Cathy McGowan (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, what would it take for this parliament to establish a National Integrity Commission? Over the past fortnight, the opposition and the government have been arguing about integrity, transparency and accountability. Will the Prime Minister commit to a National Integrity Commission to investigate and expose corruption and misconduct, particularly in Australia, and would it happen in this term?

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

I thank the member for Indi for her question, and I want to acknowledge her very keen interest in this issue. Integrity and transparency, as we have been discussing, are absolutely vital to ensure that we maintain and enhance trust in our democratic system. That is exactly why we have announced the reforms in respect of foreign interference and foreign political donations today.

Australia is consistently ranked by Transparency International as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, because we have—and I'm sure I speak for all honourable members—zero tolerance of corruption. But what we need to do, of course, is to live up to that, and the test now is with the Labor Party in respect of Senator Dastyari. You don't need an Integrity Commission to tell you that what Senator Dastyari did was wrong. You don't need an Integrity Commission—and I'm not contesting the merits of what the honourable member is saying—to tell you that every day the Leader of the Opposition leaves Senator Dastyari in the Labor caucus is a day the Labor Party demonstrates its unfitness to lead.

The establishment of a National Integrity Commission would not necessarily better guarantee protection against corruption. A National Integrity Commission, depending on how it was designed, could add some benefits, but it is something that would need to be considered with great care. Over the years I have been very sceptical about some of these commissions. As we all know, some of them have done better than others. It's been a pretty patchy performance. We have a very robust multi-agency approach, and what we have, of course, is: the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security that has the powers of a royal commission, the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity for particular importance, and the AFP's own Fraud and Anti-Corruption Centre. We are very focused on ensuring that government governance, whether it's the Public Service, agencies or politicians, is absolutely held to account and there is zero tolerance for corruption.

There has recently been a Senate Select Committee on a National Integrity Commission. I notice that it didn't recommend the establishment of one but, nonetheless, its recommendations are being very carefully considered by the government. We absolutely have the same objective: zero corruption and zero tolerance for corruption. We have many agencies that are working on it, and I will always look forward to working with and speaking with the honourable member to see how we can ensure that our zero tolerance for corruption is all better and better carried out into action.

Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry, representing the Minister for Defence. Will the minister outline to the House why it is important to have a strong, consistent and considered approach to matters of national security? Indeed, what are the risks for young players when they fail to exercise good judgement on matters of national security?

Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting—

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

The member for McEwen is warned.

Mr Tim Wilson interjecting—

The member for Goldstein's also warned.

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

I thank the member for Canning for his question. Every member and senator is expected to act in Australia's national interests at all times. The member for Corio, as the shadow minister for defence, obviously gets this. Not long ago on Neil Mitchell's program, on Thursday, 30 November, when being asked about Senator Dastyari's behaviour over the South China Sea, he said, 'There's essentially a bipartisan position in relation to the South China Sea, so obviously I do think a contrary position to that is against the national interest.' So the member for Corio gets it—as he buries his head in his papers!—but not necessarily so much Labor's candidate for Bennelong.

Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting—

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

The member for McEwen has been warned.

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

When Senator Dastyari was discovered to have had his personal expenses paid by TOP Education Institute—$1,600, in fact, of his personal expenses paid—the advice of Labor's candidate for Bennelong, Kristina Keneally, to Senator Dastyari was to 'fudge it'. She was asked about it on Australian Story. She said: 'I remember asking him, why did you do this? Like, how are you going to explain this? Why did you do this?' And he said, 'Because I didn't want to pay the bill,' to which she said: 'Well, you can't say that. Don't say that.' What did she expect Senator Dastyari to actually say—that the dog ate his homework or that the tram got a flat tyre? She was advising him to do what exactly? Not to tell the truth. That is what Kristina Keneally was advising Senator Dastyari to do. She was advising him to fudge the issue, to come up with some other kind of excuse. She didn't realise the gravity of the situation that Senator Dastyari found himself in. Having had his personal expenses paid, being compromised by a company with links to the Chinese government, he then changed Labor's policy, for which he suffered a sanction, and then he warned another Chinese donor about how to avoid being surveyed by ASIO or any other government agencies.

What is it about New South Wales Labor that they don't get how to behave, don't get what the boundaries are for members of parliament and putative ministers? Eddie Obeid crowned Kristina Keneally as the Premier of New South Wales. Senator Dastyari anointed the Leader of the Opposition as the leader of the Labor Party. Why couldn't the Leader of the Opposition win a clean fight? Why did he have to have Senator Dastyari rorting the ballot for the ALP leadership? Why were those 50 votes sent from private homes to Senator Dastyari's office? Who voted for those people? There needs to be an investigation into this, and we will not rest until the Leader of the Opposition orders New South Wales Labor to have an investigation. (Time expired)