Maribyrnong River flood review
David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (13:14): (133) My question is for the Minister for Water. Minister, why wasn’t the independent probity adviser’s December 2022 advice that Mr Wimbush’s conflict of interest be made public heeded by the government?
Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Water, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Commonwealth Games Legacy, Minister for Equality) (13:14): Mr Davis, in your question you are referring to probity advice that was sought and received by Melbourne Water as part of an independent review. The answer to the question is based on what I have just said. It is an independent review, and therefore the work that Melbourne Water has done and is doing and will do is a matter for Melbourne Water, as it should be.
David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (13:15): I note the minister has not answered the question again. It is a very simple question, and she can find the answer if she does not know it. But I say: when did you receive the advice from the independent probity adviser that there was a conflict of interest with Nick Wimbush’s appointment to the Maribyrnong River flood inquiry?
Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Water, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Commonwealth Games Legacy, Minister for Equality) (13:15): Again, Mr Davis – and I have taken you through this detail on a number of occasions now – the appointment of Mr Wimbush and the cessation of Mr Wimbush’s appointment are a matter for and have been a matter for and will remain a matter for Melbourne Water. Following receipt of media inquiries in relation to Mr Wimbush’s appointment and the cessation of his appointment, I have sought and received information from Melbourne Water and from the department after in fact those decisions were taken, which is entirely as it should be.
David Davis: On a point of order, President, when? She did not answer it.
The PRESIDENT: I think she said after the decisions were made. You can bring up a point of order at the end of question time if you are not satisfied with the response.
David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (13:16): I move:
That the minister’s three answers be taken into account on the next day of meeting.
The PRESIDENT: You can do this one – the current question. You cannot go back in time. The question is:
That the minister’s answer be taken into account on the next day of meeting.
Question agreed to.