Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The Freedom of Information Amendment (Requests and Reasons) Bill 2015, presented by Senator Ludwig, I understand, on behalf of the opposition, proposes to amend the Freedom of Information Act to require government agencies and ministers to publish the exact wording of freedom of information requests. It would also require agencies and ministers to publish a statement of reasons concerning the decision to allow or refuse the release of requested documents. The bill has the stated aims of ensuring that transparency and accountability are included within the framework of government decisions concerning freedom of information requests, allowing the public to view requests that have been made and the reasons why documents were or were not released, allowing applicants seeking similar documents to build upon previous requests, and reducing duplication of requests.

They seem to be reasonable aims of the bill because accountability and transparency are essential in this building, in government and in parliament. That is why I think Mr Shorten really needs to become a bit more transparent and accountable. I read an article in this morning's Sydney Morning Herald, a newspaper that is not usually all that antagonistic towards the Labor Party. The first paragraph of this article states:

One of Australia's biggest builders paid Bill Shorten's union nearly $300,000 after he struck a workplace deal that cut conditions and saved the company as much as $100 million on a major Melbourne road project.

We hear a lot about accountability, particularly from the Labor Party and the Greens. I think governments should be accountable, and we as a government try to be as accountable as we can and as security conditions allow us to be. But if the Labor Party is so keen on transparency and accountability, then let's have some details about what effectively seems to be a $300,000 bribe to a union of which Mr Shorten, the current Leader of the Opposition in the other place, was in charge. I am not suggesting that Mr Shorten received any of that money himself or without further investigation that any wrongdoing perhaps occurred. I cannot be judge and jury. But clearly the question has been raised—not by me but, as I said, by an investigative journalist with the Sydney Morning Herald. And it seems from a skimming of the article that the journalist has done his work reasonably well and has raised a few issues that need explanation. That is what accountability and transparency are all about.

So, perhaps I might suggest to the mover of this motion that it is a good idea—it is nice to try to ensure that there are always improvements to accountability and transparency—but it would be a greater use of your talents, Senator Ludwig, if you perhaps tried to get a bit of transparency and accountability into the union movement and into the actions alleged to have involved the leader of your political party in the other place, because that is what accountability is all about. It is also important that in this country we have stable government, but it is important that we have stable oppositions as well, because good oppositions bring the best out in a good government. I see, again in this newspaper, that:

Shorten's right-wing faction has lost control of Labor's national conference …

That seems to be something that will be quite destabilising. And the editorial in that same newspaper says:

The position of Bill Shorten as federal Labor leader is becoming untenable.