Sue Lines (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Hansard source

I have asked you to clarify what was said at Senate estimates, because I'm asking directly why the government doesn't consider this to be a privilege matter. Secondly, I've asked whether Indue ever disclosed to the government it was using SAS consultants or whether the government was aware that Indue was using SAS consultants. If that was asked and directly responded to at Senate estimates you could supply me with that, but if it hasn't been directly answered. I am asking whether the Indue relationship with SAS consulting was advised to the government and whether the government knew of the relationship between Indue and SAS. They are simple yes/no questions.

My second question is relation to Indue's terms-and-conditions book, which I'm sure your department is aware of. Some of the submissions we received in the Senate inquiry imply that Indue imposes conditions on cardholders or applies settings on the card or deposit account products, but, as we know, Indue is not a decision-making body in respect of the functional design of the cashless debit card. All functional design decisions or decisions about particular individual limits are made by the Commonwealth government. If I'm not correct in that, I'd appreciate your, before I go on, just indicating whether I'm correct.

Senator Fifield interjecting—

I'm correct, thank you. Yet, on evidence available publicly, looking at the Indue terms and conditions, there is nowhere in this document that indicates that the terms and conditions are imposed by the Commonwealth government. Indue at best confused its own card and business T&Cs and all non-CDCT transfer limitations, such as the waiting of 28 days for certain transfer payments, with the limits set by the Commonwealth directions. My question to you is: can you please clarify why there is no reference to the department in Indue's terms and conditions? I'm happy to table this document if you so wish.