Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the explanation.

That is a sweeping hypocrisy in itself from the leader of the Senate. All we ask is the answers to the questions that we put. Whether or not you want to use mealy-mouthed words to hide the fact, the coalition have not provided the answers to the questions that we have sought. These are important questions about the Attorney-General's portfolio on reviews into the handling of Seven West Media—an awful circumstance which occurred in respect of Seven West Media by this government, and there are supposed to be reviews into this. And we have not heard from the government. To date, they have refused to answer those questions. Nor have they answered our questions about strategy and delivery division, the cost of meeting with Mr Palmer or the handling of FOIs.

The handling of FOIs is one of those areas which is extraordinarily important to the general public and to the opposition to be able to ensure that they can hold this government to account, that it does not hide in the shadows, that it has proper scrutiny and that it has proper transparency. But this government has lacked and failed on all of those issues. Even in the area of FOI you have an ex-secretary of the department who, in answer to a question at budget estimates, said that they were playing 'hardball' in relation to FOI matters. In other words, they do not want to provide what the freedom of information legislation is all about—that is, providing information that is requested by media outlets, the opposition, individuals and the public. What they are doing is again highlighting the continuous broken promises that they have made from budget through to now. These are appalling circumstances, and their best defence today is to just say: 'You did it too.' Well, I thought you said that when you got to government that you were going to be a little bit better than us in this respect; that you were going to try that little bit harder to ensure that you did what you said you would. In answer to an issue also raised by Senator Macdonald: I do not know about other ministers' records, but can I take you to the one that you might have highlighted, which was when I resigned from the ministry and there was a range of unanswered questions that I did leave. We can own up to that. But they were a bit hard to answer after I had resigned, you can appreciate. My record prior to that was nil. In other words, if you look at my record, I certainly did a whole lot better than some of the portfolios are doing now. Look at the Attorney-General's record!

What we are seeking are things like the cost of ministers' websites, the cost of motor vehicles, the cost of the red-tape reduction squad—questions that should be answered. If your defence is 'you were as bad as we are', can you try a little harder this time around? You set your own benchmark. You indicated that, when you got into government, you would be methodical, you would be open and you would be transparent. I will take a little licence here, but I thought you would do a lot better in answering the questions on notice than you have to date. Over 2,000 are unanswered and I have yet to come to a few of the more appalling ones. Recognising the time I am detaining the chamber—I can see Senator Cash is getting a little nervous about the time she is being detained—I will move to the next area, unless someone else also wants to defend the Attorney-General's record.

Question agreed to.

Pursuant to standing order 74(5), I ask the Minister for Finance for an explanation as to why answers have not been provided to questions on notice Nos 207 and 209 asked during the budget estimates hearing of the Finance and Public Administration Committee in May 2014.