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

My question is to the Attorney-General. I remind the Attorney-General of her statement on 15 June:

We aren't bringing a strike-out application; Mr Slipper is.

Given that the member for Isaacs, the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary and Queen's Counsel, stated:

… the Commonwealth of Australia is bringing an application to the Federal Court to strike out this case …

Why did she make this brazenly false statement?

Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As much respect as I have for the member for Isaacs and his status as Queen's Counsel, unfortunately, if that was the statement that was made, it was wrong. A strike out application was not made by the Commonwealth, as was—

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Is there interest in the answer or not? It is question No. 1.

Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This matter can clearly be clarified if anybody would like to check the Federal Court file, which is available online. It can be clarified if anyone would like to check Hansard, as it was confirmed in Senate estimates. And I understand from my colleague that, if you actually read the context of the comments made by the member for Isaacs, it will be clear that, as we have always said, an abuse of process application was made, but not a strike out application. That information is all there, available to see, and is incontrovertible.