Mark Vaile (Lyne, National Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

I will let the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry speak for himself about his statement. I make the point that the report the member for Griffith is referring to is a report on the oil for food program to the CPA—which is something that I mentioned in this place yesterday—that was for official use only. It assessed a number of contracts that were approved by the UN under the oil for food program, but those contracts that had been approved under the oil for food program had not been completed or delivered.

Two were listed there, and this is where the member for Griffith has been misleading the House. Of the two listed Australian wheat contracts—obviously one was the AWB—one was identified as ‘potentially overpriced’. It was not in the language that the member for Griffith used. It was not ‘containing kickbacks’. That report went to the CPA. Both contracts were reprioritised by the CPA and delivered and paid for by the World Food Program. They had not been delivered under the UN oil for food program; they were checked out by the CPA. The CPA went on with them, and they were paid for by the World Food Program. To prove the point, on ABC Radio this morning, the head of the CPA, Paul Bremer, said in answer to questions from Fran Kelly:

So we knew there was corruption. I don’t remember hearing about the Australian Wheat Board.

He was then asked:

Would it surprise you to know that countries involved with those industries, and involved with the CPA in fact, as Australia was there in Iraq, might not have known of those set asides or those kind of kickbacks?

He said again:

I don’t remember hearing about the Australian Wheat Board.

That was the CPA, which ultimately approved those contracts that you referred to. They had them delivered, and had them paid for by the World Food Program.

See this speech in context