Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister and I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answer. He said: 'Once he became aware that it was a Liberal badged event he withdrew.' I also refer to the invitation issued today, which came exactly two months after the Prime Minister had announced the appointment of Dyson Heydon AC QC. The invitation carried the statement, 'I am chair of one of the lawyer branches of the Liberal Party New South Wales Division.' Will the Prime Minister correct the record?

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those on my left will not interject. I want to hear the Leader of the House.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister indicated that he was prepared to answer the question he was by the Manager of Opposition Business. He had to do his best with it, he said. But this question offends the standing orders and the practice of the House on several levels.

Ms Macklin interjecting —

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Jagajaga will not interject.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It offends the convention that matters that are before the courts, as this one is, should not be canvassed. So it offends the sub judice rule. It, secondly, offends the standing orders, because what was in the mind of Dyson Heydon is not—

Opposition members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Wakefield! The Leader of the House will resume his seat. Those opposite are interjecting. I cannot hear the Leader of the House. He is on a point of order and you will not commentate.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The second reason it offends the standing orders is because what was in the mind of Dyson Heydon is not something that is in the knowledge of a Prime Minister. Therefore he cannot answer this question. It also offends the standing orders because, under standing order 100(c)ii questions that are critical of the character of persons need to be in writing on the Notice Paper. So my suggestion to the Manager of Opposition Business is that if he wants to move a substantive motion, with respect to this matter, the government will entertain it because only through a substantive motion can he elucidate the issues that he wishes to elevate in the House today.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I have two matters on the point of order: in the first instance, there is ample precedent in practice that once a minister has gone down a particular line it is open to the House to question the veracity of what has been said in the parliament. The question does exactly that. Secondly, on the point of the government saying, 'Oh no, we can't talk about the royal commission,' it is arguably a little bit late for the Leader of the House to start making that. I simply ask that whatever ruling you make on sub judice be one that is applied equally throughout the House.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Watson. I made my position on sub judice very clear on Thursday, in respect of the member for Isaacs, who is not here, I notice. With respect to the Leader of the House's second point, the Prime Minister can only answer questions for matters for which he is responsible.

Opposition members interjecting—

You will not interject. I am not going to entertain interjections from those on my left. The Prime Minister can only answer questions for which he is responsible. The last question was skating very close—in fact, the Prime Minister could have chosen not to answer it. I am going to give the member for Watson the opportunity to rephrase it. I am not going to debate it any further but, at this point, the Prime Minister does not need to answer that question, because it is outside the standing orders. I will give the member for Watson the opportunity or we can move to the next question, if he wishes, and we will give him time to rephrase it.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to rephrase and I would ask, before we get further into question time, that you reflect on page 555 of practice, which carries the specific reference that I referred to in my point of order.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay. I would ask the member for Watson to—

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's statement in this House that once he became aware that it was a Liberal badged event he withdrew. I also refer to the Prime Minister's media release, of 10 February, which announced the appointment of Dyson Heydon. I also refer to the invitation the Prime Minister was referring to in his previous answer, which states, 'I am the chair of one of the— (Time expired)

Opposition members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not going to take interjections from my left. The member for Watson can resume his seat. The time limits on questions and answers are not advisory.

Mr Stephen Jones interjecting—

The member for Throsby will not reflect on the chair. The member for Throsby is warned. I am going to move to the next question and then we will come back to the member for Watson, should he wish to rephrase it within the time limit. I call the member for Deakin.