Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

But, if that hint was not taken, maybe this would be a hint that the Prime Minister was willing to own up to at the beginning of question time but scurried away from the moment the questions continued: 'Cheques should be made payable to the Liberal Party of Australia, New South Wales division'—probably a political function. But, maybe if he did not twig at that, how about this one, Prime Minister: 'A receipt will be issued. All proceeds from this event will be applied to state election campaigning.' Maybe that is a hint.

What we have ended up with is a situation where somebody who was employed and appointed on the basis that he should know what questions to ask and should know something about probity instead has landed us in this situation. Make no mistake; the statement that went out today does not end the issue. Those opposite have wanted to say, 'He has withdrawn; it's over.' But read the words of that statement when he withdrew from the event. He could not attend any event that was described as a Liberal Party event. He would be unable to give this address, at least while he is in the position of royal commissioner. So he is already flagging, 'Hey, guys; don't forget about me. The moment this one's over, I'll be back there for your fundraiser.' He could not even hold back from making sure that he gets invited to the Liberal Party fundraisers again in the future.

You would have thought that the former Justice Heydon would have known, given that these are the words of a judgement he himself delivered in the case of British American Tobacco Australia Services Limited v Laurie in 2011, not that long ago. I quote from paragraph 139:

It is fundamental to the administration of justice that the judge be neutral. It is for this reason that the appearance of departure from neutrality is a ground of disqualification. … it is the perception of the hypothetical observer that provides the yardstick.

Be in no doubt: if a juror behaved this way, they would be off the jury immediately. If a juror behaved this way, they would be gone. But somehow this Prime Minister reckons that a royal commissioner can behave this way and that is fine. The reason goes to the very character of this Prime Minister and why he started this royal commission to begin with: because he wanted someone who would be partisan. He wanted someone who would be biased. He wanted someone who would engage in—

See this speech in context