Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Improving integrity and good governance was a major election commitment of the Albanese Labor government. This was rightly one of the Australian people's top priorities at the last federal election, and, if I can say so, your appointment to your position, Mr Speaker, has helped us get back on track.

I've spent quite some time in this place talking about the need after the last decade for us to rebuild the ethical infrastructure of our nation, and that is what we are getting onto. It's been obvious that this is required. It's been incredibly clear that our trajectory as a country has not been good enough in recent years. Our international reputation was, in the past, one of having robust institutions, the rule of law and integrity. But, particularly in the last decade, that has been backsliding against many metrics. So, this is not a partisan point.

Let's hear what the different organisations have had to say. We've seen this backsliding in the past decade. Between 2012 and 2018 Australia slid to 13th place in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, which measures trust in government. A 2018 Australia Institute report calculated that perceptions of growing corruption in Australia shaved four per cent off our GDP because of the hit to business confidence. That had a real cost to us—a massive $72 billion. But over the past decade it got worse. Between 2018 and 2021 Australia dropped by five more slots to reach 18th place in the Corruption Perceptions Index. This picture is even more abysmal when you add it to the result of the 2022 Edelman Trust Barometer, which found that trust in government declined precipitously in 2021. I don't need to remind honourable members here of many of the reasons for that. The study found that politics had become viewed by Australians as a dividing force.

Yesterday the member for Kennedy mentioned that he was once part of a fascist government that locked people up for protesting. Well, 61 per cent of Australians responding to the study I just mentioned reported in 2021 feeling unable to have civil debates about points they disagree with. As members know, the culture of this place is often seen as a bellwether of the broader social malaise of distrust. That is why there was such an urgent need for action when our government came to office. That is also why we quickly moved to implement our commitment to legislate a powerful, transparent and independent National Anti-Corruption Commission, the NACC Act, which passed both houses of parliament in November. Our government is also reforming whistleblower protection through the Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022. This is all part of our commitment to the Australian people to restore trust and integrity to government.

Today we continue to consider a piece of legislation to increase transparency that many of us never thought we would need. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 that is before us will implement reforms that foster greater transparency and accountability in our system of government. This bill responds to the revelations that Australians learned about in August last year that their former Prime Minister, the member for Cook, had secretly sworn himself into five extra portfolios that were already occupied by his own ministers in 2020 and 2021, so that in addition to being appointed to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet the former Prime Minister was invested with the power to administer the departments of: health; finance; industry, science, energy and resources; the Treasury; and home affairs. The news of these secret appointments shocked many Australians and also shocked many around the world. It goes without saying that it also shocked many members on all sides of this parliament when it came to light, except for a select few in the former Prime Minister's circle.

This was an issue that truly cut across political lines. Of these multiple portfolios, former Prime Minister John Howard said:

I don't think he should have done that, I don't think there was any need to do it, and I wouldn't have.

The next coalition Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, said:

I'm just not going to defend what was done … it is just highly unconventional, highly unorthodox, and shouldn't have happened.

The next coalition PM, Malcolm Turnbull, said:

This is sinister stuff. This is secret government.

And:

This is one of the most appalling things I have ever heard in our federal government. I mean, the idea that a prime minister would be sworn into other ministries, secretly, is incredible.

It was in this context of widespread and bipartisan shock that the government acted to prevent this ever happening again. Our government referred these matters to the Solicitor-General, Dr Stephen Donaghue KC. As was clear from his advice, 'the principles of responsible government are fundamentally undermined by the actions of the former government.' And many who still sit on the benches opposite us today were part of the government that allowed this culture, this behaviour, to happen. In his advice, the Solicitor-General noted:

The Governor-General has no discretion to refuse to accept the Prime Minister's advice in relation to such an appointment.

But, while the Solicitor-General advised that Prime Minister Scott Morrison, the member for Cook, had acted lawfully and in accordance with the Constitution, he did so only because the current rules did not require notification of such an appointment to be valid. That's obviously an omission that, we learned, can be misused to undermine transparency in federal parliament, at the very least, and to accumulate power in too few hands, at the worst.

Following the Solicitor-General's advice, it was also clear that an appropriate and swift inquiry was needed, so, on 26 August last year, the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General announced the appointment of former High Court Justice the Hon. Virginia Bell AC to lead the Inquiry into the Appointment of the Former Prime Minister to Administer Multiple Departments. The report was provided to our government on 25 November last year and has been published online. This is an outstanding, incisive report that goes to the core of this unfortunate story in vivid detail. Thanks to the report, we know, for example, that Mr Frydenberg, the then Treasurer, was not informed of the then Prime Minister's appointment to administer the Department of the Treasury. The report draws on firsthand interviews with parliamentarians and officials involved in this case. This inquiry was not about the politics but about how this happened, why it happened and who knew about it.

The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 forms one part, an important part, of our government's response to Ms Bell's recommendations. In response, the bill will require the Official Secretary to the Governor-General to publish a notifiable instrument, registered on the Federal Register of Legislation as soon as reasonably practicable, that the Governor-General has chosen, summoned and sworn an executive councillor to the Federal Executive Council, appointed an officer to administer a department of state or directed a minister of state to hold an office. It will also require notification when any of these positions are revoked. The notifiable instrument will include the name of the person, so we understand who is being sworn, the department of state and the date on which they were sworn, appointed or directed. In the case of revocations, the notifiable instrument must include the name of the person, the name of the former office and the date that such membership, appointment or direction was revoked.

This bill demonstrates the government's readiness to act promptly to restore the Australian people's confidence in our federal system of government and to rebuild integrity in public sector institutions, processes and officials. Transparency in government processes is not a 'nice to have'; it is essential, because our system of parliamentary democracy relies on conventions and checks and balances. As the Solicitor-General concluded:

… it is impossible for the parliament to hold ministers to account for the administration of departments if it does not know which ministers are responsible for which departments.

It's pretty simple stuff: we need to know who is responsible for the discharge of what responsibilities.

The measures in this bill will go some way towards providing greater integrity and transparency around the process of appointing elected officials to high office, especially towards ensuring we have a system of government where one person cannot again garner powers without adequate accountability to the Australian people and the Australian parliament. It will ensure the Australian people are able to access information relating to the composition of the Federal Executive Council, those appointed to administer certain departments of state and the high offices that ministers of state hold. This is a technical change, an important change with positive and long-term implications for our democracy.

Like the American experiment, the Australian project relies for its legitimacy, in the eyes of the people, on a raft of rules, principles and conventions that are not necessarily laws. In this case, the convention was that the members of the executive could not legitimately accrue more power without their own parliamentary colleagues and, of course, the public knowing about it. Our system of government had until now assumed this norm to be widely understood and to not need any specific act of parliament to enshrine it in law. Unfortunately, through the actions of the former Prime Minister and his inner circle who were aware of this, we have learned that we can no longer assume anything.

I wish there had been no need for this bill—obviously, everyone does—but there clearly is a need, so I commend this bill to the House and welcome this reform that will strengthen transparency and good governance, no matter the government of the day. Crucially, this bill will also help to restore citizens' trust in government from the dangerously low levels we have seen. Earlier in my contribution I went through that slide in trust in government that we've seen in the last decade.

This bill will contribute to making our democracy stronger by shedding light on ministerial and other high-level appointments. In a mature democracy like ours, this shouldn't be optional; it should be law. This bill makes sure that it is law, and it joins with our other measures to start rebuilding the ethical infrastructure of our great nation. That's what the Australian people expect of all of us, so I call on all sides of government—all parties, all Independents—to support this bill.

Peta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Imagine, if you will, being the Prime Minister of Australia in early 2020. As the Prime Minister, you had recently won a hard-fought election—so hard-fought that even your own description of that win was that it was a miracle. You are part of a party that, over the last 20 years of Australian federal democracy, had been in power, with its coalition partner, for some 13 years. But over those last two decades, public trust in government had fallen alarmingly. In fact, by December 2019, not all that long after the miracle election win, trust in government had fallen to its lowest level on record in Australia, with one in four Australians telling the ANU Australian Election Study that they had lost confidence in political leaders and institutions.

That same study found that Australians' satisfaction with democracy was only just higher than that recorded in 1979, just a few years after the one and only constitutional crisis that we'd ever had in this country. In fact, satisfaction with how democracy was working in December of 2019 was at 59 per cent, having fallen from 87 per cent in 2007. You're the Prime Minister at a time when Professor McAllister from the ANU, conducting the Australian Election Study, said:

… the findings were a clear warning the nation's politicians needed to do better in their efforts to represent and win the confidence of everyday Australians.

That's the context in which you're the Prime Minister in early 2020. You've just perhaps started to recover from the public outrage over the fact that you were overseas on holiday while vast tracts of the country were burning, and now you're faced with a global health crisis and no-one really knows how that will play out, apart from seriously frightening and dire predictions—some of which are already manifesting—of previously unimaginable levels of death not just around the globe in other countries but here in our country. And you know, as do other leaders in this country, that we're going to have to take unprecedented steps to deal with this international health crisis, this global pandemic. You don't necessarily know what they all are, but it's clear that serious, unprecedented steps are going to have to be taken: actions that, on anyone's account, will absolutely require citizens to have confidence and faith in their governments to support the people and the governments that will necessarily be implementing restrictions on their lives that they never imagined they were going to have to face.

We know that the power of government relies on the citizens supporting the democratic system that gives government power to do the everyday mundane things, let alone the extraordinary things that are required in a time of crisis. But then you're the Prime Minister who discovers that you, personally, don't actually have the legislative power to exercise some of those extraordinary powers—it's the health minister who does. So what do you do in all of those circumstances?

Imagine that you are that person with the crisis in confidence, the global health crisis, the clear need to make sure that Australians understand what is happening and trust that the measures that are going to be put in place are being put in place for the best reasons—to protect them, their families and their communities—and one of the most senior and experienced people in your cabinet has the legislative power to put in place some of those measures. As a reasonable, rational person who is in politics and government in order to make life better for Australian citizens, what do you do in those circumstances?

What would you do where a crisis of trust in government was about to intersect with a crisis of life and livelihood, which at that time, in March of 2020, also had the potential to wreak havoc on the systems and the way of life that we all value? We know what the Prime Minister at the time did. He secretly assumed the powers of the health minister and thought that the best way to take the Australian people with him was to not tell them what he was doing; it was to take an extraordinary step that no Prime Minister had ever taken before of giving himself powers—extraordinary powers—but not tell anyone that he had done it.

Is that what you would have done if you were the person responsible at that time? Would you want to go down in history as giving powers to yourself in secret? Would you want to be compared to Trump and others around the globe who took power for the sake of power, not power for the sake of delivering for other people? Or would you perhaps have said to the Australian people in this extraordinary time: 'Extraordinary measures will need to be taken. Standing next to me is the minister with the powers to do it, and you can absolutely be assured that, as Prime Minister, I will be in the room at all times when decisions are made'?

I don't know about anyone else—well, I know about one person, because he didn't take this path—but I think that's how you start to rebuild trust in democracy and institutions in this country. You are transparent, you are honest, you execute the powers that are given to you by legislation and the Constitution. And, if you have to do something that has never been done in the history of our democracy before, you tell the Australian people what you are doing and why you are doing.

Is it any wonder that by December 2019 a vast number of Australians didn't think that their government governed for them? As it turned out, they didn't even know what their Prime Minister was doing. But other cabinet members knew about that decision to take on the health minister's power. Whilst much of the discussion and debate about the then Prime Minister's secret power grab of—how many portfolios?—five different portfolios is focused on the Prime Minister, let's not forget that the first transfer or adoption of power in relation to the health minister was kept secret from the Australian people and from this parliament but not from other members of that cabinet. There was more than one person who thought it was a good idea to keep secrets from the Australian people when they were governing, and governing in a crisis.

Are they the sort of members of this parliament that anyone wants to see back in charge of the levers of power if that's how they thought they should be exercised? The clear answer to that from the Australian people at the last federal election was no, without even knowing about one of the most inexplicable actions that a Prime Minister has ever taken, and that even he has not been able to explain in any coherent way at any time to his colleagues, let alone the Australian people. We are now seeing the consequence playing out in New South Wales, with court cases having to be taken because decisions were made exercising secret powers that the Australian people and the minister responsible didn't even know about. It's worse than that, actually. The Australian people were told those powers were exercised under prime ministerial authority, when they weren't.

This piece of legislation, which surely no-one ever contemplated should be needed in this country, goes towards dealing with that embarrassing undermining of democracy episode in Australia's history. I personally think it's inconceivable that it could ever happen again, even without this legislation. Surely we couldn't have another prime minister or another cabinet willing to accept this sort of behaviour, but this piece of legislation will ensure it—because honestly we didn't imagine it would happen in the first place, so who knows what they would do if they ever got their hands on the levers of power again.

The crisis in democracy can be dealt with. In fact during COVID we saw, for a brief period of time, Australians starting to believe in democracy and in their leaders again because they did see, publicly, difficult decisions being made in order to save lives, in order to save businesses and in order to save the economy. But it can't be restored unless everyone in this chamber, everyone involved in politics and everyone who cares about democracy, parliament and government are equally committed to restoring it.

I'm proud, as is everyone on this side of the chamber, to be part of a government that went to an election saying that integrity has to be restored and we want to be the government that does the hard work to start to do that. As my colleague the member for Solomon said before me, and I'm sure others have said in this debate, we are proud of this legislation, along with the National Anti-Corruption Commission—the way in which this government is putting in place proper guidelines for how funding should be delivered to organisations, the commitment to a code of conduct, the commitment to conducting ourselves as professional adults whose every action and decision is about making lives better for the people we represent—and we are committed to that.

I commend this bill, and I ask everyone to imagine what they would have done in March 2020. If you come to the conclusion that it couldn't have been what the then Prime Minister did, admit that publicly, because there are too many people in this chamber who still want to be apologetic for Trumpish behaviour that has no place in Australia's democracy.

Jerome Laxale (Bennelong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Member for Dunkley for her wise words in support of this very important legislation, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022. There've been many seminal moments and historical moments in the short history of our democracy and federation. There are moments that we reflect on and go: where was I when? 'Where was I during the moon landing?' is something you often hear people chat about. Where was I when Cathy Freeman won gold in the 400 metres? Where was I on the date of the dismissal?

Now, in 2023, we reflect: where was I when I found out the former Prime Minister and member for Cook swore himself into five secret ministries? Where was I when I found out about the deep betrayal by our former Prime Minister? As I was writing this speech, I thought I would take myself back to that time and just think about everyone's shock and disbelief at reading this news. I remember that day in August last year. My phone was going off with messages from everywhere. I recall one I sent to my partner, Jo, which was just a link to the breaking news, and all I typed was, 'OMG WTF!' It was a truly extraordinary moment. OMG WTF, indeed.

As we speak on this legislation, I thought it would be useful to understand the history of this extraordinary moment. We need to remember and refresh our memories about this absolute betrayal by the member for Cook of parliamentary process and of our democracy. He further severed the trust he held with the Australian people, and here's how it played out.

In August last year the current Prime Minister confirmed that, between March 2020 and May 2021, the member for Cook appointed himself to administer the Department of Health on 14 March 2020, as Minister for Finance on 30 March 2020, as Minister for Industry, Science, Energy and Resources on 15 April 2021, as Minister for Home Affairs on 6 May 2021 and as Treasurer on 6 May 2021. This revelation came just hours after the member for Cook said that he didn't recall whether he had been sworn into ministries other than Health and Finance. Imagine that! Imagine not recalling whether you were appointed a minister! He went on the radio nationwide and said, 'I don't recall being appointed.' Extraordinary!

Anyway, let's go through each one, because it's important, as we try to fix the mistakes of the past, that we understand what happened and when. On 14 March 2020, the member for Cook appointed himself to the Department of Health, as Minister for Health. At the time Australia had recorded just 100 cases of COVID. Five days later Australia would close its borders to international travellers, and returning Australians would thereafter be ordered into hotel quarantine. In what we learned to be a rare exception, the member for Cook had the support of the then health minister, Greg Hunt, to appoint himself to the portfolio; we know that's an exception to the other portfolios he appointed himself to. It's believed it had been discussed with other members of the national security cabinet, and we learned also that the reasoning for it was it was a safeguard mechanism should Mr Hunt become ill or infected. This one is half understandable—totally not necessary because we know that current processes mean if a minister is unavailable we can appoint a new one quite quickly, so it was not needed. But, sure, a few people talked about it, it seemed okay, and those in the know knew. But what's not understandable and not okay is that neither the public nor the parliament were informed of the member for Cook's secret appointment. That's not okay, and that didn't happen.

Then, on 30 March 2020, the member for Cook appointed himself to the Finance portfolio. On that same day he announced the JobKeeper scheme, which provided a $1,500 fortnightly payment to about six million Australians. The member for Cook said last year of this appointment, 'The situation was unprecedented and extraordinary', and that he needed a backup plan. I'll tell you what was unprecedented and extraordinary: the fact that then finance minister—the real one, not the substitute—Mathias Cormann did not know that the member for Cook had appointed himself to the Finance portfolio. Once again the public and the parliament were not informed. Interestingly, the member for Cook said at the time that not informing the real Minister for Finance that he had appointed himself to the same portfolio had been an oversight of his office—not an oversight of his, but of his office. There's always someone else to blame, for the member for Cook; nothing's his fault. And there was no apology to the parliament or to the Australian people for not informing them. It was just an oversight of his office not to inform the actual finance minister.

On 15 April 2021, over a year later, the member for Cook appointed himself to the portfolios of Industry, Science and Resources. The member for Hinkler, who was the resources minister at the time, said he had a conversation at the time with the member for Cook. But neither of them made those conversations public; again, the parliament and the public were not informed that the member for Cook had also acted in that portfolio. And we now know, as the member for Dunkley just outlined, the absolute mess that that has left communities in up and down the New South Wales coast, through that court case—something that is a real consequence of these terrible decisions of the member for Cook. Again, the public and the parliament were not made aware.

On 6 May the member for Cook—starting to get used to the process—instead of appointing himself to one extra portfolio in one day appointed himself to two extra portfolios. He appointed himself as Treasurer and as the Minister for Home Affairs. He was getting more efficient, the more he did it, you see. But he didn't tell the public, didn't tell the parliament, didn't tell the Treasurer and didn't tell the member for McPherson that he'd appointed himself to these portfolios.

There's no doubt that the actions of the member for Cook were unprecedented and extraordinary. It's now a responsibility of this government, which was elected on a platform of integrity, to fix this issue and ensure that it never occurs again. The Australian people elected us to restore and rebuild trust in this place and in politics generally. That's why this Ministers of State Amendment Bill is so important. This bill will ensure that the Australian people have transparency and accountability in their government. They will never have to find out that such a terrible misuse of office has occurred and they will be able to access such information related to the composition of the federal executive—those appointed to administer certain departments of state and the highest offices that ministers of state hold.

What the former Prime Minister did isn't just unconventional, isn't just unorthodox; it is and was a violation of the conventions of this place. And it is indefensible, as we learnt from those within his own party, some of whom are still here today—senior members of his own party who also thought these actions were indefensible. The former member for my own seat of Bennelong, former Prime Minister John Howard, stated that he didn't think the member for Cook should have done what he did, that there was no need to do it and that he would not have done it. Of course he would never have done it! There's no-one in the history of this place who would ever think to do this, other than someone of the calibre of the member for Cook. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said:

This is sinister stuff. This is secret government.

I think this is one of the most appalling things I have ever heard in our federal government.

I mean, the idea that a Prime Minister would be sworn in to other ministries, secretly, is incredible.

Upon finding out that the former Prime Minister had sworn himself into her portfolio, the member for McPherson told the media:

This is totally unacceptable, for a prime minister to behave in this manner undermines everything that a federal government constitutionally should stand for.

She would then ask him to resign and to leave parliament—something that I note he is yet to do. This government needs to ensure that what the member for Cook did can never happen again, as we embark on what the Australian people elected us to do, and that is to rebuild the trust of Australian people in government.

We now come to what the member for Cook had to say for himself. He said he was trying to improve efficiency of government. But this was nothing more than the member for Cook trying to accumulate more power for himself. In the mind of the member for Cook, he did nothing wrong in awarding himself these five secret ministries. He believes he was justified in his behaviour, and he's made that clear in his inconsistent comments and answers. We all sat here listening to the member for Cook's defence during the censure motion. He still doesn't get it. He tried to justify his actions under the guise of the unprecedented circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. Well, if this were to be believed, it might—might—explain being sworn into the first two of his secret ministries. It doesn't explain why no-one was told, but it might explain that. But then why did he appoint himself to three other ministries more than a year later? So, that reason doesn't stack up.

The inconsistencies continue. He said he had trust in his former ministers and that he trusted them to exercise the powers of their portfolio. But he only took on portfolios in which those same ministers had unilateral power to make decisions without cabinet. They're the ones the member for Cook appointed himself to. And they continue again. He said that the suggestions of co-administrations of departments is 100 per cent false. Why, then, does official documentation show that the member for Cook was appointed to administer the departments of home affairs and the Treasury? This is the same man—the member for Cook—who stood in front of a Perth audience last year and said that we shouldn't trust governments. I don't think we should have trusted his government, and this government is set to restore some of the trust that the member for Cook's government eroded.

Does the opposition take this matter seriously? During the censure motion, they voted against it, which is something I found incredibly surprising. But even more galling was the line of members of the opposition going to congratulate Mr Morrison for that half-hour defence of these indefensible actions. I found that extraordinary. With the exception of one or two members of the opposition, they stood by what the member for Cook did and then congratulated him after his speech.

I have some advice for those opposite: keeping those in this place accountable for their actions is not a witch-hunt; establishing trust in our great democratic system is not a witch-hunt. The people of Australia made their decision loudly and clearly in May as to who in government they trusted to restore integrity, and it wasn't the opposition—for good reason.

This legislation is just one part of the Albanese government's commitment to respond to Justice Bell's Inquiry into the Appointment of the Former Prime Minister to Administer Multiple Departments. This legislation is just one part of our commitment to the Australian people to safeguard our democracy and to ensure that the people of Australia can stand proud in their trust in this place. We understand that democracy is precious, and we understand that when it is challenged, as it was by the member for Cook, it needs to be defended. We know that we must restore trust in and integrity to politics, and this bill, in the timely manner in which it has come to this place, shows our commitment to achieving just that.

This bill, if passed through this place, will ensure that never again will one person be able to hold such extraordinary ministerial power without accountability to the Australian people and to this parliament. I commend the bill.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This bill is very important. It's very important not only to the Australian public and our democracy; it is also important in restoring trust and pride in the way that governments behave and execute their responsibilities. I thank the member for Bennelong and, before him, the member for Dunkley and the member for Solomon for their very pertinent remarks about this bill and its need to assure the Australian people that what happened under the previous Prime Minister could never happen again.

I thank the Attorney-General and the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister for introducing and advocating this bill, which I'm proud to support. Again, it's part of the Albanese government restoring faith to the Australian people in our system of government and in the way in which we govern. It's a combination of a number of measures that will prevent the actions that the previous Prime Minister, the member for Cook, took in assuming responsibility for multiple portfolios in the previous government.

The actions of the former Prime Minister, the member for Cook, have been widely documented, and rightly so; however, they only came to light many, many months after the fact, and only once there had been a change in government and some light had been shed on his behaviour. I'm not so sure that anything has changed in the coalition. Of course, they voted against the censure motion. They have not demonstrated any real change in philosophy and, as much as anything else, they seem to be in shock that we feel the behaviour was wrong. It was a shock. It was a shock to all Australians: to members of parliament, to constituents and even to the many ministers that the former Prime Minister had taken portfolios from or whose portfolios he had assumed responsibility for. Yet, during it all, the then Prime Minister, the member for Cook, continued to doggedly deny any opportunity for a federal Anti-Corruption Commission, and now I think we know why. Transparency and accountability were not something that he believed in or encouraged.

Thankfully, the Albanese government does not stand by or support such behaviour. We're getting on with the job of establishing a National Anti-Corruption Commission, and the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 also exemplifies this. Australia has a robust democracy that depends on transparency. It is important that every citizen feels that they are part of the government and can actually interact with the government about matters that are important to them. Our philosophy is that the Australian people have the right to choose their government and their representatives and a right to see how the government functions and how their representatives do truly represent their views.

Sadly, this incident with the former Prime Minister shows how vulnerable this philosophy can be when the wrong people do the wrong things with little or no accountability. The former Prime Minister, of course, has said here in this parliament that, if he'd been asked by a journalist, by a colleague or even by a constituent about his secret portfolios, he would have told them the truth. He said that in retrospect. He even, when questioned, of course, said he couldn't remember some of the portfolios or when he assumed responsibility for them. With respect to the former Prime Minister, even the most forgiving people do not believe that.

We saw, over a decade of coalition government, an erosion of transparency and accountability. I think this is a philosophical issue and a philosophical problem within the coalition. We see that in their very behaviour. We see that in their continual refusal to have a representative party that represents all Australians. They deny women positions of power. They deny, for example, the most disadvantaged the rights of ordinary citizens, and we are seeing that evolve in the robodebt scandal. And it is a scandal. We saw no ministers in the previous government stand up and admit what was very, very wrong with a system that targeted the most vulnerable and the most disadvantaged in our community. Then, when publicly questioned about it, they leaked information about the most vulnerable people to right-wing journalists to try and punish the people who were complaining about a system that was manifestly unfair. There has been no action from the coalition on this. The robodebt royal commission is still evolving, and I am sure there will be more things that we will find out about it, but we know the philosophy of the coalition involved secret consultations that punished the most vulnerable and didn't allow people to see what was happening to the most vulnerable in our society. We see the total lack of responsibility shown for these people by the previous government.

There has been a decade of former prime ministers, including the member for Wentworth, the member for Warringah et cetera, where manipulations, secret funding arrangements et cetera were foisted upon the Australian public in a very, very unfair manner.

The action of the former Prime Minister to secretly appoint himself to multiple ministries, with the collusion of the Governor-General him, without informing the Australian people is very sinister, but it is also just a symptom of the secretive philosophy of punishing the vulnerable and of not allowing the Australian public to see the truth. It was a philosophy that continued for 10 years under the coalition government. As I said, I'm not convinced that anything has changed.

The actions of the former Prime Minister and his government were contrary to the spirit of an open democracy. They should never be repeated, and this legislation is part of the remedy for that. It's not just Labor politicians who are saying that; previous prime ministers have said it. The previous member for Bennelong John Howard was critical of the former Prime Minister's action, as was the former member for Wentworth Malcolm Turnbull et cetera. It was a symptom of a government that did not respect the democracy that we all cherish. I think those opposite are paying the price for it now and will continue to pay the price for some time. The advice of the Solicitor-General, Steven Donaghue KC, who was tasked by our government to review the former Prime Minister's actions was that 'the principles of responsible government are fundamentally undermined' by the actions of the former government. I agree with him.

Our democracy depends on a form of government that allows every citizen to feel involved and see how it works. The fact that this very building and this chamber allow the public to look at our debates, to view their representatives and to see how we debate different issues is in this spirit, and long may it continue so. The fact that our constituents can visit us in our office and question us about policy, our behaviour and how we represent their wishes is part of that open democracy. I am not convinced that the coalition understands that even now. That is why this bill is so important. It will implement reforms to provide greater transparency and accountability at the Commonwealth level of government. It will stop things like the rorting of sports grants and the rorting of grants intended for flood relief et cetera during previous natural disasters. It will stop that rorting. The previous coalition government saw nothing wrong with that rorting. Their behaviour was absolutely shameful, and it is only now being exposed. But I don't hear anyone from the coalition apologising for that behaviour. That behaviour is a fundamental undermining of our whole system of government.

We've heard in New South Wales that the philosophy of the Liberal and National parties is that rorting is okay. We heard from the previous leader of the Liberal Party in New South Wales that rorting is okay: 'Everyone does it. We call it pork-barrelling, but it's actually okay. Don't worry about it.' How do you think people who are the victims of natural disasters or who have been left out of grants because they happened to live in Labor electorates feel about that? This is a fundamental issue, and I believe that the coalition will never recover from their last election loss until they actually understand that.

The robodebt royal commission is very important. The findings are shocking even to me, who was expecting some bad things to be found out. It's even worse than I imagined, and I think those opposite should be absolutely ashamed of that. I hope that at some stage they will apologise for their behaviour.

Over many years we have seen from the coalition contempt for transparency and appropriate behaviour, and it was seen in many representatives from the previous government. It's not just the Prime Minister. Whilst he may have been head of the government and encouraged that philosophy of rorting, opaqueness and lack of honesty, many ministers in the previous government shared that behaviour. Whether it be the sports rorts, the carpark rorts or robodebt, they were carried out by the previous government and the previous ministers under the Prime Minister. They were not done in the best interest of Australian democracy.

In my own interest in health care, I do think some of the actions of the previous government at the beginning of the pandemic were great and brave. The closing of the borders, the restrictions on movement, et cetera, were very important in stopping the spread of COVID-19 and they were very brave. But subsequent actions really have confirmed to me that the previous government was a government that was not acting in the best interest of the Australian people.

Just imagine if the previous Prime Minister had installed himself as health minister. Imagine what damage he could have done if he wanted to enforce other, more Draconian measures like some governments overseas had done. He could have done that, overruling the health minister. It's only now that we realise that. Imagine what he could have done on border security, having taken over responsibility for home affairs. Imagine what damage the previous Prime Minister could have done. Whilst this may seem theoretical, it is very important that we do secure our democracy for the future. We can do that, and this bill is part of it. I congratulate the government for bringing this bill to the House.

I think that, though there is a greater philosophy involved, and I hope those in the coalition will eventually understand that, to me, the actions of the previous Prime Minister and his government are shocking. Time is making it look worse and worse as we discover more things, particularly with the robodebt disaster. I know many of my constituents contacted me about it, devastated by being incorrectly being given large bills to pay back to the government. The Albanese Labor government is a more compassionate and a much better and open government. I commend this bill to the House as a way of reinforcing that.

Debate adjourned.

Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an order of the day for the next sitting.