Lyn Allison (Victoria, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

(1)    Schedule 1, item 5, page 5 (after line 2), after subsection 6AA(3), insert:

     (3A)    In deciding whether a document required to be inspected in accordance with subsection (3) should be inspected by a member of the Commission or a person authorised by the member of the Commission, the member of the Commission may consider not inspecting the document if:

             (a)    there is a likelihood of criminal proceedings arising where the document may be used; or

             (b)    there is a likelihood that inspection may cause a member of the Commission to be biased.

This amendment was foreshadowed in my speech in the second reading debate. It does not require any further discussion, but I think it is important to respond to the earlier comments of the Minister for Justice and Customs.

As I understand it, there were not a lot of questions asked of the Prime Minister but, nonetheless, the big issue was that he came out of that hearing and pre-empted the Cole royal commission’s findings by declaring that the government had nothing to hide and that somehow his appearance demonstrated that. Some of us do not go along with that. We also do not think that the Prime Minister fronting up to a hearing means that no-one else need be asked to speak and answer questions. That is the point that was made by both Senator Evans and me: it was not appropriate for the government to gag public servants in the way that they did and it was quite proper for us to ask questions. The government is making it up as it goes along by saying that when you have a royal commission on you cannot ask questions about it—that you cannot have parallel inquiries. There have been examples of many cases where it suits the government to have parallel inquiries take place.

The amendment I have moved allows some flexibility to avoid the possibility that legal professional privilege might in some way bias the findings of the commission as a result of the commissioner sighting a document and subsequently discovering that it is covered by legal professional privilege. It is a straightforward amendment and one that I ask the Senate to support.