follow the law and not breach the
cabinet confidentiality processes that are in place, but I will
say to you and everyone listening right now that at
no time was I in a decision making position on
alcohol policy.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
So there was no discussions by cabinet about alcohol policy
when the Stronger Futures legislation was ending.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Thank you, Katie, if you just let me fintry, I
had letting.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
You finished, But you're not answering the question. So it's
a yes or no question. Were their discussions by cabinet
about the Stronger Futures legislation ending? And did you disclose
to your colleagues that you had these shares? It is
absolutely fundamental in terms of people being able to understand
whether you've crossed the line here or not.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
And Katie, I will not break a cabinet confidentiality, but
I will say to you there are always conversations in
and around with my colleagues and with the community, and
I always absolutely declare where there are perceived both real
and possible conclentce the.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
Chief Minister said yesterday. The Chief Minister said yesterday she
couldn't recall you declaring it when cabinet had those discussions.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
And Katie, the Chief Minister has certainly been out talking
to people about this. Again. Two years ago the Chief
Minister was a very different person. But again, I can
absolutely stay hand on heart. I have always complied with
the rules and I have always disclosed where there is
(08:21):
a positible.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
So she said yesterday that she couldn't recall you declaring
it when cabinet had those discussions. So did you remove
yourself from those talks?
Speaker 2 (08:32):
Again, Katie, I can't speak for anyone else, but I
can say I've always disclosed and declared where there is
a possible, perceived or real confidence.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
So did you break the nt Cabinet Code of Conduct? No,
So you don't believe that you've broken that code of
conduct in any way.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
No.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
Look, I want to be really upfront here. I mean,
I think four hundred dollars worth of shares it's not
much money, you know, it's not a huge amount of shares.
Some would argue that it's not going to cloud your
judgment in terms of making those decisions. But the point
here is that you have to disclose that to your
colleagues when you are making decisions in this space and
(09:10):
the ending of that stronger Futures legislation, many would argue,
you know that what we had seen in Alice Springsten
at the beginning of last year was absolute carnage and
there was you know, there was real heartbreak. We had
people like Congress coming out saying that it wasn't the
right move to make. So can you understand why people
(09:30):
are really questioning your judgment here and whether you've done
the wrong thing, Katie.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
I think it's really important to be really clear again,
my position on stronger futures laws in the Northern Territory
has been on the record for many years and I
don't support race based policies or laws. We as a
government have introduced restrictions and they have been not based
on race, and I have always declared where there is
(09:58):
a possible perceived real conflict and I'll absolutely continue to
do that into the future as well.
Speaker 1 (10:04):
Well. Again, I'll say part of the issue here is
that you have these shares. You're part of the decision
making process when it comes to alcohol policy, and you
have the perceived potential to benefit financially from those decisions.
So do you see the concern here?
Speaker 2 (10:22):
Okay, again, it's important to acknowledge I no longer have
those shares, but you.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Had them when those decisions were being made.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Absolutely, But I'm just confirming you said that I had
still had the shares. I no longer own those shares.
I sold those when I took on the role as
the Deputy Chief Minister to ensure that if I had
to act on behalf of another minister, or if I
had to do the functions of another minister, that I
would not be in a position that put my team
(10:52):
or the government in a perceived, possible or a real conflict.
And that's why I made that decision.
Speaker 1 (10:59):
Why did you want to wait until you became the
Deputy Chief Minister to do that? Why could you only
see that that wasn't the right thing to do once
taking on the Deputy Chief ministership.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Because as the Deputy Chief Minister, if a minister is
on leave or has to travel into state for ministerial
business and decisions may have to be made in the territory,
we may need to act on their behalf and at
times I might have been required to do that where
I'd have to be in a position that would make
a direct decision, because previously I have at no time
(11:33):
been in a position decision making position on alcohol holicy
or licensing in the territory that was held previously by
Natasha Files the Northern Territories alcohol licensing and alcohol policy.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
Let's step aside then from the alcohol issue for a moment.
Can you see why people would be questioning your judgment
when you've purchased shares in a company that you knew
well was selling food into town camps when you were
the minister for town camps. Can you see how some
people would be questioning that judgment why you chose those shares, Katie.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
I'm just being clear again. Met cash is a wholesaler.
It supplies foods to yep.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
We all understand that, but I.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
Guess around the town. So it's not just I just
want to be really clear here. This is not and
should not be about Aboriginal people living in town camps.
This is about supplying food to corner stores who may
have a contract with met Cash. It is not directly
about or should not just be about Aboriginal people.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
I mean, do you admit though, that you've made an
error of judgment.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
No, because I have fully and complied with the Ministerial
Code of Conduct and the LEGISLT Assembly's disclosures of interests.
This has been on the public record for over a
year and a half, Katie, where it's been publicly available
for people.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
I mean you said though that you don't want to
break the law and each cabinet in confidence by saying
whether you disclose these shares to your cabinet colleagues when
these discussions were happening. I mean the Chief Minister said
yesterday that she doesn't recall you making those disclosures. So
are you accusing her of breaking the law.
Speaker 2 (13:16):
No, not at all.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
Well why can't you just say yes or no whether
you did or didn't.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Because Katie, I have answered your question. I disclosed it
every opportunity where I believe there might be a perceived,
possible or real conflict.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
So again I will ask you said to your cabinet colleagues,
I've got shares in met cash. I need to remove
myself from this discussion.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Again, Katie, the Stronger Futures laws were not Northern Territory
government laws, so there was no no.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
That but there were still decisions being made in this space.
I think it's disingenuous to say that there wasn't because
you know, at the end of the day, like we
all know that the Northern Territory Government had to still
be having those discussions. You guys knew that they Stronger
Futures legislation was coming to an end.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
Yeah, the Northern Territory Government had brought forward by the
Alcohol Policy Minister reform pieces. I always acknowledge and notify
my colleagues when I make changes to the Members' Interests declarations,
and I've done that and I'll continue to do that
and it will continue to be publicly available.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
What about when you were talking to industry about the
issue you know about, like the ending of stronger futures legislation.
Is it something that you know Is it something that
you've been really open and upfront about that you had those.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Shares Again, Katie, it's been open to everyone in the community.
That gets tabled in Parliament and people can absolutely talk
about it. The reason we're talking about it now is
because people have seen that on the members Interests and
raised itself.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
Well, if you didn't, if you didn't become the deputy
the deputy Chief Minister, would you still have those shares?
Speaker 2 (14:58):
No? Because Katie, I think it's very clear the Chief
Minister Lawla made a decision for all cabinet ministers to
divest of any shares and she stood up at the
review into MINISTERI or conflicts of interesting Was it directive?
Speaker 1 (15:14):
Was it a directive of Eva Laula?
Speaker 2 (15:17):
Pardon?
Speaker 1 (15:18):
Was it a directive of Eva Laula that that cabinet
members had to take a look at their shares portfolio
and have a look at what they needed to divest their.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
Chief Minister had spoken to everyone around in cabinet divesting
of share She made that public commitment when she took
on the role at her first press conference that that
was happening.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
So I guess another thing that people are really going
to be questioning this morning is why do you think
that this situation is different to the one that Natasha
Files was in.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Yeah, look, I think the situation is very different. My
shares were publicly disclosed on the members entry and that
has been publicly available for everyone. I think the former
Chief Minister had an unfortunate area where those shares had
been divested of a company and that hadn't been put
on the members' interests, so it's a very different situation, Katie.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
So you think it's fine then to have shares, you know, like,
you don't see that there's a big concern here.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
Look, I think the question that we're all looking at
now is where the politician should have interests and that's
work that the Chief Minister has announced in terms of
that review that's being undertaken.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Deputy Chief Minister, do you think you can survive this week?
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Yeah, I've still got a lot to deliver and give
to the Northern Territory. I think that again, this is
something that I have complied with the law and the
Ministerial Code of Conduct and the Legislative Assembly has been disclosed.
It's been open and accountable for everyone to see. I've
hidden nothing.
Speaker 1 (16:57):
Well, the big thing that people are still messaging in
a this morning is did you, specifically, I mean, did
you disclose this to your cabinet colleagues when the discussions
were being had around the table about the ending of
the Stronger Future's legislation? That is, that's what everyone's messaging
in about this morning.
Speaker 2 (17:16):
Certainly, and as I said, Katie, I always have declared
possible perceived in real conflicts. And Katie, you will know
you worked for a labor government that is cabinet and confidence.
We can't certainly tell everyone what's being discussed there, but
I can say no.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
One's expecting you to. No one's expecting you to reveal policy,
No one's expecting you to reveal you know, elements of
exactly what's said in there. But what people are wanting
to know is did you disclose that you had these
shares to your cabinet colleagues when these really serious discussions
were being had?
Speaker 2 (17:51):
And again, Katie, I always disclose where there is so
yes you did and real conflicts. I've answered your question
kk K.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Yes, yes you did. You did openly.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Say that I have always declared where there is possible,
perceived and real conflict.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
Why do you think then the Chief Minister said yesterday
that she does not recall you doing so well. Katie.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
You know, over two years ago these shares we're talking
about having acquired, we had a Chief Minister who was
a different person. Lots of things get discussed regularly in cabinet,
as you I can imagine, but I'm saying, absolutely, hand
on heart, I absolutely declare where there is any real,
perceived or possible conflict, and I absolutely can say that
(18:38):
I'll continue to do that into the future.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Chancey Paig, the calls are mounting today for you to resign,
Will you or are you going to dig your heels in?
Speaker 2 (18:49):
Look, Katie, I've certainly got a lot to give the
Northern Territory and I've got a lot to do to
represent the hard working people in the remote electorate of Guadja.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Paik the Deputy Chief Minister. I appreciate your time this morning,
appreciate you fronting my questions, and I believe we've got
you on the show on the week that was on Friday.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
No worries, Thanks Katie, Thank you,
Well we know the Deputy Chief Ministers staring down these
calls for his resignation over the latest shares scandal of
the Northern Territory. Chief Minister Evil Laula yesterday defending her
deputy after it was revealed that he'd purchased shares in
a major liquor and grocery wholesaler that supplies alcohol to
central Australian bottle shops. It has now been revealed that
(00:20):
he owned over four hundred dollars in shares. The Deputy
Chief Minister Chancey Paike joins me on the line right now,
Good morning to you.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Good morning Katie.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
Now, Deputy, why did you buy those shares?
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Yeah, look like most people who meet with their financial
planners and accountants, I was asked, are encouraged to consider shares.
So look, I purchased a range of shares through my bank.
Some of them happened to be met Cash, which supplies groceries,
hardware and liquor right across Australia. That was four hundred
(00:55):
and thirty six dollars and sixty cents to be precise.
And other shares were in environmental sustainability, so.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
You did purchase them. They weren't gifted to you.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
No, that's correct. As I said, I purchased shares in
met Cash and an environmental sustainability and.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
That followed financial advice. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Look like everyone who meets with their financial planners and
accountants being encouraged to consider that as an option. And
then I did that through my bank, so they.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Would declared on May nineteenth, twenty twenty two, two months
before the stronger futures legislation ended. I mean, did you
buy those shares in particular because you thought they'd be
a valuable investment.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
Katie, There was four hundred and thirty six dollars worth.
The met Cash is a three point eight billion dollar company,
so I was certainly not buying those to get rich
off them.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
I also, you did say that you sought financial advice,
and that the financial advice was to purchase shares. So
I'm just trying to ascertain why exactly those those shares.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
Yeah, of course, I you know, went through through my bank,
and there were a whole range of shares that were
available at the time to be acquired. And as I said,
I acquired four hundred and thirty six dollars worth of
met Cash and also environmental environmental sustainability shares, and you know,
I think it's important. I had always complied with the
(02:22):
Ministerial Code of Conduct of the legislatation.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
Look, I'll get to that in just a moment, but
I'm keen to find out did you make any profit
from them?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Look? Those shares were sold for you know, for that
now they would be worth in today's exchange rate four
hundred and sixty dollars. So no, I didn't profit off
those shares.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
So if you didn't buy them for profit, but you
did buy them through financial advice, I'm like, what exactly
is the reason that you purchased them? Were you wanting
to support met cash?
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Oh? Look, acquiring shares and working with financial planners and
accountants is a diversification of my financial portfoil.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Yeah, but I guess you know, for most normal people
out there listening this morning, there are others that would
have shares. I know that, you know, I'm family members
of mine have shares. The main reason that you usually
buy them is a because you want to support a
company or be because you think they're going to make profit.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Ye and Katie, as I said, being based on a
relationship and conversation that I had with my financial planner
and accountants.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Okay, so did you at any point think that this
may not be an appropriate investment given the fact that
met Cash supplies both groceries and alcohol to NT communities
and you were the Minister for town camps.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Look, met cash is a major national supplier of groceries,
hardware and liquor. It supplies products right across the country,
not just Central Australia. And as I've said, I've always
complied with the ministeri or code of conduct and the
legislative disclosure of interest.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
But did you at any point think that it might
not be appropriate? I mean, you are the Minister for
town camps, you were at the time, and we are
talking about a supplier to those town camps.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Look, Katie, it's a supplier to grocery, hardware and other
outlets throughout the country.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Including town camps, including town camps, and they did have
that contract from what I understand.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
I'm not sure what contact your referralal.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Contracts within communities to supply groceries. So what I'm trying
to ascertain again is you know, did you at any
point think, hang on a sec this might not be
an appropriate transaction to make. Maybe I need to look
at Shees in another organization or another company.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
Just to be clear, Katie, there are no supermarkets or
bottle shops in town camps. And I have always complied
with the Ministerial Code of Conduct and the disclosure of
interest and I will always continue. I'll always continue to
ensure that I have disclosed where there is a perceived
(04:56):
or possible.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
Do you accept then do you accept then that there
is a perceived conflict of interest?
Speaker 2 (05:03):
As I said, Katie, I have always disclosed, whether it's
in a meeting with my colleagues, whether it's in a
meeting with a stakehold or interest group across the territory,
where there is any possible or potential or right conflict.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
Well, so with that on that, did you declare this
conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest when
you were having those discussions about the stronger Futures legislation
with your cabinet colleagues.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
Again, Katie, just to be clear for everyone chuned in,
no decision was made by the Northern Territory government on
stronger futures because that's not territory law. That was a
decision that the Morrison government decided to let lapse.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
There was definitely calls though at the time. I mean,
we all know what happened a year ago in Alice Springs.
We all understand exactly what had gone on. We understand
that there's both levels of Parliament obviously involved in that.
But the question here is did you tell your cabinet
colleagues that you had those shear is when you were
at the table discussing these policies.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Katie, no decision was made by the Northern Territory government
around Stronger.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Futures, Okay, Deputy Chief Finister, it's a yes no question.
Did you tell your cabinet colleagues, Katie.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
I've always disclosed where there is a potential, perceived or real.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
Conflict, So when you were having meetings, So when you
were having those cabinet discussions about the Stronger Futures legislation,
you said, hey, guys, I think it's appropriate that you
know that I have these shares.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
In met cash and Katie, my position yes or not,
stronger future, yes or not in the Northern Territory.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Deputy Chief Finister, yes or no?
Speaker 2 (06:40):
And I don't support race based policy.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
So yes, it's a yes or no question. Did you
disclose it to your cabinet colleagues, Katie, to their faces?
Did you disclose it?
Speaker 2 (06:52):
I'm going to follow the law and not breach the
cabinet confidentiality processes that are in place, but I will
say to you and everyone listening right now that at
no time was I in a decision making position on
alcohol policy.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
So there was no discussions by cabinet about alcohol policy
when the Stronger Futures legislation was ending.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Thank you, Katie, if you just let me fintry, I
had letting.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
You finished, But you're not answering the question. So it's
a yes or no question. Were their discussions by cabinet
about the Stronger Futures legislation ending? And did you disclose
to your colleagues that you had these shares? It is
absolutely fundamental in terms of people being able to understand
whether you've crossed the line here or not.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
And Katie, I will not break a cabinet confidentiality, but
I will say to you there are always conversations in
and around with my colleagues and with the community, and
I always absolutely declare where there are perceived both real
and possible conclentce the.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
Chief Minister said yesterday. The Chief Minister said yesterday she
couldn't recall you declaring it when cabinet had those discussions.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
And Katie, the Chief Minister has certainly been out talking
to people about this. Again. Two years ago the Chief
Minister was a very different person. But again, I can
absolutely stay hand on heart. I have always complied with
the rules and I have always disclosed where there is
(08:21):
a positible.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
So she said yesterday that she couldn't recall you declaring
it when cabinet had those discussions. So did you remove
yourself from those talks?
Speaker 2 (08:32):
Again, Katie, I can't speak for anyone else, but I
can say I've always disclosed and declared where there is
a possible, perceived or real confidence.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
So did you break the nt Cabinet Code of Conduct? No,
So you don't believe that you've broken that code of
conduct in any way.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
No.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
Look, I want to be really upfront here. I mean,
I think four hundred dollars worth of shares it's not
much money, you know, it's not a huge amount of shares.
Some would argue that it's not going to cloud your
judgment in terms of making those decisions. But the point
here is that you have to disclose that to your
colleagues when you are making decisions in this space and
(09:10):
the ending of that stronger Futures legislation, many would argue,
you know that what we had seen in Alice Springsten
at the beginning of last year was absolute carnage and
there was you know, there was real heartbreak. We had
people like Congress coming out saying that it wasn't the
right move to make. So can you understand why people
(09:30):
are really questioning your judgment here and whether you've done
the wrong thing, Katie.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
I think it's really important to be really clear again,
my position on stronger futures laws in the Northern Territory
has been on the record for many years and I
don't support race based policies or laws. We as a
government have introduced restrictions and they have been not based
on race, and I have always declared where there is
(09:58):
a possible perceived real conflict and I'll absolutely continue to
do that into the future as well.
Speaker 1 (10:04):
Well. Again, I'll say part of the issue here is
that you have these shares. You're part of the decision
making process when it comes to alcohol policy, and you
have the perceived potential to benefit financially from those decisions.
So do you see the concern here?
Speaker 2 (10:22):
Okay, again, it's important to acknowledge I no longer have
those shares, but you.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Had them when those decisions were being made.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Absolutely, But I'm just confirming you said that I had
still had the shares. I no longer own those shares.
I sold those when I took on the role as
the Deputy Chief Minister to ensure that if I had
to act on behalf of another minister, or if I
had to do the functions of another minister, that I
would not be in a position that put my team
(10:52):
or the government in a perceived, possible or a real conflict.
And that's why I made that decision.
Speaker 1 (10:59):
Why did you want to wait until you became the
Deputy Chief Minister to do that? Why could you only
see that that wasn't the right thing to do once
taking on the Deputy Chief ministership.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Because as the Deputy Chief Minister, if a minister is
on leave or has to travel into state for ministerial
business and decisions may have to be made in the territory,
we may need to act on their behalf and at
times I might have been required to do that where
I'd have to be in a position that would make
a direct decision, because previously I have at no time
(11:33):
been in a position decision making position on alcohol holicy
or licensing in the territory that was held previously by
Natasha Files the Northern Territories alcohol licensing and alcohol policy.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
Let's step aside then from the alcohol issue for a moment.
Can you see why people would be questioning your judgment
when you've purchased shares in a company that you knew
well was selling food into town camps when you were
the minister for town camps. Can you see how some
people would be questioning that judgment why you chose those shares, Katie.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
I'm just being clear again. Met cash is a wholesaler.
It supplies foods to yep.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
We all understand that, but I.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
Guess around the town. So it's not just I just
want to be really clear here. This is not and
should not be about Aboriginal people living in town camps.
This is about supplying food to corner stores who may
have a contract with met Cash. It is not directly
about or should not just be about Aboriginal people.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
I mean, do you admit though, that you've made an
error of judgment.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
No, because I have fully and complied with the Ministerial
Code of Conduct and the LEGISLT Assembly's disclosures of interests.
This has been on the public record for over a
year and a half, Katie, where it's been publicly available
for people.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
I mean you said though that you don't want to
break the law and each cabinet in confidence by saying
whether you disclose these shares to your cabinet colleagues when
these discussions were happening. I mean the Chief Minister said
yesterday that she doesn't recall you making those disclosures. So
are you accusing her of breaking the law.
Speaker 2 (13:16):
No, not at all.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
Well why can't you just say yes or no whether
you did or didn't.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Because Katie, I have answered your question. I disclosed it
every opportunity where I believe there might be a perceived,
possible or real conflict.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
So again I will ask you said to your cabinet colleagues,
I've got shares in met cash. I need to remove
myself from this discussion.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Again, Katie, the Stronger Futures laws were not Northern Territory
government laws, so there was no no.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
That but there were still decisions being made in this space.
I think it's disingenuous to say that there wasn't because
you know, at the end of the day, like we
all know that the Northern Territory Government had to still
be having those discussions. You guys knew that they Stronger
Futures legislation was coming to an end.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
Yeah, the Northern Territory Government had brought forward by the
Alcohol Policy Minister reform pieces. I always acknowledge and notify
my colleagues when I make changes to the Members' Interests declarations,
and I've done that and I'll continue to do that
and it will continue to be publicly available.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
What about when you were talking to industry about the
issue you know about, like the ending of stronger futures legislation.
Is it something that you know Is it something that
you've been really open and upfront about that you had those.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Shares Again, Katie, it's been open to everyone in the community.
That gets tabled in Parliament and people can absolutely talk
about it. The reason we're talking about it now is
because people have seen that on the members Interests and
raised itself.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
Well, if you didn't, if you didn't become the deputy
the deputy Chief Minister, would you still have those shares?
Speaker 2 (14:58):
No? Because Katie, I think it's very clear the Chief
Minister Lawla made a decision for all cabinet ministers to
divest of any shares and she stood up at the
review into MINISTERI or conflicts of interesting Was it directive?
Speaker 1 (15:14):
Was it a directive of Eva Laula?
Speaker 2 (15:17):
Pardon?
Speaker 1 (15:18):
Was it a directive of Eva Laula that that cabinet
members had to take a look at their shares portfolio
and have a look at what they needed to divest their.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
Chief Minister had spoken to everyone around in cabinet divesting
of share She made that public commitment when she took
on the role at her first press conference that that
was happening.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
So I guess another thing that people are really going
to be questioning this morning is why do you think
that this situation is different to the one that Natasha
Files was in.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Yeah, look, I think the situation is very different. My
shares were publicly disclosed on the members entry and that
has been publicly available for everyone. I think the former
Chief Minister had an unfortunate area where those shares had
been divested of a company and that hadn't been put
on the members' interests, so it's a very different situation, Katie.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
So you think it's fine then to have shares, you know, like,
you don't see that there's a big concern here.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
Look, I think the question that we're all looking at
now is where the politician should have interests and that's
work that the Chief Minister has announced in terms of
that review that's being undertaken.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Deputy Chief Minister, do you think you can survive this week?
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Yeah, I've still got a lot to deliver and give
to the Northern Territory. I think that again, this is
something that I have complied with the law and the
Ministerial Code of Conduct and the Legislative Assembly has been disclosed.
It's been open and accountable for everyone to see. I've
hidden nothing.
Speaker 1 (16:57):
Well, the big thing that people are still messaging in
a this morning is did you, specifically, I mean, did
you disclose this to your cabinet colleagues when the discussions
were being had around the table about the ending of
the Stronger Future's legislation? That is, that's what everyone's messaging
in about this morning.
Speaker 2 (17:16):
Certainly, and as I said, Katie, I always have declared
possible perceived in real conflicts. And Katie, you will know
you worked for a labor government that is cabinet and confidence.
We can't certainly tell everyone what's being discussed there, but
I can say no.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
One's expecting you to. No one's expecting you to reveal policy,
No one's expecting you to reveal you know, elements of
exactly what's said in there. But what people are wanting
to know is did you disclose that you had these
shares to your cabinet colleagues when these really serious discussions
were being had?
Speaker 2 (17:51):
And again, Katie, I always disclose where there is so
yes you did and real conflicts. I've answered your question
kk K.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Yes, yes you did. You did openly.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Say that I have always declared where there is possible,
perceived and real conflict.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
Why do you think then the Chief Minister said yesterday
that she does not recall you doing so well. Katie.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
You know, over two years ago these shares we're talking
about having acquired, we had a Chief Minister who was
a different person. Lots of things get discussed regularly in cabinet,
as you I can imagine, but I'm saying, absolutely, hand
on heart, I absolutely declare where there is any real,
perceived or possible conflict, and I absolutely can say that
(18:38):
I'll continue to do that into the future.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Chancey Paig, the calls are mounting today for you to resign,
Will you or are you going to dig your heels in?
Speaker 2 (18:49):
Look, Katie, I've certainly got a lot to give the
Northern Territory and I've got a lot to do to
represent the hard working people in the remote electorate of Guadja.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Paik the Deputy Chief Minister. I appreciate your time this morning,
appreciate you fronting my questions, and I believe we've got
you on the show on the week that was on Friday.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
No worries, Thanks Katie, Thank you,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.