Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of all answers given to the coalition's questions in questions without notice earlier today.

There was an editorial in the Australian on Thursday 13 June entitled 'Public deserves full truth on Higgins weaponisation'. They didn't get that today. They didn't get the full truth today, just as they didn't get the full truth at that now infamous Senate estimates hearing back in 2021.

What we heard from the relevant minister today and in her statement earlier today was that she did in fact mislead the Senate at that estimates hearing. There is absolutely no question about that. So, firstly, she did mislead, and, secondly, the minister refuses to provide details of the information which she had prior to that estimates hearing even though it is of great public interest. Thirdly, she continues the attack on those on this side of the chamber, including on my good friend, and I'm proud to call her my good friend, Senator Reynolds. Senator Reynolds has been put through absolute misery mercilessly by Senator Gallagher and others in relation to this matter—absolutely mercilessly—and she expects us on this side of the chamber to show her the quarter which she never gave to our colleague Senator Reynolds. It won't be given. We will hold you to the same standard that you sought to hold Senator Reynolds, but we will not go into areas which are inappropriate, unlike Senator Gallagher, who did in that Senate estimates hearing.

So the first issue is did she mislead the Senate. Let's go to the transcript, and I've actually got the transcript of that committee hearing on 4 June 2021. This is what Senator Gallagher said—and I should say this was after prolonged questioning of Senator Reynolds, as indicated in the Hansard: 'No-one had any knowledge. How dare you. It's all about protecting yourself.' That was the full quote from the transcript. I note that Senator Gallagher conveniently left out the words 'How dare you? It is all about protecting yourself,' but, in addition to the absolute denial about 'No-one had any knowledge', there was also a continuation of the personal attack on my colleague Senator Reynolds. That is the full context of this matter.

Now, by admission in her own statement, she says:

I want to be clear with this Senate … I was provided with information in the days before the allegations were first reported—

That's what the minister has said in her own statement, which is absolutely at odds with what she said at Senate estimates. She did mislead the Senate. You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to work that out. It's clear on the evidence that she misled the Senate. Then, when we asked legitimate questions about what she did know, what information she was provided, she refused to answer.

Let's see how she treated my good friend Senator Reynolds in estimates in relation to the issue of information, in a direct quote from page 115 of the transcript:

You are the person who, out of all of this, has avoided answering or providing information about your state of knowledge or any facts relating to this matter.

And what are we hearing today? The senator refusing to provide information. It's absolute rank hypocrisy of the first order. There was no answer with respect to whether or not she had the transcript of the project interview before it went to air, no answer to the question as to whether or not she provided any feedback with respect to that information and no answer to the question as to whether or not she put forward questions to be asked or to be prepared for. There's only this blanket claim of confidentiality. She didn't provide the same standard as Senator Reynolds, which she now seeks to invoke—no, absolutely not.

The Australian public has a right to know the information in relation to this. This is no longer a public matter. The project interview has gone to press. There has been a court trial. It's no longer confidential. It is entirely in the public domain. The people of Australia have a right to know the answers to these questions.