Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to take note of the minister's answer or, rather, excuses. Senator Ruston has outlined why questions that have been placed on the Notice Paperand, as we know, senators are entitled to place questions on the Notice Paper and expect a response within the allocated time of 30 days—have not yet been answered.

The point that Senator Ruston makes is actually a point that the Senate needs to take note of. The platform that Mr Albanese went to the Australian people on was all about integrity and transparency. In fact, prior to the election he was very vocal when he made announcements to the Australian people that, if elected, both he, as the Prime Minister, and his ministers, as part of the Albanese government, would deliver transparency, integrity and accountability in everything they would do. But, as we know, it was all talk before the election. Just as with so many of the promises that they made to the Australian people—and we can go through them shortly—what you now have are broken promises from a tricky government. This is a government that prior to the election talked big on integrity, accountability and transparency yet, once elected to office, fails to hold itself to the standards that it set for itself prior to the election.

Senator Ruston raised an issue with the minister today in relation to questions in the health portfolio that have not yet been answered. I myself, prior to question time today, raised with Senator Watt—as the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Mr Burke—that I too would be raising this in relation to my portfolio after question time. I had 155 questions that had been asked in January of this year to which the responses, which had been due to be tabled on 9 February 2023, were still outstanding. Lo and behold, just before question time was finalised today, Minister Burke tabled the answers to the questions. Interestingly, I thought that my office would be sent 155 answers. One might expect that, for 155 questions, there would be 155 answers. Imagine my surprise, colleagues, when I was given one piece of paper. So much for integrity, transparency and accountability! There was one piece of paper responding to questions Nos 1162 to 1317. There's quite a jump in between, let me assure you. The question date was 10 January 2023, and the Table Office due date was 9 February 2023. Just before question time today, after the minister has been notified that I, too, would be moving a motion to take note of a failure by the minister to uphold the standards that Mr Albanese told the Australian people that both he and his ministers would be implementing if and when they were elected to government—transparency, integrity and accountability—I suddenly get one page. It is a global answer to 155 questions, but it does inform me—and this is the good news, colleagues—that the office of the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and the department have undertaken a review of my questions on notice 1162 to 1317.

So at least it's a step in the right direction. Obviously they opened the file that was sent to them and they at least reviewed them. And then quite literally, as part of administering the workplace relations system, the minister, the minister's office and the department met with employee and employer representatives, for example, to consult on policy development. This is the beauty of the answer, though: 'Contact with some of the named representatives may have occurred in this context.' Well, 'may have'—what does 'may have' mean, in particular for a government that, again, prior to the election, espoused virtues of integrity, transparency and accountability?

What we have here is, quite frankly, contempt for the Australian Senate. And that is not just me talking. I reflect on comments made by those who are now in government when they were in opposition. In particular, I have to say, the now Attorney-General of Australia, Mark Dreyfus, is somebody who is a great preacher; I wouldn't necessarily say that he is a practiser, but he does like preaching, as so many have stated, in relation to accountability and integrity. In fact, Mr Dreyfus proudly told the Office of the Information Commissioner, in a speech on International Right to Know Day last year—this is very interesting—that information held by government and public institutions is a public resource. I'm assuming he thought that was a complete, total and utter joke. He also said that a culture of transparency within government is everyone's responsibility. Perhaps what he should have done, though, was put in brackets 'except for the following ministers'—in this case Minister Burke: again, 155 questions on notice, 155 questions outstanding as at 8 March and then, prior to question time, a one-page answer in relation to all these questions.

But also Mr Dreyfus, clearly not worried about practising what he preaches, said this: 'Appropriate, prompt and proactive disclosure of government-held information informs community, increases participation and enhances decision-making, builds trust and confidence, is required and permitted by law and improves efficiency.' Again, I'm a little confused. What part of treating the Senate with contempt, by providing a one-page answer to 155 questions well after the 30-day time period has expired, actually fits within 'appropriate'? Absolutely not. 'Prompt'? Definitely not. 'Proactive disclosure'? Well, absolutely not there. 'Informs community'? Well, one page doesn't inform us of much. 'Increases participation and enhances decision-making, builds trust and confidence and is required and permitted by law and improves efficiency'? Well, the answers that I have been provided with—or, rather the one-page answer—clearly does not do any of that. But, then again, now that they are in government, those on the other side are clearly holding themselves to very, very different standards to what they preached prior to the election.

Look at what now Minister Watt said in June 2021, just over 20 months ago. This was in relation to a failure to provide answers to questions on notice in a timely fashion. Those on the other side were also entitled to raise this when we were in government. But the problem is that they've then got to actually look at the answers they gave when they were in opposition and judge themselves and hold themselves to the standards that they screamed that the other side were required to uphold when we were in government. This is what Minister Watt said: 'We deserve answers and transparency.' He went further and said, 'It is not negotiable, and it should not be negotiable, to comply with standing orders and properly answer those questions.' Well, perhaps Minister Watt, on behalf of senators in this place, may actually raise that with both the Prime Minister and Minister Burke in terms of the way they have responded to the questions that I had on notice and certainly in the way that Senator Ruston's questions have not been answered despite, again, the standards by which Mr Albanese said his government would be judged if, and in due course, they were elected.

As others on the other side have all said, sometimes you actually need to read what you preached when you were in opposition to ensure that you are practising it when in government. Senator Marielle Smith said, on 15 October 2019:

I am relatively new to this place, but it doesn't really seem like an unreasonable request to me that these questions are answered within 30 days.

It's not an unreasonable request, Senator Smith.

Senator Sheldon, on 15 October 2019, said: 'When you answer the questions it drives results, and it drives accountability. This is what this parliament is for.' And then I have to say, with all due respect to poor Senator Ciccone, I will have to remind you of what you stated on 3 December 2019, but I'm sure you impress upon your ministers this:

It is a fundamental responsibility of this place to hold any government of the day to account. The Australian community expect us as senators to ask these very questions. These questions need to be asked. For any minister of the Crown to simply ignore this place—to disrespect the Senate and, through it, the Australian community—is very much unacceptable.

I have to say, it was very well said, Senator Ciccone. It is just a shame that both the Prime Minister of Australia and, in my case, Minister Burke, have not listened to what are your very wise words.

As Senator Ruston has clearly articulated—as is evident from what those on the other side said when they were in opposition and certainly by the actions of the now Albanese government ministers but, in particular, the Prime Minister himself—they set themselves the standards of being a government that would have integrity, be transparent with the Senate and the other place and the Australian people, and certainly provide accountability. And yet, day after day after day—and we haven't even reached the first year anniversary of the election—all we, in this Senate and the Australia people, are seeing is a government that doesn't really care what it said prior to the election, a government that once elected turns its back on the promises that it made, a government that fails to hold itself to the standards it set and, quite frankly, is a government that is just full of broken promises.