Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am certainly pleased to have the opportunity to rise to speak on the matter of the Reserve Bank of Australia board and, in particular, its subsidiaries, Securency and Note Printing Australia. I note that this motion has been put forward by the Australian Greens. When you go to the heart of this matter, it is a call by the Australian Greens for there to be a full-blown inquiry into what the Reserve Bank knew, when they knew and what they did about it. However, the matters at the core of this issue, dealing with Reserve Bank board governance with respect to Securency and Note Printing Australia, are matters that I, as a member and Deputy Chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, have already asked the Reserve Bank Governor himself about at two inquiries that the economics committee has conducted with the Reserve Bank.

There can be no doubt that the issues and the allegations at the core of this matter are substantial. There can be no doubt that, when it comes to corrupt practices such as paying bribes to foreign officials, this is the kind of matter that ought to be dealt with very firmly. When these allegations were first raised with me, off the back of some very fine investigative work by a number of journalists, that was part of the reason I took it upon myself to ask some hard questions of the Reserve Bank Governor. It is beholden upon all of us in this place to make sure that we walk the fine line between allowing transparency and asking difficult questions on hard topics while not allowing matters to become partisan politics purely and simply because it suits certain agendas at certain times. So in good faith I put to the Reserve Bank governor a number of questions in 2010 and subsequently at hearings of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics. We know that the time line is not as apparent as the mover of the motion put it. Certainly, it would suit these conveniences of the Greens to argue that there is a large conspiracy and a cover-up—and, in fact, we know there were corrupt officials being paid inappropriately by Australian agencies—but the truth is that it is simply not that clear-cut. Where the evidence tends to indicate that there may be a prima facie basis to support the assertion of a conspiracy and a cover-up, charges have been laid. The AFP is investigating the conduct at the core of this. They are investigating it in a way that is not beholden to party political process or prone to grandstanding but rather in a way that is focused upon discerning the truth—something that I fear is not at the core of the Greens motion on Securency.

There is one area on which I do agree with the Greens on this matter—that is, that a full and frank account is owed to the Australian people by the Treasurer. The reason I say it is owed by the Treasurer is that under evidence from the Reserve Bank Governor we know that the first time that information was transmitted from the Reserve Bank to the executive arm of government occurred under his watch as Treasurer of the country. That was the first time that this Labor Treasurer—or, indeed, any executive member of the parliament that we know of—was informed about some of the practices that had taken place and whether or not these practices were appropriate.

In defence of aspects of the activities of the Reserve Bank, it is clear to me, based upon the evidence that I have been given in answers from the Reserve Bank Governor and my own reading of, for example, the audit by KPMG and the evidence from Rick Battellino and others, that shortly after the AWB scandal the Reserve Bank board instructed that there be a thorough review of the practices and policies of NPA—that is, Note Printing Australia—and Securency in their use of offshore agents. Although the headline figures that the Greens used sound controversial, they were not inconsistent with a business of this size. The findings of that review made a number of recommendations. In some instances the use of agents was ceased, and in others it was continued. But there was a breakdown of management controls, and that is part of what AFP investigation has gone too.

In the fullness of time, a thorough political investigation may be the prudent thing to do; but right now is not the prudent thing to do. There is an AFP investigation. Charges have been laid. It is not the time for political grandstanding; it is time for the AFP to do their work. It may, however, be the appropriate time once the Treasurer has given account.

See this speech in context