Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance and Administration (Senator Minchin) to questions without notice asked by Senators Evans and Wong today relating to a function for the Liberal Party held at Kirribilli House and political donations.

In doing so I thank the minister for that supplementary answer, which confirms that the Prime Minister is under investigation by the AEC for what Senator Minchin himself describes as a Liberal Party function. He is exactly right. It was a Liberal Party function which business observers paid $8,000 to attend along with two other functions. A Liberal Party fundraiser was conducted at Kirribilli House, organised by the Prime Minister and largely supported by taxpayers. Taxpayers, who are paying the wages of the staff and the upkeep of Kirribilli House, have directly contributed to the cost of the Liberal Party organising fundraisers at official residences. I thought this was extraordinary and a terrible development in Australian politics.

I understand from the Prime Minister’s press conference that he has done this before. I understand he has got form on this. He thinks that he has done it once or twice—no doubt all that will come out. But the clear offence that has occurred here is that the Liberal Party have charged people for access to government and taxpayer funded facilities. They have sought to abuse their trust and they have abused their role as the government of this country in order to further their narrow political interests. This is partisan behaviour on behalf of the Prime Minister. It is not behaviour that the old John Howard would have conducted. This shows the deterioration in the standards of the government. This shows the commitment now of the government to do whatever it takes and to use whatever taxpayer funded resources are available to achieve their political ends. People understand; they are very cynical about the Howard government’s use of taxpayer funded advertising and they know taxpayers’ funds are being used to promote the government. We have seen the worst abuse of this in recent months and we will see more in the lead-up to the election. People have in some ways come to accept it because they have seen it all before; they know that in an election year taxpayers’ funds will be used by the Prime Minister to support his re-election. But what is becoming increasingly apparent is a pattern of behaviour that sees the Prime Minister abusing his office in a much more personal way. We remember of course the alterations to the dining room in Parliament House that were proposed—the third dining room alteration under the Howards. They did the Lodge, they did Kirribilli and then they were going to do Parliament House.

We have seen the $243,000 for alcohol at the official residences, the Prime Minister inviting his mates around for a booze-up and putting the cost on the taxpayers. We have seen the Broome holiday. The Prime Minister went to Broome on holiday at taxpayers’ expense. He flew in on the VIP jet and he flew out on the VIP jet. When concern was raised, when the light was shone on this issue, the Prime Minister again sought to make a reimbursement. He fronted up $1,200 each for him and Mrs Howard to meet the costs of the VIP flight in and out of Broome, which on return took them to Brisbane. Economy rates for Broome to Brisbane are $1,200. It cost taxpayers about $54,000, but we got 2½ grand back from John Howard for the cost of his holiday in Broome. So what you are seeing is a pattern of personal behaviour that the Prime Minister did not indulge in in his early days in office, but his standards have dropped as the standards of this government have fallen dramatically.

We have this latest incident where the government seeks to abuse its position, abuse taxpayers’ funds and run fundraisers for the Liberal Party, where donors to the Liberal Party—people who donate $8,000—are invited to official government residences and entertained as part of their donation. This behaviour is extraordinary. It is wrong, the Prime Minister knows it is wrong, and every Australian will know it is wrong when they see the telecast of his press conference. I have never seen him look so bad. I have never seen such an appalling performance by the Prime Minister, because he could not explain his behaviour. His behaviour was totally inappropriate. He could provide no rational answer. He even admitted that it was part of the fundraising effort on behalf of the Liberal Party. The Prime Minister ought to stand condemned for his behaviour. This is a new low in the standards of this government. I am not sure how low you can go, but increasingly the standards are falling. (Time expired)

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a ramble, Senator Evans. Perhaps it would not hurt if you looked a little bit into your own history—into the history of your Labor Party and the activities of your prime ministers when they were in office. Then you might find that your wild accusations are way off the mark. If you want to talk about fundraisers and Kirribilli House, how about referring to the fundraiser that Prime Minister Hawke had in 1987 in Kirribilli House? He had a fundraiser there for millionaires and multimillionaires, who were secretly invited so that nobody would know who was on the list. Then, when they got there, who was walking around amongst the millionaires and multimillionaires but the well-known ‘fixer’ Graham Richardson, touching every one of them for somewhere between $30,000 and $100,000, to be paid after the election so that it could be hidden in the administrative costs of the Labor Party. Why don’t you read your own history and look at the use of Kirribilli House—$30,000 to $100,000 from those touched by Graham Richardson—for what was unarguably a fundraiser?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Have a crack at Kirribilli.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the case of Kirribilli House, where we had a function on the occasion of the federal council, those people who were business observers certainly never paid $30,000 or $100,000. They paid to be business observers and they went to a function—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They didn’t invite senators because they had not paid eight grand.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

that was hosted by the Prime Minister in Kirribilli House. If Senator Evans wants to look into the history of the Labor Party and see what previous prime ministers have used Kirribilli House for, he ought to take a close look at Prime Minister Hawke. It was probably when Senator Faulkner was deputy secretary of the Labor Party in New South Wales; that seems to be about the right time.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Have a crack at defending the function.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you are going to let him keep yelling out like that, Mr Deputy President—

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ferguson, address your comments through the chair. Senator Evans, cease interjecting.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When you have a function hosted by a Labor Prime Minister where the multimillionaires are touched for $30,000 to $100,000, that is all okay! ‘What about Kirribilli House?’ says Senator Evans. Kirribilli House was used for a function as part of the program that was put in place for the Liberal Party’s annual federal council and the people that went there—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chris Evans interjecting—

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

apart from delegates, who paid their way to go to the federal Liberal council—were people who were business observers. You do not like it when it hurts, Senator Evans, because your arguments are blown out of the water. In the other place today we heard the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Rudd, ask the Prime Minister some seven questions. When the Prime Minister replied, talking about the fundraiser that was put on by Prime Minister Hawke in order to gain contributions from the millionaires and multimillionaires that attended, Mr Rudd immediately moved a censure motion. He was not going to ask any more questions once the facts came out, once the truth came out.

We have this ridiculous situation where the Labor Party has come into this place harping on about a function at Kirribilli House—where delegates went for a couple of hours, where business observers had paid to attend the federal council where all of the business took place, where they were spoken to and where they had the opportunity to talk to all of the delegates—and they say that this was a Liberal Party fundraiser. I have never heard such rubbish in my life. If you want to talk about a fundraiser, talk about Richo moving amongst people, asking for contributions of $30,000 to $100,000. That is the real thing, isn’t it, Senator Faulkner? Senator Faulkner, who would probably have been well aware of what was going on at the time, knew that this was the way you raised funds. You have a secret dinner at Kirribilli House where you do not know who is going to the function, and when you get there you have Richo moving amongst them, touching them all for between $30,000 and 100 grand, all to be paid after the election. It was a pretty smart move, Senator Faulkner, but do not come in here painting yourselves as lilywhite and try to describe a function held at Kirribilli House for delegates to a council meeting and for business observers as a fundraiser. That is about the most ridiculous description I have ever heard, Senator Evans. You want to go back and check the history. Just check the history. (Time expired)

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let us be clear about the facts of the Kirribilli House situation—the Kirribilli House cocktail party that Prime Minister Howard hosted for Liberal Party council delegates and donors to the Liberal Party of Australia. Let us be clear what the facts are. First, Mr Howard, the Prime Minister, hosted a function at Kirribilli House for Liberal Party donors and Liberal Party federal council delegates. Let us be clear about who was invited to this function. It was not people off the street, it was not people in the electorate, it was not constituents—it was delegates to your federal council and people who donate to your political party. So let us be very clear about who was on the invitation list for this exclusive event. Second, 225 people at this event and just over $5,000 paid by the Liberal Party—

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! There is too much noise. I understand people are a little bit excited and I understand it is Thursday afternoon.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We’re just keeping the gallery awake!

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not need your interjection, Senator Ian Macdonald. Senator Wong, you should address your comments through the chair and others should not interject during your speech. Someone else asked me to invoke that ruling, but the very person who asked me to invoke that is now interjecting as much as the other person who was interjecting upon them. I think a little bit of respect for the chair and the chamber is important.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Through you, Mr Deputy President: what do we know about this event? First, the Prime Minister holds a function to which only Liberal Party federal council delegates and donors to the Liberal Party are invited. Second, the Liberal Party of Australia pay back just over $5,000—a fraction of the real cost. Where else in Australia can 220 people have canapes, shots of posh soup, oysters, prawns and two hours worth of wine for $5,000?  I want to know where you can get that. You would struggle to pay less at your local pub for a fisherman’s basket and a pint of beer.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A VB and a party pie!

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes. Another thing we know about this matter is that not one cent was paid by the Liberal Party of Australia to the Australian taxpayer or to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet for the use of the venue. Not one red cent was paid for the use of the venue. So you cannot get away with arguing this was full cost recovery, because the Australian taxpayer has, effectively, through their funding of Kirribilli House, subsidised your fundraiser and your venue. Kirribilli House is not a Liberal Party function centre, but that is how this Prime Minister is treating it.

What else do we know? We know that the Commonwealth Electoral Act requires in-kind donations to be disclosed. We know that that is a provision of the Electoral Act. What was this? This certainly was a free venue—I note Senator Minchin in question time today said he may come back to us on this—although, arguably, there may have been some other in-kind donation associated with the cost, because no-one in Australia can believe that you only pay $9.46 for this kind of food and only $6.50 for this kind of wine over two hours. We know that the Electoral Act requires disclosure of in-kind donations and we also know that the Australian Electoral Commission is investigating whether or not there is something here that needs to be disclosed.

Steve Hutchins (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There’s something fishy here!

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, there’s definitely something fishy here. What have we seen over the last few days? We have seen this Prime Minister trying to worm his way out of this. He is in a difficult situation and he is trying to worm his way out of it. We have seen a range of defences put by the Prime Minister. First, he says, ‘I was acting in accordance with the advice of my department’—this mysterious advice that Senator Minchin says he would not mislead us about, but he refuses to table it, refuses to tell us who sought it, refuses to tell us what it says and refuses to tell us when it was provided. So we have no idea whether this is some old advice or some recent advice, but the government will hide behind it anyway. Second, I think Senator Minchin told us, I think, the day before yesterday in question time that this AEC disclosure issue was a bit silly. Well, the AEC is now investigating. And the third thing we have been told is that it is not a fundraiser. What did the Prime Minister say in the press conference? He was asked:

The nub of this is it is fundraising, isn’t it?

You will have to excuse the grammar, Mr Deputy President. The Prime Minister said:

Yes, but, well, it is that and, well, sometimes a gathering of the type that I have alluded to, you know, might in a remote way be associated with fundraising.

So every defence you put up is just drifting away. You say in here it is not a fundraiser. Even the Prime Minister on the public record in his press conference admits that it is a fundraiser. You have no excuse. (Time expired)

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On Monday I commended Senator Faulkner on the quality and consistency of his confected outrage, but I think Senator Wong has now just eclipsed Senator Faulkner. In the absence of confected outrage, what are the facts here? The facts are, yes, there was a function held on 1 June 2007 at Kirribilli House. The function was for invited guests of the Prime Minister. The guests were, indeed, delegates and business observers of the federal council of the Liberal Party. The costs of the function were fully reimbursed by the Liberal Party. The costs were, on a per head basis, comparable with other functions held at Kirribilli House and the Lodge. The function was held following the decision, which took into account previous advice from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, that it was appropriate to hold functions on a full cost recovery basis. The function was appropriate and the function was at no cost to the taxpayer. End of issue! The Prime Minister of Australia, by virtue of his office, is entitled to temporarily occupy Kirribilli House. Kirribilli House is temporarily his residence and, given the fact that that is temporarily his residence, he is entitled to exercise his discretion and invite whomever he wants to his residence.

Prime Minister Hawke exercised that discretion when he invited then Treasurer Keating, the then Secretary of the ACTU and a prominent business figure to his house to discuss a certain pact. Prime Minister Hawke exercised his discretion there. The opposition are asserting a breach of the Commonwealth Electoral Act. The opposition are asserting a gift in kind and a failure to disclose. The ALP are alleging conspiracy and cover-up. All of these claims are absolutely baseless. The Prime Minister has made it clear that he has received preliminary legal advice from Mr Burmester that there is no issue. The Prime Minister has indicated that he is very relaxed with the AEC conducting inquiries. Despite Labor accusations, the government has not sought—and never would seek—to interfere in an AEC investigation. We have the AEC’s own press release today to prove that. We all know what the ALP focus on Kirribilli House is about: it is a distraction from the ACTU’s megacampaign—a distraction from the Big Brother attempt to manipulate and intimidate unionists to vote Labor. Why wouldn’t regular, decent Australians who happen to be unionists be intimidated? They know that elements of the union movement are into payback. They know, and we know, that the ACTU are keeping a database on the responses—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is disorderly to shout across the chamber from both sides. I am trying to listen to Senator Fifield’s contribution to this debate.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We know, and those union members know, that the ACTU are keeping a database of their responses. This is Orwellian stuff. Imagine that you are at home one night and the union calls. Imagine that a few nights later the union calls again. Imagine a week later that the union calls for a third time. Then a week after that the union knocks on your front door—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The ACTU today were very quick to roll out for the papers a picture of a nice young 24-year-old ACTU worker. The message was, ‘How could she possibly intimidate anyone?’ No matter who the ACTU send out as their shock troops, we know that they are just a front for the Kevin Reynolds and the Dean Mighells. We know what these people really think of these regular decent union members—these ordinary members of the trade union movement. We know this from the ACTU campaign manual. It says, ‘It may be despicable to you that the member may agree with some of the federal government’s policies, but avoid getting into heated arguments. Such debates are likely to make the member dig their heels in.’ The ACTU holds the views of their own union members in absolute contempt. We know what the ACTU really think of the right of individuals to express their free will. We know what an ALP victory will mean: it will mean a Kevin Rudd ACTU puppet government. That is what awaits Australians if the ALP is elected to office. The ACTU have questions to answer to the AEC about their own database. (Time expired)

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister has turned Kirribilli House into a fundraising venue for the Liberal Party. He has crossed the line in Australian politics in doing so. We in the Labor Party have always said that the Prime Minister’s expenditure at Kirribilli House is scandalous. Just one example is the excessive grog bill since Mr Howard became Prime Minister. Some $243,244 and counting has been spent at the Lodge and Kirribilli House. It has all been guzzled by Mr Howard and his cronies and all paid for by taxpayers. Kirribilli House, as we know, has become the venue for Christmas parties, for New Year’s Eve parties, for all these other knees-ups—for any excuse at all for a knees-up for Mr Howard. A number of years ago I dubbed Kirribilli House as party central. Now, of course, Kirribilli House is no longer party central: it is Liberal Party central. It has become an absolute example of the misuse and abuse of taxpayers money that we see from this government. We ask for answers in relation to the misuse of Kirribilli House by Mr Howard. We ask for some transparency. We ask for some accountability. We ask for the truth. And, of course, just for a change, what do we get? Just the same old response: none at all.

Today in question time we asked: what was the total food and drink bill for the Liberal Party function—not just the cost paid for by the Liberals? There was no answer. We asked what advice was provided by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet about costs that should be paid for by the Liberal Party. There was no answer. We want to know when the advice was sought. We want to know when it was provided. We want to know who sought that advice. We want to know why the government will not table that advice if they have got nothing to hide. Why the cover-up? Instead of the truth, what have we got? Ducking and weaving—a cover-up. The issue now is the definition of a ‘fundraiser’. We saw Mr Howard, before question time, in panic mode. Out he went to a press conference in the Prime Minister’s courtyard, red-faced—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And this was at 1.30 pm.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This was at 1.30 pm. He was red-faced, twitching and had that horrible, hollowed out Halloween-pumpkin-like smile he gets on his face when he is under pressure. He almost uttered the whole sentence: ‘I will decide who will come to Kirribilli House and the circumstances in which they come.’ He nearly got the whole sentence out until he realised, ‘Uh-oh, we have a problem.’ He did not quite say it, but he meant it. He will decide who comes, but, I tell you what, he will not pay for it—the taxpayers will be stuck for the bill every single time. And he will not say who goes to these functions; he will not give you a list of attendees. He will not give the cost to the taxpayers. There is no accountability, no transparency, no honesty and no decency in process in relation to this.

Mr Howard in question time solved at least one thing: we know it is a fundraiser. In question time on Tuesday, Mr Howard said, ‘It was not a fundraiser, and you know that.’ Today, Mr Howard was asked:

The nub of this is it is fundraising, isn’t it?’

Let me quote Mr Howard’s answer—I do not often do it, but I am going to enjoy it now. Mr Howard said:

Yes, but, well, it is that and, well, sometimes a gathering of the type that I have alluded to, you know, might in a remote way be associated with fundraising.

Thank you, Mr Howard, for that clear explanation—that clear admission that you are sticking the taxpayers for the bill for these functions at Kirribilli House. The Liberal Party is not paying; Mr Howard is not paying; the taxpayers are paying. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.