Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, they're walking out. You're quite right, Senators Brandis, they are leaving—I suspect in disgust. Off the back of a failed tactic at the beginning of question time, where questions were being asked of the wrong minister, which backfired embarrassingly—I haven't seen that in my time in the Senate, I have to say—they picked themselves up, or at least so they thought, changed tact and went on with this fascination, this obsession, the Labor Party has with pecuniary interests of senators in this place. Again, it's something that matters nought to the people of Australia, frankly.

Opposition senators interjecting—

And, as much as those on the other side chuckle and guffaw and think it's a great little show and that we should be sitting down with a bucket of popcorn to take it all in, the reality is that people out there in the real world, don't care. They're not worried about this sort of thing.

I have to say, though, in my own mind, it conjures up images of Labor senators and their staff sitting in smoky, dark rooms with dim lighting, rifling through the pecuniary interest register of senators to see what they've changed, what they own, what they had yesterday and what they're going to be changing if things are put on the public record, as they assert. It doesn't fill one with confidence about a group of people that aspires to lead this country in government one day. They're more interested in rifling through bits of paper and trying to sling mud at members of this place about fake arguments around what they own and the benefits they may be drawing. As Senator Brandis mentioned in his answer to the questions that he was asked, he canvassed these matters last week, and much of this was put on the public record. That begs the question: why are we back here? Because it's all about mud-slinging; it's all about characterising this as something that it is not. The questions have so much loaded language around the actual situation. All are assertions that are trying to draw conclusions that cannot be established on the facts available.

It was most enlightening to hear Senator Watt, under pressure by way of interjection from the Attorney-General, change his language. He was talking about Senator O'Sullivan having contracts with the Commonwealth when, in fact, the contracts with companies—whether or not there is an interest held by Senator O'Sullivan—are held with the Queensland state government, not the Commonwealth. Senator Watt realised that and he changed his language quite significantly, talking about benefits derived. There, immediately, he highlighted that he accepts that this argument does not hold water, and, really, it is only further ambulance-chasing and grubby politics, which is exceptionally disappointing.

One thing I would ask is whether those opposite have actually done an ASIC search of Senator O'Sullivan's companies. I wonder whether they would find, as I understand the case to be, that a simple ASIC search will show that Senator O'Sullivan holds shares in none of the companies that have been mentioned. I wonder if the next opposition speaker—I assume that will be Senator Chisholm—would be able to answer that question for me when they rise to their feet to contribute to this debate. It is about the facts; it's not about the assertions. We have to remember that.

The other thing we have to remember—as I started by saying—is that we ought to be focusing on the issues that actually really matter to people. It was revealing that this took up the lion's share of the opposition's questions today. Again, there is more of that 'gotcha politics' arrangement going on. They are not focused on things that people are concerned about. Senator Gallacher did ask a question about jobs. It was the last question, just squeezed in in time. But, beyond the feigned interest in jobs for communities outside of Canberra, Sydney or Melbourne, there was not much talk of real-world issues, which is disappointing. I think it is about getting the facts on the record. It's about clarifying the assertions that have been put on record in here—the disappointing reflections on individuals and just slinging mud left, right and centre to try to get someone. That is what this is all about. It's politics; it's not policy. It's not about advancing our country and it's not about advancing the lives of Australians that we apparently represent in this place; it's about slinging mud. It is exceptionally disappointing. I invite senators who want to pursue this matter to do so in a way that is based on facts and nothing else.