Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I listened with great interest to the answer to the first question today from Senator Cash on the unnecessary release of 147 dangerous detainees from immigration detention. I think the Attorney-General's conduct at the press conference yesterday should alarm all Australians and absolutely put into question his fitness for the job as our first law officer. Peta Credlin last night criticised the Attorney-General for trying to use a 'big man's tactic' of 'intellectual intimidation' against a very fine Sky News reporter Olivia Caisley. I actually disagree with Peta Credlin. He is using a big man's tactic and intellectual intimidation, and, as Sussan Ley and others have said, it's also probably one of the worst cases of mansplaining. But I think it is so much worse than that and goes against the code of conduct of this place, and it is a very, very clear case of bullying. Let me tell you why.

First of all, let's have a look at what he actually said. Speaking to the media yesterday, he was asked by Sky News political reporter Olivia Caisley whether he; the Minister for Home Affairs, Clare O'Neil; or the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, Andrew Giles, would apologise to the Australian people for releasing criminals. Of course he should have apologised to the Australian people. Of course all three of them should have apologised to the Australian people. But instead of saying, 'Yes, we got it wrong,' and respecting the journalist, he pointed his finger at Ms Caisley and called the question 'absurd'. He said:

You are asking a cabinet minister, three ministers of the Crown, to apologise for upholding the law of Australia, for acting in accordance with the law of Australia, for following the instructions of the High Court of Australia.

How dare an Australian journalist ask this question. He said:

I will not be apologising for upholding the law. I will not be apologising for pursuing the rule of law and I will not be apologising for acting …

Then he pointed, and he said:

Do not interrupt … I will not be apologising for acting in accordance with a High Court decision.

Of course, he wasn't.

Let me go to the code of conduct of this place. It contains five principles. Principle No. 1 says, 'Act respectfully, professionally and with integrity.' He didn't. He breached the first. The second principle is: 'Encourage and value diverse perspectives and recognise the importance of a free exchange of ideas.' Clearly, he breached the second principle. The third is: 'Recognise your power, influence or authority and do not abuse them. Clearly, as the first law officer of this nation, he has contravened the third principle as well. The fourth is: 'Uphold laws that support safe and respectful workplaces, including anti-discrimination, employment, work health and safety and criminal laws. Clearly, he has breached the fourth guideline. It was not a safe or respectful workplace for the journalist in that place. The fifth principle is: 'Bullying, harassment, sexual harassment or assault, or discrimination in any form, including on the grounds of race, age, sex, sexuality, gender identity, disability, or religion will not be tolerated, condoned or ignored.' Guess what. The first law officer of this nation, the Attorney-General, has managed a hat-trick of five. He has managed, in my opinion and, I'm sure, in the opinion of every average Australian, to break all five of the principles of our code of conduct.

Not only is it a breach of the code of conduct of this place, the behaviour he demonstrated yesterday would not be acceptable in any other workplace in this country—not one—except this place. How can it be that a lot of our journalists have chosen not to report about this? As Peter Dutton observed yesterday, if this was anybody on our side of politics, they would have been drummed out of the parliament already, but there has been not a word. Bullying comes not only in such an overt fashion but in many other fashions. I've run out of time to go through all of those at this time, but those of that office should hang their heads in shame.

Question agreed to.