Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with some reluctance that I rise in relation to the Friends of Indi—and, more importantly, the overweening arrogance of this sclerotic government. Last night Labor called on the member for Indi to come clean about her connection with this group. It is important to remember that the Friends of Indi failed to lodge a return for the last two financial years, keeping its receipts and donations a secret. It was not until British American Tobacco lodged its return that its cover was blown. In the process, the cover of the chief ‘friend’, the Member for Indi, was also blown.

It is clear that the member for Indi was the beneficiary of donations made to Friends of Indi, including a $15,000 donation from British American Tobacco in the last financial year. That British American Tobacco was donating money to the member for Indi is made clear on page 2 of the company’s return to the Australian Electoral Commission.

Labor has asked the member for Indi to answer some simple questions about her relationship with the Friends of Indi. And it is not just Labor asking the questions. The member for Indi’s constituents, including tobacco growers kept in the dark about her relationship with BAT, have been asking questions about the member’s conduct as well. While British American Tobacco have made a decision to shaft hundreds of local tobacco growers by importing cheap tobacco from China, the member for Indi has not been telling them that she has taken what is for a local campaign a massive donation. No wonder they are angry; no wonder they feel betrayed. Some people would argue that this is not cash for comment; this is cash for no comment. It is bad enough that the member for Indi has got herself caught up in this mess. It is simply beyond belief that coalition members decided last night that the member for Indi is an appropriate person to chair the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters.

The Howard government has abandoned all common sense in this matter. It has made the poacher the gamekeeper. It is a sign of the government’s arrogance that the appointment was considered—let alone confirmed—by the coalition party room. The Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters is one of the most important committees in this parliament. Appointment to the committee is an honour. It goes without saying that the chair of the committee should be beyond reproach. Sadly, in the absence of answers from the member for Indi and the completion of the current investigation by the Australian Electoral Commission, the member is not beyond reproach. It is time that the member for Indi provided the parliament with a full account of her conduct.

The bluster we heard after question time today falls short of the explanation the member is obliged to provide. Shouting at the Speaker and getting thrown out of parliament for disorderly behaviour is not good enough. Repeating allegations about corrupt local tobacco growers is not good enough. Running away from journalists and failing to return calls is not good enough. The unanswered questions are pretty simple. Who is involved in the Friends of Indi? When did the member for Indi trouser the $15,000 donation from British American Tobacco? How did she spend it? Why did she think it proper to hide the donation from the tobacco growers that she was asking to accept a British American Tobacco buyout? What other donors have used the Friends of Indi to launder campaign donations?

Tonight Labor again urges the member for Indi to offer a full account of herself. Personally, I like the member for Indi. She is a feisty and colourful character in this parliament. But until such time as the member properly accounts for her conduct, a cloud of controversy will surround her appointment as chair of the committee with responsibility for the oversight of electoral matters. This is not a personal matter for the member for Indi. This is a political criticism of someone whose political support fund is under an official investigation and of the government’s wrong decision to at the same time make her the chair of this very important committee. In my view, until the member properly accounts for her conduct, a cloud of controversy will surround her appointment as chair of the committee with the responsibility for the oversight of electorate matters.

The Howard government has long shown contempt for the parliament and this is just another example. Its appointment of the member for Indi as Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters in these circumstances—in the midst of a campaign finance scandal—represents a further blow to the parliament and to the quality of our democracy.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am rather disappointed in the last speaker, the member for Melbourne Ports. I usually have a higher regard for him, but I have never heard so much rubbish or hypocrisy spoken in my life. Today in this chamber the member for Indi—a good friend and colleague—was perfectly properly correcting the record that had been so wrongly placed the night before by the member for Gorton. He is a little-known member in this place, but he is certainly well known in the union movement. Indeed, from the years 1993 to 2001, he was the Assistant National Secretary of the Australian Services Union. And guess what? During 1998 to 2001, that same union, using three related entities—but still the Australian Services Union—donated $240,000 to the Labor Party. And guess what? It did not declare it. Only for one year, the year of 1999-2000, did he bother to put in his return that they had in fact donated $12,000, when the ALP’s own return showed that in that year they had donated $75,000—a discrepancy of $63,000.

The little-known member for Gorton—though he is a well-known trade unionist—talked about $15,000 as a hefty donation. Well, what the hell do you call $240,000? I put it to you, Mr Speaker, that when the member for Indi was very properly correcting the record today, she was ejected from the chamber while defending herself. If we go further into the records of the ASU and the assistant secretary, from 1998—which is the farthest we can go back—up until 2001, with the exception of the year 1999-2000, not one ASU declaration was filed. We picked up the numbers from the ALP declaration. What of the precedent set by this trade unionist who now calls himself a member of parliament? That same person set such a good standard that, in the year 2005-06, the same standard was adhered to. No return was filed by the ASU—not filed at all—yet, in that year, $100,000 was donated to the ALP. And you stand there tonight whingeing about the fact that the Friends of Indi filed a late return—and they have filed—for $15,000.

There is not the faintest suggestion that the former assistant secretary of the ASU was trying to correct the record. It is hypocrisy, with a record like this, to come in here and to give somebody a hard time. It is outrageous and it should be condemned at the highest level. We have always known about the cosy relationship between the unions and the Labor Party, which is simply the political front for the trade union movement. Here it is in black and white—$240,532 donated and not disclosed, with the exception of a miserable $12,000. One can only conclude it was deliberate, aimed to mislead or incompetence. In any case, the member for Gorton and now, by implication, the member for Melbourne Ports stand condemned. As I said, I am disappointed in the member for Melbourne Ports. I had often thought much higher of him. I thought his standards were better, but he has dragged himself into the little-known member for Gorton’s attempt to besmirch a good member by getting into bed with him and his nasty trade union deceit.

Barry Haase (Kalgoorlie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Shame!

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is shameful and it should be condemned in this place. The member for Indi deserves an apology from that side of the House for its attempt to besmirch what is a fine reputation of a member who works hard for her own constituents. This is an attempt in the lead-up to an election to try to appear holier than thou over a late return for the year 2006 when you have failed to lodge returns over the period from 1998—and probably further back—and have hidden $240,000, which has gone to the Labor Party ‘trouser’, to use your word. It has been trousered by the Labor Party from their trade union mates. You owe her an apology, and I hope it is forthcoming tonight.