Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Special Minister of State, Senator Ludwig. Will the minister confirm that the Labor government has erected signs in schools which breach the Commonwealth Electoral Act? Has the minister sought advice as to whether the signage also breaches any state electoral act?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Ronaldson for his question. As the Senate would know, successive Australian governments have required projects funded by the Commonwealth to carry signage for the life of the project or program, identifying project details and funding sources. It has always been the convention that signs relating to government projects do not carry an authorisation message. The Nation Building Economic Stimulus Plan signs are used to mark Primary Schools for the 21st Century and science and language centre projects under the Building the Education Revolution program. The signs do carry the Nation Building Economic Stimulus Plan brand which is applied to all joint programs and information activities and to materials for projects initiated under the plan. The signs and government websites are intended to assist the public.

We have received advice from the Australian Electoral Commission which suggested that authorisations may be necessary for some signs under the Commonwealth Electoral Act, and, in light of the impending Bradfield by-election and out of an abundance of caution, I announced on 3 September that the government will affix authorisations to all signs already in place and ensure future signs are produced with authorisations. Additionally it is necessary for the government to ensure that these signs are not displayed within six metres of the entrance to a polling booth on the day of a federal election or by-election.

We have taken on board the advice from the AEC. When you look at the opposition’s position, I am advised that, under the previous government’s programs, such as Roads to Recovery, around 70,000 recognition signs were erected. Roads to Recovery signs— (Time expired)

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Minister, now that Labor has been caught out clearly and deliberately breaching the Electoral Act for cheap political purposes, will the minister give the Senate an undertaking that the government will not erect any further signs and that the 4,000 already in place will be removed within seven days? Will the minister also apologise to the Senate for misrepresenting the position in relation to the Investing in Our Schools Program in which there was no mandatory requirement for signage at all? Will the minister now apologise for indicating otherwise?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the opposition quite well know, this is a matter that has now been determined by me and the AEC have provided that advice. It is one of those areas where, if you look at the previous government’s record—and it surprises me that they should raise it—and if you look at Roads to Recovery signs, they had to remain—

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on a point of order: the question clearly asked the minister whether, having been caught out red-handed doing this for cheap political purposes, he would now give an undertaking to the Senate that the 4,000 signs that have been erected will be removed and whether he would give an undertaking to the Senate that no further signs will be erected in the future.

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

What is the point of order?

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

Senator Conroy interjecting—

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

Senator Conroy, I am asking what the point of order is, because I heard an argument—

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Clearly it was on the issue of relevance, Mr President.

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

There is no point of order. The minister has 33 seconds remaining to answer the question.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The previous government actually required Roads to Recovery signs to remain on display for a minimum of one year after the completion of the project itself. Similarly, I am advised that there were 6,000 recognition signs erected for black spot projects. This government takes the issue very seriously. What we did was act on the AEC advice and— (Time expired)

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given that the minister has now admitted that these signs are $3.8 million of political advertising, why hasn’t this campaign been referred to the Auditor-General for evaluation, as is required by the government’s own communication guidelines?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The guidelines on campaign advertising apply to advertising information campaigns which involve paid placement of advertisements in the media valued at more than $250,000. The signs in question, it was deemed, do not meet these criteria. The Building the Education Revolution signage was not considered by the interdepartmental committee on communications or by the Australian National Audit Office because the signage was seen as routine advertising for operational activities carried out by a government agency.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

Order! Minister, resume your seat. When we have silence we will proceed. Senator Ludwig.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. Other examples of non-campaign advertising of this type include signage for the Black Spot Program on roads and national highway projects. Of course signage similar to those has been dealt with by this government and others. (Time expired)