George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is directed to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Evans. I refer the minister to reports in weekend newspapers that:

KEVIN Rudd abstained from voting on a Cabinet decision on book prices because daughter Jessica is writing a novel.

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Days of our Lives.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, Senator Coonan, it is said to be a novel ‘about the rise of a Machiavellian MP’. Is the minister able to confirm that the Prime Minister’s reason for absenting himself from that cabinet decision was that a family member is an aspiring author?

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

Senator Brandis is right to highlight the talents of Mr Rudd and his family. They are a very talented family. I am in awe of the skills of those I have met. I am not aware of Jessica’s talent as an author, but I also noted that comment. Senator Brandis would be well aware that I do not comment on cabinet decisions—who voted for what, what was said et cetera. There is a longstanding practice, as all senators are aware, that cabinet ministers do not comment on cabinet processes or cabinet decisions.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Is it now the government’s policy that the Prime Minister or other members of cabinet are entitled to avoid taking positions on matters of policy affecting all Australians if there is the possibility that family members or other associates are indirectly affected?

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

As I understand it, the cabinet rules provide for people to excuse themselves from discussion and decision making where there is a conflict of interest. I am not sure, Senator Faulkner, whether that guidance has changed since the previous government. In any event, as Senator Brandis would be well aware, there is guidance for cabinet ministers and ministers in terms of matters where they might feel they have some sort of conflict of interest. But, as I made very clear to the Senate, and as he well knows, there will be no way that those cabinet processes will be discussed by cabinet ministers in this chamber.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Is it the practice of this government that ministers may abstain from policy decisions on tax or social security if there are potential effects on their relatives’ affairs? Could they abstain from decisions in relation to military engagements if they had a relative in the armed services? Can the government claim to govern in the national interest if that is its practice? Or was this merely a fictional excuse to excuse the Prime Minister from dodging a difficult policy question?

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

I think Senator Brandis seriously undermines his reputation as a serious player in this chamber by the nature of his questions. It is clearly a sign that the opposition have run out of ideas if we get such a question. I suggest Senator Brandis do the hard policy work required to take an interest in the issues that Australians are interested in.