27 July 2011 in Media
To listen to the audio of this interview, please click here.
ABRAHAM:
Good morning Jamie Briggs.
BRIGGS:
Good morning Matthew Abraham, David Bevan as well.
ABRAHAM:
And Amanda Rishworth, Labor MP for Kingston. Good morning Amanda Rishworth.
RISHWORTH:
Good morning.
ABRAHAM:
Jamie Briggs if we can start with you. And one of your colleagues and somebody who I think you are very close to on both a personal and professional level, Mary Jo Fisher. Senator Mary Jo Fisher is in trouble with the law and we are told struggling with depression as well, by Andrew Robb another one of your colleagues who has struggled with depression and a very difficult time all round. Do you have anything you can tell us? Have you spoken to her?
BRIGGS:
Look I have had a couple of brief conversations with Mary Jo since it was revealed last Friday night about the charges. And obviously we don’t comment on things which are before the courts, other than to say obviously, I guess people should remember the key tenet of our legal system that people are innocent until proven guilty and there will be a court hearing in a month or so and at that point she will be able to lay out her defence. She has obviously had some challenges for a while, she is a very good friend and she remains a good friend and she will be a good friend come what may. But one interesting point I think which people or the State Government’s review should reflect upon is vast difference in the treatment of two public figures we have seen this year. We have had Mary Jo who on the weekend it was revealed about these charges on the front page of the Advertiser and I stress I have made no criticism of coverage in the media. But there is of course another MP who is facing charges and we are still yet to know their name, an consistency for me, a baffling difference, there is yet to be a name given to another charge and I think that is something the State Government’s review about how this is working should reflect upon.
ABRAHAM:
It is interesting, while and I am not saying shop lifting is a minor charge but in the spectrum, its at the lower end I suppose, stealing from a shop, or allegedly stealing from a shop and her name is out there and that will do a lot of damage to her career. Even whatever the court decides, you are saying quite rightly there is another MP, a person who has now been suspended from the Labor Party by his colleagues, who is facing charges of accessing child pornography and that name has been suppressed. So the State Government is doing a review, the review would maybe respond to calls to have that persons name or if a similar situation occurred, have it out in the open. You are saying what, either all out or none out?
BRIGGS:
Well I think it needs to be consistent for public figures. We sign up to this life and I am not at all complaining and I don’t want people to think that I am complaining about the treatment. In fact I think we do have to, when these events happen, it is right that people are aware. We are ultimately representatives of people and I don’t reflect at all again on the other MP because obviously as I said earlier, people are innocent until proven guilty in our society, however I think it is as you say, there are a consequence with being named in these sorts of things in peoples minds and I think it is largely inconsistent and unfair that one charge is laid out on the front page of the paper, as I said I don’t complain about the front page, but I think it is unfair…
BEVAN:
But hang on, aren’t you heading back towards what we had in this state not that long ago and that is suppression due to undue hardship and that is people who are in public life were able to say, look if I get charged for something I am going to be plastered all over the front page of the paper that is undue hardship, I deserve a suppression order.
BRIGGS:
No, I am not actually. I am not saying that we deserve suppression orders at all, as I say I am not criticising the coverage of the incident on the weekend.
ABRAHAM:
You are looking at the inconsistency.
BRIGGS:
I am simply reflecting on the difference that has been with another case some four or five months on and we are still not aware of the name. I think it is unfair that there is different standards and I think that should be looked at and I understand the State Government is and I imagine that this is something, this is a good case for them to compare.
ABRAHAM:
Now Amanda Rishworth, I do apologise we are a little pressed for time this time, we are about to talk to the weather bureau, but as the ALP Member for Kingston, your reflections on that?
RISHWORTH:
Well look I obviously, my understanding of the review is that the suppression orders don’t just, for in the case of sexual offence, child pornography cases it extends not just to public figures, they extend to everyone that is my understanding. I think that it is right for the State Government to be reviewing this and I don’t know if they will be looking at other public figures that are charged for other offences. Obviously they are looking at whether or not suppressions should occur in cases of accessing child pornography and other sexual offences and obviously that review will take into consideration not just public figures, but also other individuals and I think it is right that they are reviewing that. That was a long standing law that dates back to the 70s and does not need to be reviewed in light of community standards.
BEVAN:
Amanda Rishworth, thanks for talking with us this morning, Labor MP for Kingston. Before that Jamie Briggs, the Liberal MP for Mayo.
Read more