Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Hansard source

When Senator Wong reaches for principles to try to defend this motion you know that she is absolutely scrabbling for ground. It was this person who came into this place, remember, telling us that the carbon price and the carbon challenge was the greatest moral challenge of our time, and then just threw it away like a used tissue. The principle all of a sudden became inconsequential. Of course, loyalty to leader is one of her great strengths. A strong principle in Senator Wong is loyalty to leader—until she decides otherwise; until she thinks it might be beneficial for her to become Leader in the Senate.

But let us have a look at this motion bit by bit. First of all, my good friend and colleague the Attorney-General is being criticised for failing to defend the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission from malicious attacks. And what does she base that argument on? She is basing it on the fact that 'statutory agencies should be able to act without fear or favour'—without having their reputations reduced. I ask Senator Wong and the Australian Labor Party, not rhetorically: does that apply to the Australian Public Service Commissioner? That there is no answer from the Australian Labor Party tells you everything you need to know. Labor will besmirch the Australian Public Service Commissioner in a press release from the shadow labour minister, but that is okay!

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Senator Cameron is coming in right on line! Come in, spinner! Senator Cameron, by his interjection, reminds me of another independent statutory authority: Fair Work Building and Construction. You would not believe my luck! At Senate estimates I deliberately asked Senator Cameron—Senator McKenzie will vouch for this—a question. I should not have done, I confess, but the Hansard I am sure will record, 'Does he have confidence in the Director of Fair Work Building and Construction—an independent statutory authority?'

Senator Cameron interjecting—

He said 'No,' and he is confirming it.

I appeal especially to the crossbenchers: when people want to bring motions of this nature they have to come with clean hands. They have to be able to show that they represent a party that treats each individual statutory authority in an honourable and respectful manner as they are asserting today. Have they done so with the Public Service Commissioner?—by their own admission, no. Through Senator Cameron, have they done so for the Fair Work Building and Construction Director?—no.

When people come into this place wanting to move censure motions they should do so with clean hands, and we see the hypocrisy of the Australian Labor Party. Make a criticism of the Human Rights Commission and there is outrage. Make a criticism of the Public Service Commissioner and it is, 'Okay; nothing to see here, we will just move along.' Make a criticism of the Fair Work Building and Construction Director and it is, 'Nothing to see here; we'll just keep moving along.' The hypocrisy is palpable. Senator Wong stands condemned for trying to make this assertion that statutory agencies cannot be criticised.

Let us be very clear what the point is here. Many years ago the Australian High Court determined that this country does have this wonderful thing called 'free speech'. Even if you are a statutory authority, such as the Industrial Relations Commission, an editor of a newspaper is entitled to criticise you. That was established in a great case involving the editor of The Mercury many years ago. The then editor sought to criticise a decision of the Industrial Court and the Industrial Court took him all the way to the High Court, but the High Court quite rightly said that it was right and proper for that good editor of The Mercurythey had them in those days; in fairness, I am sure they still do nowadays—to be critical. If the High Court is of the view that people can be critical of independent statutory authorities, why is it that a parliamentarian should not be able to? In fairness, I have never run the ridiculous argument of Senator Wong in relation to independent statutory authorities. I believe they have to do their duty, they have to be seen as bipartisan—

Senator O'Neill interjecting—

Thank you very much, Senator O'Neill. I invite you to watch a video of the employment estimates so ably chaired by Senator McKenzie. If you do, you will see some of the worst bullying in your life—by Senator Doug Cameron. He spent half an hour in the previous Senate estimates attacking an independent statutory authority for seeking to defend a female public servant from being abused through a loudhailer—with language so abusive that I hope we would all condemn it. If ever you wanted an example of misogyny, it was Mr Collier shouting through a loudhailer at a female public servant who was acting for and on behalf of an independent statutory authority. What does Mr Shorten do in response to that? He wheels in his frontbencher Senator Doug Cameron to run defence for this terrible individual who has now voluntarily given up his right-of-entry permit. But Senator Cameron tried to fight it all the way.

Without saying that Senator Brandis has failed to defend the President of the Human Rights Commission, I simply remind the Labor Party—

Senator Wong interjecting—

Is it not amazing? When coalition senators interject, it is the most outrageous thing. When Senator Wong does it, it is Labor, so it is okay! It is like the attacks on independent statutory authorities—the hypocrisy is there for all to see and for all to read in the Senate Hansard. The second paragraph of this motion asserts that the Attorney-General sought to obtain the resignation of Professor Triggs. That is simply false. There is not a shred of evidence that supports that assertion. It is false, false, false.