Senate debates

Monday, 22 July 2019

Documents

Ministerial Conduct; Order for the Production of Documents

1:28 pm

Photo of Malcolm RobertsMalcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I wish to comment on the most grave and angry concerns about the recent postministerial employment of Mr Pyne and Ms Bishop in the private sector, which, in my view, represent clear breaches of the ministerial standards, as anyone could see. Mr Pyne was Minister for Defence Industry from July 2016 until August 2018, and Minister for Defence from August 2018 until April 2019. He is now employed with the firm Ernst & Young, a firm that has received Department of Defence contracts worth more than $148 million over just the last four years. Ernst & Young has stated publicly that it is aiming for further Defence business opportunities.

The government would have us believe that this is not a breach of ministerial standards, which essentially state, at paragraph 2.25, Post-ministerial employment:

… for an eighteen month period after ceasing to be a Minister, they will not lobby, advocate or have business meetings with members of the government, parliament, public service or defence force on any matters on which they have had official dealings as Minister …

For that same period they must not 'take personal advantage of information' which they have accessed through their previous position which was otherwise not available to the public. Mr Pyne is not able to unlearn what he has been exposed to in his ministerial position.

The Australian public are not stupid. Australians do not think that this action is okay. This action is an insult to the Australian people, who are being asked to condone conduct that is clearly enriching Mr Pyne based on information that came to him during his time as minister. It is disrespectful to the electors of this country and a breach of the trust that was placed in him by both the electors and his colleagues. This is the 'Sixty Billion Dollar Man'. The $60 billion job creation scheme created just one job: Christopher Pyne's, when he was re-elected in the 2016 election. That $60 billion lasted just three years.

If this is allowed to be swept under the carpet, it makes a mockery of all the rules that this Senate has considered essential for the good and fair conduct of past ministers. Perhaps Mr Pyne—to reflect on his joke in his valedictory speech, when he was leaving parliament—wants to avoid squeezing his own lemons for his drinks in future. But it leaves a bitter taste in the mouths of Australian voters and Australian taxpayers.

Now let's turn to Ms Bishop. She served as Minister for Foreign Affairs from September 2013 until August 2018. She is now working as a board member for Palladium, a global investment and consultancy group that was awarded more than $500 million in Australian government contracts during the period when Ms Bishop was Minister for Foreign Affairs—half a billion dollars. This conjures up in my mind the name 'Hillary' and the images that go with that.

It is clear that each of these people has in fact gained financially from what they gleaned from their ministerial roles, and this is not good enough. It speaks to the standards, sadly, of the government, the Prime Minister and the Liberal-Labor duopoly. From the pubs of Thursday Island to the pubs of Tugun, Mr Pyne and Ms Bishop fail the pub test. This is not what Australian taxpayers expect from their ex-politicians. Parliament is not for the members of parliament. We are servants to the people, and we should be serving in parliament and after parliament in accordance with parliamentary procedures and what the people expect.

Ms Bishop's and Mr Pyne's actions are not acceptable, and the Australian public need to know that One Nation will stand up against these abuses of office. From Cairns to Cunnamulla and from Bamaga to Burleigh, One Nation wants to restore honest and competent government to Australia for the benefit of all Australians.

Question agreed to.

Comments

No comments