Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to the statement of Kathy Jackson, the secretary of the Health Services Union:

… there's been … unauthorised expenditure … and we want answers …

Given that there have been no answers from the member for Dobell, I ask the Prime Minister: on what basis has she come to the conclusion that the member for Dobell is worthy of her full confidence?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course I am aware of statements made by Kathy Jackson. Kathy Jackson is a union official. Unions, are, of course, the organisations that the Leader of the Opposition wanted to put out of business as part of the Work Choices agenda.

On the issues that he has raised about the member for Dobell, can I say this to the Leader of the Opposition: another day and he digs himself deeper into the mud of hypocrisy on this question. Can I remind the Leader of the Opposition there is only one member of the federal parliament who has been charged with a criminal offence. That is a Liberal Party senator who has been charged with an offence against a person and an offence against property, and those charges are obviously coming to trial and going through appropriate criminal processes. It is not appropriate in respect of that Liberal senator for conclusions to be drawn about her innocence or guilt beforehand. The Leader of the Opposition said that. He said:

The matter is now before the courts where I understand it will be contested and she should be extended the presumption of innocence.

That is in relation to a criminal charge and I repeat again: the only member of this parliament facing criminal charges is a Liberal senator.

On the question of the matters involving the member for Dobell, as is well known, there is a Fair Work Australia investigation in progress and I believe it is appropriate to wait for the outcome of any such investigation.

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. The Prime Minister was asked a question about the member for Dobell, who has no case before the courts at this stage. The Prime Minister is answering on the basis of a Liberal senator who has been charged with an offence. That is obviously an entirely different case and she therefore can answer the question.

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

Order! The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The point of order was not relevant to the question but, if the point of order is direct relevance, at the point in time that the Prime Minister was interrupted she was being directly relevant, and I highly encourage her to continue to conclude her answer in a directly relevant manner.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Manager of Opposition Business for confirming what I have said to the parliament—that there is only one member of parliament charged with a criminal offence.

For the member for Dobell, people know there are Fair Work Australia investigations in process and the appropriate thing to do is to wait for the outcome of those investigations.

Can I also remind the Leader of the Opposition not only is he mired in the hypocrisy of applying a completely different standard to a Liberal senator than any standard he extends to the member for Dobell; he is mired in hypocrisy in that when in government he was the first one as Leader of Government Business to get to this dispatch box to defend Liberal members who were in various scrapes and to say that they should be extended the presumption of innocence and that people should not act or draw conclusions until investigations came to an end. I remind the Leader of the Opposition that at that time he sat behind Prime Minister Howard, who said—and I specifically adopt these words as my own:

… a lot of people who are under investigation end up having nothing to answer for.

He was talking about a police investigation dealing with three Liberal MPs. He went on to say:

It's a police investigation and the appropriate thing for me to do is to let the police investigation run its course and then if it is appropriate I will have something to say.

Prime Minister Howard was right then. I adopt those words now in relation to the member for Dobell and the Fair Work Australia investigation.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I ask a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. I ask it on behalf of Kathy Jackson and the 70,000 members of the Health Services Union.

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

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order: the standing orders do not provide for the Leader of the Opposition to ask questions on behalf of anyone but himself. Also, the idea that any trade unionist would get him to ask that question is quite clearly out of—

Honourable members interjecting—

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

No matter what the level of emotion each of you as an individual has, we will be judged on our collective actions by those outside. It has been a long fortnight. There are a few hours to go, but some of you might have an early mark.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Kathy Jackson is a brave, decent woman, and she is speaking up on behalf of 70,000 members. I refer the Prime Minister to her words:

… there's been unauthorised use of credit cards, unauthorised expenditure that is not normal union expenditure and we want answers … This union and our members require answers …

When will this Prime Minister ask the member for Dobell to provide some answers? When will she give them herself?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said in answer to the earlier question, I know Kathy Jackson. I know her particularly from the days when I was shadow minister for health and she was campaigning alongside me against the destruction of the Australian health system being presided over by the now Leader of the Opposition. She was standing alongside me as we campaigned against his destruction of Medicare and bulk-billing. She was standing alongside me as we campaigned against his $1 billion worth of cutbacks to the public hospital system. She was standing alongside me as we campaigned against the disgraceful way that Australians—

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think you are aware of what it will be, Mr Speaker—it is on relevance. There is nothing in the question from the Leader of the Opposition which asks about the health portfolio or past history; it is about the issue of the day.

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

The Prime Minister is responding to the question.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is not my fault that they are badly drafted. On a question that specifically raised character issues in relation to Kathy Jackson, I am responding. In specifically responding to those character issues as raised, I remind the parliament about the campaign that she and others participated in because pensioners could not get the most basic dental care under the Leader of the Opposition when he was presiding as health minister. Let us remember all of the things that were happening as they sought to spread Work Choices to the public hospital system. Let us remember the real threats that there were to tie public hospital funding to the offering of Australian workplace agreements so that staff in public hospitals would have things like their penalty rates smashed away. That is what was happening when the Leader of the Opposition was minister for health.

I also say to the Leader of the Opposition that I understand that he has used Kathy Jackson's words; and he would understand—I am sure he does understand this—that the matter is now being assessed by the New South Wales police. I understand that the Leader of the Opposition would know that because his shadow minister, Senator Brandis, has been out in a deeply concerning fashion ringing the New South Wales police minister to get the New South Wales police minister to ring the police commissioner. Senator Brandis is ringing up his Liberal mate to ring up a police commissioner. Why would this be happening? Why would I be concerned about this? I am concerned about it because I remember the days when the Leader of the Opposition was running political protection for Wilson Tuckey after he tried to intimidate the police into withdrawing a speeding fine from his son.

So, when we look at the modern Liberal Party, what do they believe in? Saying no to everything—they believe in that; rejoicing when workers lose their jobs—they believe in that; creating a $70 billion black hole—they obviously believe in that; and from their past conduct we know they are not above putting pressure on police officers, because it has happened before, and now Senator Brandis has some explaining to do.