Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I have a serious issue to raise with you, and I feel it is best that it be raised at the first possible opportunity. Yesterday in the House, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition took objection to, and indeed gave a personal explanation on, the suggestion made by the Treasurer at question time that she had plagiarised a Wall Street Journal article. Today in the Age it is reported that:

Ms Bishop later conceded to The Age that many of the words in question had been taken only from The Wall Street Journal article and not from Mr Paulson. But she said she was not wrong in her explanation to the House.

If you examine the words of what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition actually said to the House, as checked against the tape, you will find that she said, ‘In my speech I was referring to the United States’s plans. In fact, the words I used were the technical explanation from the US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, which have been published widely.’ When I checked the Hansard this morning, I found that it records the Deputy Leader of the Opposition as saying something very different.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I seek your guidance. Is it appropriate for the Leader of the House to be accusing the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in this way without moving a substantive motion?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am waiting—

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Pyne interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I do not know what has possessed the honourable member for Sturt since going from the sideboard to the shadow cabinet, but he cannot just prattle on. Quite correctly, when he approached the dispatch box he indicated that he understands this is a serious matter. The point is that I have given indulgence to the Leader of the House. He is setting a scenario. I expect him to then come to some form of conclusion. That might involve me making some sort of comment or decision or it might involve him doing something. I think we should just bear with him. I will listen to him. I honestly do not know where this is going. I have not been encouraged to this position at all. I am listening. The Leader of the House.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Hansard records something quite different in meaning. It records the Deputy Leader of the Opposition as saying:

In my speech I was referring to the United States’ plans, and, in fact, the words I used were a technical explanation of US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s plan, which have been published widely.

The distinction is quite acute between what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said and what the Hansard records the Deputy Leader of the Opposition as saying. Mr Speaker, I would ask that you examine the tape and report back to the House at your convenience and at the earliest possible opportunity on how it is that the Hansard has been changed on a serious issue in which the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was giving a personal explanation about plagiarism.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will seek advice. I think honourable members would agree that the Hansard is produced professionally, as per guidelines. But I will seek advice about the matters that the Leader of the House has raised with me and report accordingly.