Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy. I refer the minister to comments made by the Auditor-General in relation to the National Broadband Network on 26 May this year. I quote the Auditor-General, who said:

Amendments to the RFP would be required for non-compliant bids to be accepted.

How can the minister claim that Telstra’s letter can be formally considered under this process?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Birmingham for his ongoing interest in these issues. Before 12 pm yesterday, Telstra submitted a document into the box designated for receiving proposals under the government’s National Broadband Network RFP.

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy, resume your seat. It is disorderly to debate this across the chamber when we are trying to hear Senator Conroy and get an answer to the question that was asked by Senator Birmingham. I ask senators to desist. Senator Conroy, you are entitled to be heard in silence.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This proposal included a signed proponent’s declaration form. Yesterday morning, Telstra released a media statement in which Telstra chairman, Don McGauchie, stated:

Telstra believes the Government can consider its proposal under the existing terms of the RFP…

Yesterday afternoon, Telstra Policy and Communications GMD David Quilty told CommsDay:

It’s a request for proposals. We put in a proposal. We believe it enables us to be assessed.

Last night, Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie told Lateline Business:

… we have put in a proposal to the Government which is within the terms of the RFP.

They are certainly more right than those opposite. In this context we have said that Telstra’s proposal will be assessed against the RFP by the expert panel in exactly the same way as those of all other bidders. To do otherwise could unnecessarily expose the government to legal action. The government’s NBN process is being conducted subject to strict probity principles for very good reason. It is because we take the integrity— (Time expired)

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Coonan interjecting—

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. The minister seems to be suggesting that Telstra, rather than the government, are setting the rules for this process. If the minister wants to quote Telstra, my supplementary question is as follows: Telstra equally said that they were unable to submit a full and detailed bid as part of the minister’s tender process. In light of this, and given the Auditor-General’s advice, how can the minister justify allowing Telstra’s letter to be formally considered under exactly the same process as other full and detailed bids, directly in contravention of what seems to be the Auditor-General’s own advice?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is disappointing that Senator Birmingham, who is somebody who has diligently applied himself to the issues around the RFP—

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He’s read the newspapers!

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, no! To be fair, Senator Carr—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy, ignore the interjections. Refer your comments to the chair.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Birmingham has done more than just read the newspapers. He has questioned my department and me at considerable length about the RFP. I know that he even has a copy. So it is disappointing that he has not bothered to read it in its entirety. The government’s NBN process is being conducted subject to strict probity principles for very good reason.

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Coonan interjecting—

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is because we take the integrity of this process very seriously. Unlike those opposite—and I am hearing continual interjections from Senator Coonan—we are not going to do what Senator Coonan did last year— (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. The minister indicated in his opening answer that the government did not wish to be exposed to unnecessary legal risks. Does the minister accept that his whole process is at risk of becoming a farce if Telstra’s letter, rather than its full and detailed bid, is in fact treated equally to all other formal bids? In terms of the legal risk, does the minister agree that other compliant bidders, who have lodged full and detailed bids, may have every right to challenge such a decision if the government ignores the Auditor-General’s advice?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are committed to conducting a fair, equal assessment process. As I said, Senator Birmingham, you have a copy of the RFP. Let me be clear: I did see some commentary yesterday from some members of the opposition, less informed than you, who claimed that there were threats that legal action would be taken if the Telstra document were admitted. I note that you chose not to name anybody.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy, address your comments to the chair.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You have every opportunity in the take note of answers debate after question time to name a company that has suggested that it is considering legal advice. You are welcome to name it. You are welcome to name anyone who has suggested that. What we have to do is follow the process set in train. We will not do what Senator Coonan did last year, when she was running this portfolio—that is, start a process and then, halfway through it, change the goalposts and only tell one bidder. And, funnily enough, the one bidder was the winning bidder. Twenty-seven other bidders did not even know the process had been changed— (Time expired)