Senate debates

Tuesday, 8 November 2016

Committees

Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee; Report

5:43 pm

Photo of Barry O'SullivanBarry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I know that this does not sit comfortably with you. I know that when we sit down and lay these things out deliberately and carefully it becomes very uncomfortable for you because of what you would prefer to think. Imagine a world where the senior officers of a government of the day could do what they liked and could engage in conversations with whomever they liked and where confidential information passed between officers of the government and the opposition. Given the nature of how our parliament operates, you do not think that would be a problem? I know that that became the norm under Labor governments. In fact, I think it contributed significantly to bringing you down. You guys do not even do it through the concealed method. You wait until someone wants to run a three-part documentary and then you play yourself. You actually get an old phone so that it does not look like you have the new iPhone, because that conversation took place three years ago. I will tell you what we are not going to do that: we are not going to take a lecture off you guys about what standards need to be met by senior officers of the Crown, who are paid pretty significant money to get on and do the business of the Commonwealth.

Let us come down to the question at the heart of this issue. This is to do with two documents. It is the tale of two documents. You had a guidance note and then a legal services direction. These two things bore a relationship to each other. Admittedly, there is an argument that one carried more weight than the other. One was more prescriptive in the sense of how one had to react to it.

An opposition senator interjecting—

Hold on. Listen: I rarely do this, but I sat here quietly while you spoke. So I would appreciate it, through you, Mr Acting Deputy President—

Comments

No comments