Premier Jeremy Rockliff is facing demands to say when he learned a former minister had misled parliament and why a second minister’s $300,000 legal bill has gone unexplained.
Rockliff on Tuesday afternoon apologised for his handling of former minister Madeleine Ogilvie’s taxpayer-funded legal fees and promised new transparency rules, days before a Friday deadline to answer questions from the Greens and independents.
“I accept that I should have interrogated the issue further and ensured a more appropriate response was provided,” he said.
“I regret I didn’t. I should have. And for that I apologise.”
But Labor said the apology raised more questions than it answered.
Leader Josh Willie said the premier needed to reveal when he was told about Ogilvie’s legal action, when he approved it and why he had not asked her to correct the record.
“The premier has made a conditional apology and announced a review with no timeline,” Willie said.
“That’s not enough to make this matter go away. In fact, it raises more questions than answers.”
Willie also raised Minister Jane Howlett’s $300,000 in legal fees, which Labor says remain unexplained.
“Madeleine Ogilvie resigned because she could not answer questions about her court case. By this logic, Minister Howlett should as well,” he said.
“Why are the premier’s standards different on these two matters?”
Crossbench MPs this week made similar demands, threatening to use parliamentary options, including a censure motion, if the premier does not give ‘direct and exact answers’ by Friday.
Independent MP Peter George said the “partial mea culpa” from the premier was “too little and much too late”.
“The only way to assure Tasmanians that ministers understand and abide by their responsibilities to parliament and the people is to insist on imposing strict Westminster conventions,” he said.
“If a minister has misled parliament or is subject to serious investigation involving criminal matters or dishonesty, they should stand aside – or be stood aside by the premier – until the investigation is concluded.”
Ogilvie quit cabinet on May 30 over allegations she misled parliament.
She told a parliamentary committee last year she had not been a party to any Supreme Court action in the previous 18 months. But in May, she revealed she had initiated such proceedings.
Taxpayers spent about $120,000 on her legal fees between 2023 and 2025.
Rockliff said the new measures were part of a “broader review” of existing guidelines, aimed at giving Tasmanians “greater visibility” over how their money was spent.
“I have instructed my department to develop new provisions that will improve transparency and public access to information, while ensuring that legal proceedings are not compromised,” he said.
The changes include enhanced public reporting of legal expenditure and potential cross-party visibility over decisions to grant indemnities.
Rockliff said the matter was complex and involved “legal sensitivities and confidentiality requirements”, but he had sought advice on what could be made public.
“I understand that Tasmanians expect clear information about how public funds are being used,” he said.
“This work will ensure there is greater clarity and accountability in the system.”
He confirmed Ogilvie was receiving legal assistance under the current guidelines, which are now under review.
