Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. On Saturday Senator Gallagher stated in relation to serious allegations aired on The Project, 'I wasn't aware of the full allegations that were made public when the interviews went to air.' This was not true. She had in fact received a copy of the interview four days before it went to air. How is this consistent with the Prime Minister's statement yesterday, 'Katy Gallagher has been transparent in relation to this matter'?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What is being suggested here by those opposite is that Labor is to blame for what is a serious sexual assault allegation by a Liberal staffer about another Liberal staffer in a Liberal minister's office, metres away from the Liberal Prime Minister's office. I'm answering the question very directly, Mr Speaker. Senator Reynolds said on the night referred to in 2021:

I was told by one of your senators two weeks before about what you were intending to do with the story in my office. Two weeks before.

Senators were accused of having the information weeks in advance and setting up the story. They did not, and that is how they responded.

Do you know what Senator Reynolds said later that evening, after she had had a discussion including Senator Gallagher and Senator Wong? She said this: 'Senators Wong'—I can't be more relevant.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My point of order is on relevance, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has been asked about inconsistent statements and his addressing of that inconsistency and describing it as transparency. He has not addressed the question which is on his own statement about Minister Gallagher being transparent—not other ministers'; his own statement about Minister Gallagher being transparent—when she separately said two completely different things. How is that transparent?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Resume your seat. The question was about the allegations and also Senator Gallagher's statements. The Prime Minister is giving context and information regarding—

An honourable member interjecting—

Order! I'm just going to listen, but I need there to be silence in the chamber so I can hear what the Prime Minister is saying to make he is being relevant to the deputy's question. He has the call.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm asked about transparency. Senator Reynolds said this that evening:

… Senators Wong, Gallagher and I had a very respectful discussion during the dinner break, and they've assured me they were not involved in that matter becoming public. I accept their assurance. Thank you.

Clearly, at the time, Senator Gallagher had a clear discussion with Senator Reynolds and told Senator Reynolds exactly what she knew. You can't be clearer.

Compare that with the lack of transparency opposite, with the Gaetjens inquiry. The former PM could have asked his staff at any time what they knew; instead he asked his former chief of staff and then secretary. The review was suspended twice. On 25 May 2021, Gaetjens told estimates his report would be completed 'as soon as possible' and that he thought it would be 'weeks, not days—certainly not months'. Three months passed before the review was suspended. The failure to release any findings shows the inquiry was never intended to shine any light. The government failed to answer 57 questions on notice from Senate estimates dating back to 22 March 2021. This parliament has open to it, of course, to call for documents— (Time expired)