Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion of censure against the Minister for Human Services and the Prime Minister.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition from moving the following motion forthwith—

That the House:

(1)notes—

(a)that the Minister for Human Services provided assistance to Nimrod Resources during a trip to China in August 2014;

(b)that the Minister for Human Services has already admitted to the House that he was travelling in a personal capacity when he assisted Nimrod Resources during his trip to China;

(c)therefore the minister's own actions were a direct breach of clause 2.20 of the Prime Minister's own statement of ministerial standards;

(d)the principal of Nimrod Resources has donated more than $2 million to the Liberal Party in the past two financial years;

(e)the Prime Minister has a choice between getting rid of his minister or getting rid of his own ministerial standards and he has been unable to make that choice; and

(2)censures the Minister for Human Services for failing to resign for his clear breach of ministerial standards; and

(3)censures the Prime Minister for his inability to sack the Minister for Human Services for a clear breach of the Prime Minister's own statement of ministerial standards.

This Prime Minister set one standard for the minister for cities and he is setting a lower standard for his own backer, Stuart Robert. This is wrong that the Prime Minister is in any way deferring the issue. The Prime Minister stands here in a lofty manner, patronising the nation and says, 'Oh, we've got to go through the Parkinson process.' What is it that this Prime Minister does not understand about ministerial responsibility? It beggars belief that this minister, travelling to China in a personal capacity, accidentally turns up at a signing ceremony. What are the odds of that?

Then we have this hapless traveller, this Stuart Robert, wandering around—

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

The Leader of the Opposition will refer to members by their correct titles.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have the hapless Minister for Human Services wandering around in China. Not only does he fortuitously meet the donor, Paul Marks, which is fantastic, 'What a surprise meeting you here,' but then he happens to stumble across a signing ceremony in his personal capacity. Then, glory be, he has a meeting with the Vice Minister for Land and Resources. He should buy a TattsLotto ticket he is that lucky on his travels.

In fact it is a much more serious issue. The divisions of this government have been revealed for all to see. When the minister for cities had his particular difficulty, I have no doubt that this Prime Minister moved harshly and quickly. That is what he does to the people he does not like. But Mr Robert, the Minister for Human Services, is in a different category. He is one of the Treasurer's great allies. He is one of the great fund raisers of the Liberal Party. When we see the money talking we do not see Mr Robert walking.

It is now up to the Prime Minister to make a decision. We heard his argument about due process. We heard him talk about it. What is it that this Prime Minister does not understand about the prima facie breach? What is it? This person was not in an official capacity in China; he was in a personal capacity. What was his explanation to be standing alongside a $2-million donor to the Liberal Party. In China they have a great respect for office, even respect for current Liberal government ministers no matter how misplaced that may be. The point about all this is, what is he doing, authorising, embracing, endorsing, attesting and attending a signing ceremony of a major deal? Did that Chinese minister think he was just having a chat to citizen Robert of Australia or was he under the misapprehension that this man was a minister in the government?

We have asked the Prime Minister to act. What he has done is contracted out his leadership to Martin Parkinson. Martin Parkinson must be so happy to be back working for the Liberal government. He got run out of town by one bunch in this government, now he has been brought back in to carry out the nightsoil for this current Prime Minister.

The real issue here is that we see the division in the government now.

Mr Fletcher interjecting—

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

The Minister for Territories, Local Government and Major Projects will cease interjecting.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, mate, we have material right up to the election. Now we see the government clearing the way. They will either sack the minister or they will sack their ministerial standards. You cannot have both. The real issue happening here as well is that Prime Minister Turnbull always has an excuse. It is always someone else's fault. In this case my prediction is that, if Minister Robert does not go as he should, they are going to blame the member for Warringah. In this case, whilst I disagree with many of the things the former Prime Minister did in government, I do not believe he was told the full truth by the Minister for Human Services.

We know that a letter was written requesting leave on 28 July. Of course, when you are going to have a holiday in your personal capacity to Dubrovnik, to Israel, to China and you are going in August, most Australians take six months to get the special cheap airfares. Not this minister. He said he paid for it all on his own. He issued a leave application on 28 July for a holiday travelling to three continents during the following two weeks, fortuitously. But did this minister put into his leave application what he was going to be doing in those countries?

If you are going waterskiing or just catching up with old buddies, I guess you do not have to. But, when you are a minister in a government, a defence minister in a government, and you are going to visit China and meet with Chinese leaders and help endorse some wannabe trade minister doing deals with major Liberal Party donors—did he tell the member for Warringah, or his office, who he was meeting with? I do not actually think that if the member for Warringah had had the full information in front of him he would have authorised this leave. But that is not good enough for Prime Minister Turnbull. Prime Minister Turnbull just wants this issue to go away. He would like to save one of his cash cows and his donors. He would like to save Minister Robert, because he did vote for him in the leadership ballot. But what he is doing is letting his loyalty to some people overwhelm his obligation to the nation. You got Tony Abbott once. We on this side are not going to let you get him again by blaming him for something which you know—

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

The Leader of the Opposition will refer to members by their correct title.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Warringah, the former Prime Minister, Prime Minister Turnbull's predecessor—call him what you want—should not be hung out to dry because you will not act on Minister Robert because you need that hopeless Treasurer to keep backing up your machine. We know exactly what is going on.

Furthermore, when we look at this issue, why we should be censuring this minister and censuring this Prime Minister is because he has double standards: he says one thing and does another.

Mr Mitchell interjecting—

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

The member for McEwen has been warned.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have no doubt that, when he looks at this issue, he knows. Were there notes kept by the Chinese government? DFAT says that there were. Has he requested them? Has he bothered to investigate the Defence protocols that were outlined by the member for Isaacs in question time and not answered by the Minister for Human Services? You cannot, when you are a defence minister, even in your own time, frolic to foreign countries carrying particular technology and not even notify. What is going on in this Liberal government when you are having your ministers travel around the world, in their own capacity, doing their own deals?

The government of Australia and the ministers of Australia are not valets for donors to the Liberal Party, opening doors and closing doors. I mean, what was he doing there? Does he have the interesting hobby of watching big deals being signed and he just likes to turn up? Is it an affectation? And we do want to know who paid his airfare, how he travelled around and what equipment from the Australian government he took.

I cannot believe that this issue has gone on for the last number of days. Whilst the Prime Minister has a wry grin, most of his backbench cannot believe that he is still letting this issue drag on. I do not expect the Minister for Human Services to be here on the front bench when parliament resumes. The only thing stopping this Prime Minister now is his own arrogance. Because he is Prime Minister Turnbull, the smartest man in the room, no-one can tell him the truth in front of his nose because he does not like to hear it if it is not his own idea. Well, we have news for this Prime Minister: we are going to make sure we persist on this issue. This minister has been acting in a private capacity with a major Liberal Party donor, attending meetings with the Chinese government—signing ceremonies! Why on earth didn't he just do it as part of his job? I am sure some of you are asking that question. There is something far more distinctly unusual about this arrangement than even what we have got to the bottom of so far. This minister should go. He should go now.

This Prime Minister should stop contracting out to Dr Martin Parkinson, the highest ranking public servant in the land. He should just do his day job. This Prime Minister has been saying he is going to do this and that and move all the chess pieces around and be the master of it all. The truth of the matter is this: you could have dealt with this issue on the Thursday when this issue came up. The fiction of this Prime Minister acting decisively is this: he only asked Martin Parkinson to do an inquiry at 1.58, two minutes before question time. I can bet that, if you are a foe of Malcolm Turnbull's in the Liberal Party, when he saw that press story at 6.30 that morning he would have been on the phone saying, 'We must investigate this matter and we must deal with it.' It is not good enough. You need to do better. You know that your government is drifting on a range of policy areas and tax— (Time expired)

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

Is the motion seconded?

Mr Whiteley interjecting—

The member for Braddon is warned.

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

I second the motion. It is not often you get something in this parliament that is as cut and dried as this.

Mr Sukkar interjecting—

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

The member for Deakin is warned.

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

There is a clear prohibition, a blanket ban, on ministers acting in any way to assist a private company for business. Section 2.20 of the code of conduct is absolutely clear on this. We had a situation at the beginning of this where the Prime Minister said he needed to investigate. The investigation was made clear the moment this minister came to the dispatch box for the first time, because what he provided was the confession. He said to the parliament, 'Yes, I was there in a personal capacity.' That is it. That is the breach. You do not need anything more than that. The only thing they could possibly be investigating is whether or not he lied to the parliament when he said that—in which case he should go for misleading the parliament. No matter which way you look at it, from the moment the Minister for Human Services came to the dispatch box and said he was there in a personal capacity the issue was over.

When he did so in opposition, he was not under the ministerial code of conduct. There will be backbenchers over there who will help different businesses in their electorate—and they are allowed to do it. But, when you are a minister, you are always representing Australia. As a minister in the Australian government, you do not have the right to say, 'This bit's just for the donor; I'll take the hat off,' and then go out to a foreign government and think, 'Maybe they won't notice I'm here as a private citizen.' Does he really think he is such a genius that the company wanted him there because of the glory of the private citizen named Stuart Robert? Or did they want to have a representative of the Australian government in the room because it would be to their advantage?

There will be many occasions when ministers quite properly assist companies. We paid tribute today to the Minister for Trade, who is regularly on trade delegations helping companies. He does so in an official capacity. He does so representing Australia. You cannot do it on the basis that you do not tell the Department of Foreign Affairs that you are helping a company. You cannot do it on the basis of, 'This business has been good to me, so maybe I'll get away with it.' When you take on a position as part of the executive, whether as a minister or a parliamentary secretary, you take on a responsibility and you do not just get to look after the donors to your campaigns. You have a responsibility that, whatever you do, you do on behalf of this nation. That is why 2.20 exists. That is why successive Prime Ministers have made sure that that clause goes into the code of conduct—because we cannot have a situation, particularly in Defence of all portfolios, where someone goes off to a foreign government and the foreign government knows that there is an Australian minister present but the Australian government does not, where the government of China comes out of the meeting with detailed notes and the department of foreign affairs in Australia has no idea that the meeting ever occurred. This is why we have a statement of ministerial responsibility. The entire reason for a code goes to these sorts of issues.

The Prime Minister has a really simple choice. One of two things has to go: either the code goes or that minister goes. There is no way of keeping both. The minister has responded by treating this parliament with absolute contempt. When he is given a question and is told, 'By the way, the answer to this was not in your statement,' he thinks it oh so clever to say, 'I refer you to my statement.' We know it is not there. He is simply treating the parliament with absolute contempt.

Prime Minister, if you remain indecisive, if you think this minister is going to keep hanging around, do not think the issue will go away. We have already seen Senator Sinodinos start to muse on the possibility that your predecessor, the previous Prime Minister, might have given the authority for this. Have no doubt, if you want to run the argument that you are going to keep the minister by throwing your predecessor under a bus, it will not just be people on this side who will be outraged, it will not be just people in the Australian public who will feel a level of contempt; people on your side, Prime Minister, know exactly that you are setting a different set of rules— (Time expired)

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

Standing orders should not be suspended because the government will not be lectured on standards by the Leader of the Opposition and the Australian Labor Party. We will not be lectured by the Leader of the Opposition and the Australian Labor Party on standards.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

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

I remind all members that warnings carry over after question time.

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

It is a remarkable thing that, when looking in the mirror today practising his lines, the Leader of the Opposition did not realise that this is the party of Eddie Obeid and Joe Tripodi. This is the party of Craig Thomson and Clean Event. This is the party that seeks to come into this House and lecture this government about standards. We had six years of the most dysfunctional government in the history of Australia after the Whitlam government. In 40 years they managed to break every record for chaos and dysfunction. They were the most divided rabble we have ever seen. Some of them are still there seeking to get back onto the government benches. I have heard a statistic that I find utterly remarkable. There were as many ministers in the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments, in less than six years, as in the entire period of the Howard government of 11½ years.

Opposition members interjecting—

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

The member for Gellibrand and the member for Charlton are warned!

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

So for less than half of the time that they were in government they had exactly the same number of people who held executive office. They were an absolute disgrace. In six years they had two Prime Ministers, three Deputy Prime Ministers, five ministers responsible for regional development, six ministers for small business and nine ministers for education—I was the shadow to seven of them. They made 11 changes to ministerial arrangements, involving 20 parliamentary secretaries and 48 ministers—

Mr Brendan O'Connor interjecting—

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

The member for Gorton is warned.

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

with over 100 different ministerial titles. They were an international laughing stock. In the first Rudd government Joel Fitzgibbon, who is still here, resigned. In the Gillard government, Kevin Rudd, Richard Marles, Chris Bowen, Martin Ferguson and Kim Carr all resigned. Simon Crean should have resigned, but he was sacked. In the second Rudd government—in that short interregnum, which was shorter than Napoleon's return to France—Wayne Swan resigned, Greg Combet resigned, Craig Emerson resigned, Peter Garrett resigned—

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

The Leader of the House will refer to members by their correct titles.

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

Stephen Conroy resigned and Joe Ludwig resigned. These are the people who come into this place and lecture us about ministerial standards. We all know what is happening here. The idea of being lectured by the Labor Party on standards is like Dean Martin lecturing people on alcohol abuse, and we are not going to take it. We all know what is going on here.

Labor are practising the old politics that they have always managed to get away with. They are quite good at old politics. They are practising old politics and this government is getting on with new politics. The Labor Party need to get back to their electorates and they need to talk to voters because what voters want is governments and opposition being constructive about creating jobs and growth in the economy. That is what they want. They are sick of the six years of Labor Party abuse of government. They are sick of the shouting, particularly the shouting over there, Mr Speaker—

Mr Conroy interjecting—

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

The member for Charlton will cease interjecting.

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

They are not too bright, Mr Speaker. They are very sick of the shouting from the Labor Party, practising old politics. Late last year Labor invested a tremendous amount of political capital in attacking the member for Fisher.

Opposition members interjecting—

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

The members for Gellibrand and Charlton will not interject again.

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

After that period of time their polling figures got worse: the Leader of the Opposition went backwards in the polls and their party's standing went backwards in the polls. You would have thought it would have been a message to the opposition that that strategy was not working.

Opposition members interjecting—

They are very shouty today, Mr Speaker. They know it is because the Leader of the Opposition is swinging in the breeze.

Mr Conroy interjecting—

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

The member for Charlton will leave under standing order 94(a).

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

We all know what is happening here. This is a desperate attempt to distract the Australian public from the fact that this government has the plan and the policies to create jobs and growth—

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

The member for Charlton will leave immediately.

The member for Charlton then left the chamber.

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

not just in innovation, which I am responsible for—industry, innovation and science—

Mr Mitchell interjecting—

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

The member for McEwen will not interject again if he wishes to remain in the chamber.

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

the National Innovation and Science Agenda—but in trade, as we heard with the outgoing minister for trade with the four trade agreements that he has settled that are opening up our economy, and in agriculture, which is booming, not just because of the minister for agriculture but also because of the government getting out of the way of business and farmers and encouraging their businesses to grow.

We are, through the actions of the Treasurer and other ministers, helping the economy to transform and to transition from the construction phase of the mining boom to the creation phase of the mining boom. These are the actions that we are getting on with as a government, because we know they will create jobs and growth. The Australian public knows it too. That is why the Australian public rewards me when I return to my electorate of Sturt and they tell me that they like the fact that the government is getting on with the things that matter. They give a big tick to people who are helping us to do that.

It has been quite instructive how the Greens are doing so much better in the current political climate because they are practising new politics and they are working with the government to try to bring about things like multinational tax reform and the duties on the heavy vehicle fuel excise—things like that which we did late last year. These are the changes that the Greens know are changing the economy, and the public is grateful for their engagement with the government. It is certainly passing strange that the Greens have become—

Ms Ryan interjecting—

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

The member for Lalor is warned.

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

more economically credible than the Labor Party, but they have. They have become more economically credible than the Labor Party. All Bill Shorten, Leader of the Opposition, has now is another distraction from the real issues of the day: jobs and growth. His own side knows it. His own side knows there is a hole in the heart of the Leader of the Opposition's case, because his case all week has been that the member for Wentworth should sack the Minister for Human Services.

On the other hand, the member for Isaacs has spent the week demanding that the Minister for Human Services be investigated by the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and that the Minister for Human Services cooperate with that investigation. Both of those things cannot be true. They cannot both work. Either he should be investigated, there should be due process and the Prime Minister should receive a report to which he should respond, or apparently—in the world of the Leader of the Opposition—there should be a knee-jerk reaction to these stories and a minister should be instantaneously sacked.

There is no consistency in the Leader of the Opposition's approach. It is because the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition have not done the serious policy work needed to present as an alternative government at the coming election this year. They believed for months that they would be able to coast into government on the back of a GST, with a not-very-scary scare campaign. Yet again, they did nothing to do the policy work necessary to prepare for government and give the Australian public the confidence to support them. They did none of those things.

Yet again, they have been found wanting. There will not be a goods and services tax increase. Their not-very-scary scare campaign has fallen flat. Yet they have spent six months wasting their time supporting the Leader of the Opposition on a campaign against a tax that the government was never committed to and the government never mentioned. We tried to help them time and time again. Whether it was the member for Warringah, the member for Wentworth or the Treasurer, we said over and over again that there was no policy to introduce a goods and services tax increase but we were happy to have a national conversation. Labor spent six months wasting time talking about a tax increase that is not going to be introduced. As a consequence, we have this distraction today, we have had this distraction this week. We have had the same distractions with the member for Fisher. Labor is going backwards in the polls and the public does not support them.

The standing orders should not be suspended. The government will not be stopping our program for another political stunt.

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

The question is that the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition be agreed to.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.