Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. I refer to the minister's previous answer in which he claimed he had declared his interest in Jam Land according to the rules. How does the minister explain an FOI decision by his department on 23 August 2019 and the answer given to a question on notice from his department also dated August 2019 which states it has no record of any declaration by the minister?

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

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

I will just hear from the Leader of the House on this—

Mr Albanese interjecting—

The Leader of the House is entitled to raise a point of order, I say to the Leader of the Opposition. The Manager of Opposition Business does so regularly without being admonished.

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

I will wait until you finish.

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

I don't know who your conversation is with but until it stops I am not going to hear from the Leader of the House.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think it's with his conscience.

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

I think I better call the Leader of the House.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's with respect to the well-known exception to the rule in 98C relating to statements made by ministers that may have occurred previously, which questions can be asked in relation to. But it appears the question is in relation to an FOI statement, which is not a statement of the minister made previously and therefore would be out of order.

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

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

The member for Isaacs is interjecting regularly, is particularly loud. You're injuring my left ear. I'd prefer you didn't interject but if you have to, maybe the whip will assign you another seat where you're less provocative. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.

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

The question at the start refers to a specific statement that the minister has made to the House. The reference to the FOI points to that statement being untrue, so it is completely appropriate that a minister is able to be asked. It's not like we've simply said 'refer to previous answers' in the general. We have gone specifically to a claim he made that is contradicted by a decision of his department.

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

Can I hear the question again? I thank the member for Griffith.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. I refer to the minister's previous answer in which he claimed he declared his interest in Jam Land according to the rules. How does the minister explain an FOI decision by his department on 23 August 2019 and the answer to a question on notice from his department also dated August 2019 which stated it has no record of any declaration by the minister?

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

I will just hear from the Leader of the House again.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister's previous statement is with respect to the standard disclosure that he, like all of us, is required to do as a member of parliament. At the very least, what the question does is contain an inference about a statement made by a department, which, by the way, is not the minister's department. But, with respect to a standard which all of us are required to submit to, in that sense, the question is clearly out of order.

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

The Manager of Opposition Business just briefly.

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

With respect to the issue of the declaration, we're referring to a specific statement that the minister made in the House, not to the declaration—that's separate to that. With respect to the department, I'd simply draw the Leader of the House's attention to the fact that it is the minister's department that has made this decision.

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

I'll rule on this now so that we can—

An honourable member interjecting—

Whoever that was, you're not being helpful. I take the point the Leader of the House is making but, given the linkage to the minister's previous answer, I will allow the question, and obviously he can answer it in the way he sees fit, given what he has said in his previous answer. The minister has the call.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I've been clear that my indirect interest in the Delegate farm is declared to the parliament in accordance with the rules. I've always been clear that the discussions with the department were to focus on the technical aspects of the revised listing, and they did. I advised the then minister of the compliance matter and of the need to avoid any discussion of the matter. The department confirmed at a Senate hearing that this approach was completely appropriate. Let's be clear: I declared my interest, the department already knew of the relationship and the meeting didn't discuss the compliance matter.

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

The member for Ryan has the call.