Tasmanian Greens leader Rosalie Woodruff is calling on Environment Minister Madeleine Ogilvie to resign, accusing her of deliberately misleading parliament over her involvement in a Supreme Court matter.
The row centres on a Budget Estimates hearing on November 17, 2025, when Ogilvie was asked whether she’d been a subject or party to any Supreme Court matters in the previous 18 months.
She said no.
But in parliament today, Ogilvie conceded she is in fact a party to a matter currently before the Supreme Court.
“I want to make clear I am a party to a matter currently before the Supreme Court initiated by me in the execution of my duties as Minister,” she said.
“I’m not able at this time to provide any details regarding the matter but I will do so at the earliest possible opportunity when I’m legally able to do so.”
Ogilvie said she had already provided a clarification to parliament on November 20 last year, three days after the Estimates hearing.
“In that clarification I stated that I had not been the subject of legal proceedings initiated by another party,” she said.
Woodruff then asked a follow-up question, pressing Ogilvie on which ministerial portfolio the Supreme Court proceedings related to.
Ogilvie again declined to provide details.
“I’m not able at this time to provide any details regarding that matter but I will do so at the earliest possible opportunity when I am legally able to do so,” she said.
Woodruff said the November clarification did nothing to correct what she called a completely false statement.
“This is a clear-cut case of a Minister intentionally misleading parliament,” Woodruff said.
“As the Ministerial Code of Conduct says, that means the Minister should resign.”
She said if Ogilvie won’t step down, Premier Jeremy Rockliff should sack her.
Speaker Jacquie Petrusma cautioned members about raising court matters in the chamber, reminding them that matters awaiting a decision in court shouldn’t be seen as being influenced by parliament.
“If you refer to any criminal case or any civil case, you do have to be very cognisant about the words that are used in here because we can’t be seen as putting any influence on the outcomes,” Petrusma said.
