Josh Wilson (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm glad to speak on this bill, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, and to follow that excellent contribution from the member for Gellibrand. This is a bill that shouldn't need to be passed because what it seeks to correct should never really have been at risk. We shouldn't need to come in and legislate for basic honesty and transparency and clarity around our system of governance. We shouldn't need to legislate the expectation that the Prime Minister would be straight with the Australian people and that a government would be straight with the Australian people. You would think that, as a basic duty and obligation, anyone who has the privilege to serve in this place would start with that as No. 1 on their priority list when they come into this House.

We know that rules, conventions, norms and sensible behaviours—the sensible observance of integrity—are critical to the good function of government in a way that is very, very substantial, and we know that bad practice leads to bad outcomes. We know that weak and perverted governance leads to incompetent and dishonest government. We know that because we just spent the last several years experiencing that. The Australian community just spent the last several years seeing that up close and personal. That kind of perverted, dishonest, incompetent, unaccountable government inevitably hurts the Australian community, and it hurt the Australian community in this case.

Robodebt is what happens when you have a government that is a stranger to transparency, accountability and decency. That's what happens. Tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Australians get, at the very least, the fright of their lives—at the very least. Tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Australians get hit with debt notices that are wrong and unlawful, and the consequences in some cases, as we know, are the gravest that there can be. There are circumstances that have been disclosed to the robodebt royal commission that involve people taking their lives because the former government, the coalition government, was so awfully incompetent and unaccountable.

It wasn't just a case of ignoring the sensible requirements of transparency and accountability that we ought to be able to take for granted; it was a case, in many instances, of intentionally perverting or covering up matters that the Australian community deserved to know about. It happened with the secret multiple ministerial moonlighting of the former Prime Minister, the member for Cook. It happened with the secret million-dollar donations to the legal fund of the former Attorney-General. It happened on multiple occasions. It happened with the secret legal advice—that never saw the light of day until all that catastrophic harm had occurred—that said that robodebt was wrong.

As the member for Gellibrand just said, the one thing that has been notable in the 10 months since the change of government is that, in relation to all of those awful failures, there has not been one skerrick of collective reflection and responsibility from those opposite. Is it too much to ask, when you have patently failed in your obligations and your duties to the Australian people, that you at least acknowledge that, take responsibility for it and apologise for it? Under the previous government, long gone were the days when a minister, looking squarely in the face of the kind of failure that robodebt represented, would not have any particular courage but would just do the basic decent thing and say: 'I have to take responsibility for that.' There were, frankly, multiple ministers who could have done it. They could've had a conversation amongst themselves about who was perhaps best placed to wear that opprobrium, but so far that has not happened to one degree. We've not heard the word 'sorry' once from any of the people involved.

When the parliament gave those opposite the opportunity for a bit of self-reflection, a bit of ex post facto accountability, those opposite weren't interested. The fact is that, when this House censured the member for Cook, which, frankly, was really the bare minimum that ought to have occurred in terms of recognising the gravity of the failure that has occurred and the deception of the Australian people that has occurred, those opposite voted to oppose that motion and essentially to support that conduct, and they gathered around the member for Cook afterwards, smiling and patting shoulders and shaking hands. I understand that. I've actually got nothing against people showing care for one another. The fact that someone on the other side might have taken the time afterwards to say privately to the member for Cook, 'It's a bit of a tough day when you get censured in the House of Representatives,' is okay.

Looking after one another through tough times is okay. But when you all have been tarnished by that kind of behaviour, to vote against the very sensible and, frankly, relatively mild recognition in the Australian parliament of something that should never ever have occurred—a bloke secretly swearing himself into multiple ministries, not even telling the ministers responsible. When that occurs, rather than taking the opportunity to say 'That was wrong. We recognise that was wrong. We don't want that to ever happen again,' and reflecting the sombre and serious nature of what a censure in the House of Representatives represents, you get people who couldn't rush over quickly enough to smile and laugh and clap the member for Cook on the back as if nothing had occurred, and that tells you a lot about the state of denial that those opposite are in.

As I have said, the institutions and conventions that guide the best form of our Westminster parliamentary system are not window dressing. They are not optional extras. It is not the difference between whether you wear a tie or don't wear a tie in this place. They are the guardrails for proper government. They are the guarantors of competence and integrity. They are the buffers against incompetence and consequential harm that follows. If we can't do those things better and if we can't set right some of the failure that we saw under the previous government, then democracy in Australia will be weaker for it, and the quality of government that the Australian people receive will be weaker for it. It is worth noting that the—(Quorum formed) Clearly that was too much truth for those opposite. I mean, why take responsibility and show some accountability for the frankly disgusting behaviour of the former government when you can just play silly games, when you can get up and interrupt people in the middle of saying something that is pretty important? I think the Australian people don't ever again want to see a situation where you have a secretive and deceptive Prime Minister going about arrogating power to themselves in multiple important ministries, appearing not to even remember which departments they'd been sworn into.

The truth had to be dragged out of the member for Cook; that should be recognised. The member for Cook couldn't decide or remember, apparently, exactly which secret alternative ministerial costumes he had put in the closet for his use, and he never ever acknowledged the fact that what he did was wrong or unnecessary. As the member for Gellibrand said, he tried to excuse it afterwards with a whole range of pathetic excuses, including suggesting that it was in the nation's interest and it was better for the nation's defence and security. Frankly, that is ridiculous.

The truth only came out, as we know, because the member for Cook, the former Prime Minister, bragged in relative secret to the writers of a book about it, because he thought the story would somehow reflect well on him afterwards—that it would show his preparedness to do anything, in his own twisted version of high-handed, top-down government. Not only did it take weeks and weeks of multiple interviews for the member for Cook to make clear the actual details of the various ministries that he'd secretly sworn himself into, but in the last few weeks we've learned that the former member for Tangney was sworn into one of his colleagues' departments. We've also learned that the member for Cook was very proud of the way that he kept the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister for Foreign Affairs completely in the dark about some of the most serious defence and security matters that were under contemplation at the time.

Australian democracy matters. All of it matters—the hardware and the software, the rules and the conventions, and certainly the behaviours and the norms. Ironically, from a coalition government whose twin ideological themes are, on the one hand, faith in the markets and, on the other hand, a desire to protect and maintain important conservative institutions, we had a complete abandonment of both of those kinds of thought. There was no interest in sensible market solutions to big issues like climate change or waste and recycling and there was a complete trashing of Australia's democratic institutions, norms and conventions. That is something that we can only hope they will reflect upon, but, from what we've seen to date, there's little evidence of that.

Unfortunately, I think we're going to have to keep saying this in here multiple times every day until something changes: it is still astounding that a government can inflict illegal and wrong debt notices on tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Australians and that those responsible can be incapable—as yet—of saying openly that it was wrong, that it was a scandalous piece of incompetence—harmful, immoral incompetence. Not one person is prepared to say that. The coalition parties, individually or together, are not capable of saying that. There's been no ministerial accountability. There's been no acknowledgement at the leadership level.

This government wants to put Australia democracy on a much healthier and higher quality foundation. We're doing that with this bill—which shouldn't really need to be passed—to simply make it crystal clear, particularly to those opposite, that Australians are entitled to expect accountability and transparency from their government. We've done it with the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and we'll continue to do it through the leadership and conduct of the Albanese Labor government.

See this speech in context