Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

This government can duck and weave, it can try and pull tricky manoeuvres within this chamber, but, I tell you what, Mr Speaker, the Australian public is onto the Albanese government. The Australian public understands that this minister now has a serious credibility issue.

There are now nine different positions taken by the minister in relation to a substantial matter in our country's interests, and there has been no consistency offered at all, including, I might say, in a train wreck of an interview this morning that was very telling in relation to the minister's own position. The minister provided the latest version of why she had rejected the application by Qatar Airways to bring additional capacity into Australia, which would reduce airfare prices for Australians travelling overseas but also help to reduce or bring downward pressure on domestic airline fares. When the minister made a reference to the abhorrent situation that was faced by Australian women at the Qatar airport, she used that as at the latest excuse for why she rejected the application by Qatar Airways to apply for additional routes to their network here in Australia.

It doesn't take too long to contemplate why that is a flawed argument. The fact is that Qatar Airways already comes into Australia. If the minister is so aggrieved by the shocking conduct towards and treatment of those women in Qatar, why wouldn't she have stopped the Qatar Airways Group current exposure and usage of the routes here in Australia? If it was a credible argument put by the minister—her ninth position—why would she not have taken a decision to step back and say that, so egregious is the conduct of the Qatari government, or the Qatari people, in her judgement Qatar Airways should leave Australia's airspace. But she didn't do that, because that's not the reason why the minister took a decision in relation to these matters. It's obvious that there is a very close and personal relationship between the Prime Minister of this country, Mr Albanese, and Mr Alan Joyce, the outgoing CEO of Qantas Airways.

Now, there are many things that you could say in relation to Qantas. If you read the online blogs, if you see the experiences Australians have had over the last couple of years, you can see very clearly what Australians are saying about Qantas Airways at the moment in relation to various activities that Qantas is undertaking.

But it is clear that there was a financial gain for Qantas and for Mr Joyce personally out of the decision taken by the minister, who now says that, in contemplation of her decision, weighing up all of the facts for her to make an informed judgement, she can remember speaking with stakeholders who had lobbied her, including Virgin and a third party, who made representations on behalf of Qatar Airways. She has perfect recollection of that element, but she comes into this chamber and says, with a straight face, I might say, that she can't remember whether or not she discussed this matter with Qantas—with Mr Joyce or other senior executives or board members of Qantas Airways. It doesn't pass the pub test. It doesn't at all. This cosy relationship between the Prime Minister and Mr Joyce is something that needs further examination.

We asked today a very simple question; in fact, we asked it three times: could the minister provide details to this House of the exact date that she advised the Prime Minister—because the Prime Minister has given a version of events which now doesn't make sense either. He's given it to this House and he's given it to the Australian public. Even though the minister can recall the date on which she made the decision and she can recall every other date that is tangible and that is applicable to her decision-making and the public announcement that she made, she comes in here and says, 'I can't recall. I don't know the exact date that I advised the Prime Minister and/or his office in relation to this decision.'

There are ministers in this government who, when in opposition, made a very significant issue around transparency, and that was one of the hallmarks of the Albanese leadership when he took control of the Labor Party. There are independent members of this chamber who have made a virtue of transparency and accountability, and, to their great credit, they've been consistent in relation to that. They, too, should join this debate and ask this Prime Minister for detail—detail that his minister will not provide. That's the reality of the situation that we're provided with at the moment: we have a minister who is not being honest with the Australian public.

What happened is this murky deal—this sweetheart deal—was done between government and Qantas to exclude Qatar from coming in and reducing airfares, which would have resulted from that. Just think about where we're at. This deal is a sweetheart deal. It is a murky deal that needs to be understood by the Australian public. We've had the Assistant Treasurer and other ministers go out with different versions of events. It was about competition; it wasn't about competition. It was about the treatment of the women at the Qatar airport; it wasn't about that. There are many other versions that have been given by this minister and other ministers, but it doesn't add up, and the Australian public can smell a rat here.

I think this chamber deserves honesty from the minister, but we are not getting it. The selective memory—the way in which some details can be recalled and some details can't—is, again, not acceptable. The minister didn't come in here and say, 'Look, I don't have my diary with me. I haven't had a chance to check with my department. I haven't looked at the records of conversation in my office. I'll take it on notice,' as ministers have always done in this chamber, where they've been able to provide the detail. There was no sincerity in what the minister was saying. Instead, the minister stood in this parliament today and gave a version of events to the Australian public and the Australian parliament which doesn't pass the pub test. There's nothing this minister is saying that adds up. It is at odds with what the Prime Minister is saying.

We know that this Prime Minister has a relationship with the former CEO of Qantas Airways. They have been happy to be photographed at every red-carpet event. At every top-end-of-town event, there's been the Prime Minister alongside Alan Joyce. Now they can't even mention his name. Why? If you have a decision that has been made in our country's best interests, why not detail it so that your decision can be understood and agreed with? But that's not what's happened, and this is not without consequence. As I say, Australians at the moment are facing huge cost-of-living pressures. We know that, because of decisions made by this government in two subsequent budgets, we've got higher interest rates, we've got higher inflation and people are getting less for what they're paying at the checkout at the supermarket. They're paying more for every cost-of-living line item in their budget.

When they go overseas to see family, when they save up to go on a holiday overseas, when they go to Perth or fly to Melbourne, Sydney, Hobart or wherever it might be, they are paying more for their airfares under this government. We deserve to hear from the minister in an honest and transparent way, and that hasn't happened. This parliament rises this afternoon. The government has played all sorts of tricky tasks over the course of this week, but next week we will revisit this. (Time expired)

See this speech in context