Fiery clash: Labor MPs confront integrity committee chair in parliament
By Rachel Eddie
A fiery confrontation erupted in the halls of the Victorian parliament when Labor MPs accused the Greens chair of the integrity committee of humiliating them by supporting a motion condemning their treatment of the former head of the state’s anti-corruption watchdog.
Three opposition MPs who witnessed the incident told The Age Labor’s Belinda Wilson yelled at Greens MP Tim Read on Thursday morning in the corridor behind the lower house chamber. The incident has been referred to the speaker for investigation.
Greens MP Tim Read and Labor MP Belinda Wilson.Credit: Eddie Jim; Supplied
Moments earlier, Labor’s Ryan Batchelor had accused Read of being out of line in joining the opposition to criticise government MPs in the motion in the lower house. Batchelor and Wilson are both members of the integrity and oversight committee, which Read chairs.
Five MPs spoke to The Age on condition of anonymity to speak frankly about the events. Wilson has since apologised to Read, MPs were told.
The parliamentary committee on Monday heard from Robert Redlich, the former head of the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission, who aired concerns about corruption in the state.
Labor committee members instead asked him whether he had ever bullied staff, inquired into a termination payment outlined in the IBAC annual report and questioned the timing of a preliminary report released during the 2021 Christmas period.
Robert Redlich speaks at a parliamentary hearing earlier this week.
The four Labor MPs on the committee on Tuesday defended their line of questioning, which they said was within the written guidance provided by Read and was not ruled out of order at the time.
On Thursday, shadow attorney-general Michael O’Brien moved a motion condemning each of them by name for a “politically motivated attempt to smear” Redlich.
Greens MP Tim Read, who chairs the committee, spoke in favour of debating the motion.
“I believe that all of us should support this motion from the opposition, to go into the conduct of the public hearing and question whether we handled it appropriately. I believe, as part of the committee, that we should be answerable to the house. I believe that we should respond to what is discussed in this motion, and we should not run away from it,” Read said in parliament.
“It has been the subject of broad reporting in all of the main media outlets, and I think it is important for the government to read the room in the way that the opposition has, on this occasion, accurately done.”
Read said this was for all committees to consider.
“When a committee is hearing from an expert witness, it is important that we allow the witness to contribute the information that they are able to contribute without attempts to deflect and distract. If that has happened, then it is important that this house examine that.”
Batchelor approached Read as he exited the chamber and claimed his support of the motion was unacceptable as committee chair. Two opposition MPs who witnessed that conversation described it as confrontational, while a Labor MP described it as direct but civil.
Wilson then shouted at Read shortly afterwards in what three opposition MPs described as an extraordinary attack. Wilson said Read was a disgrace and had humiliated her, they said.
Liberal MPs had been yelling at Wilson in the chamber during debate.
Batchelor, Wilson and the speaker’s office were contacted. Read and a government spokeswoman declined to comment.
James Newbury, the manager of opposition business in the lower house, on Thursday morning requested the “deeply distressing” confrontation be investigated by the speaker.
“There was shouting, there was clear harassment of the member,” Newbury said in parliament late on Thursday morning, without naming any of the MPs involved.
“We all want to work in a safe workplace. I would say that the behaviour we saw not only didn’t fit a safe workplace, it was distressing.”
The matter was referred to the speaker, Maree Edwards.
Assistant Treasurer Danny Pearson said he did not witness the events but that it was appropriate for the speaker to investigate.
“I can only take on face value what [Newbury] said ... I think that referring the matter onto the speaker is appropriate. Why there’s a requirement, though, to disrupt the proceedings of the house in order to make this point, I’m unclear as to why [Newbury] has chosen to do this in this way,” Pearson said.
“But if something has happened, then it’s appropriate that matter be referred onto the speaker.”
Get the day’s breaking news, entertainment ideas and a long read to enjoy. Sign up to receive our Evening Edition newsletter here.