John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

In reply to the Leader of the Opposition, I have not in any way misrepresented what the commissioner has said. I have his statement before me. The commissioner has said that, under the current terms of reference, he has the power to make findings of fact in relation to the behaviour of a whole list of people and organisations, including the Commonwealth. He uses the expression ‘the Commonwealth’ generically. That means he can make findings of fact in relation to officers of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, findings of fact in relation to ministers and findings of fact in relation to employees or officers of statutory authorities.

I invite the Leader of the Opposition to contemplate for a moment the difference between a finding of fact and a finding that there has been a breach of law by somebody. There is a very clear distinction. Any rudimentary understanding of how our legal system operates would tell you that there is a difference between making a finding of fact and going on to then say that the finding of fact represents a breach of the law. The commissioner could find, for example, that X had done something in a careless fashion, but that does not represent a breach of the law. It does not represent a criminal offence.

The commissioner goes on to say—and I invite the Leader of the Opposition to listen to this:

Accordingly, if, during the course of my inquiry, it appears to me that there might have been a breach of any Commonwealth, State or Territory law by the Commonwealth—

again, generically used—

or any officer of the Commonwealth related to the subject matter of the terms of reference, I will approach the Attorney-General seeking a widening of the terms of reference ...

In other words, the commissioner is saying that he has ample power to make findings of fact. If he needs a widening of the terms of reference to make a finding that an offence has taken place, as distinct from an extension of some finding of fact, he will approach the Commonwealth. I have already indicated—and I hope I do not presume, on the authority of the Attorney-General, to repeat this indication—that, if the commissioner were to seek an extension of the terms of reference, he would be granted that extension.

The Leader of the Opposition is without substance in this allegation. This government has been transparent. This government has established an inquiry with the powers of a royal commission. We are now drawing to the end and how many questions must it be—60, 70 or 80?

See this speech in context