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

My question is to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy. Has the government sought legal advice on the question of whether its abandonment of the Australia Network tender has exposed the Commonwealth to potential liability for the payment of damages to the tenderers?

Senator Birmingham interjecting—

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

They have brought in the big guns—sorry, Senator Birmingham. The Australia Network is a core element of Australia's overseas broadcasting network and a major public diplomacy platform. It makes a significant contribution to the promotion and protection of Australia's national interests. The Gillard government is determined to ensure the Australia Network has a strong and effective operator that will advance our national interests. The tender process was terminated on legal advice that it was compromised by the leaking of information confidential to the process. I would like to emphasise that at all times the government has acted within the terms and conditions of the tender process.

For the benefit of the Senate it is worth again explaining both how the Australia Network has come to this point and the absolute priority of the government's actions at every stage of the process. The government announced that it would conduct—

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

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The point is that the minister is not being directly relevant to the question. He was asked whether the government had sought legal advice about one matter—that is, the potential exposure of the Commonwealth to a liability and damages at the suit of the tenderers. He has referred to other legal advice on a different matter. He is now proposing to rehearse the history of the tender. He has not approached or gone near the question he was asked.

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

There is no point of order. Senator Conroy has been giving a direct and full answer to the question asked of him. The question went to the tender process and the legal issues associated with it, and Senator Conroy has been directly relevant to those questions and is putting in context the issues of the legal advice to the government in dealing with the tender process. He is directly on the point and has about 50 seconds to go to complete his answer, which will be a full answer to the question asked of him.

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

I have listened to the minister's answer very carefully. I believe the minister needs to address the question that has been raised.

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

The government announced that it will conduct an open tender process for the Australia Network in November last year, and, as is normal practice for these matters, placed an official public notification of the tender on AusTender on 4 February of this year. Tenderers were given until 25 March to respond. The tenders were considered by an independent panel of government officials in a process which, again—as is normal practice for such a large tender—took several months.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I draw your attention to the sessional orders that were changed some three years ago now and which required ministers to be directly relevant in answering questions. I would invite you to invoke that sessional order in relation to this answer.

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

I have already, in response to a previous point of order, drawn the minister's attention to the question, and I draw the minister's attention to the question again. The minister has 16 seconds remaining.

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

Despite Senator Birmingham's assertion, I had no involvement in the development of the ABC's bid during this time. I had no involvement; neither was I briefed on it. I was confident on principle that the ABC's bid was strong— (Time expired)

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

Mr President, before asking my first supplementary, I invite you to review the Hansard and report back to the Senate after your consideration of whether the minister defied two directions from you to address the question. My supplementary question is this: what is the government's estimate of the costs suffered by the Commonwealth as a result of the abandonment of the tender process and the additional costs which the Commonwealth will incur as a result of the tender process having to be repeated? Does the minister accept that responsibility for this debacle must lie somewhere within the government and that the liability for the damages caused by the leak must also fall upon the person or persons within the government who corrupted the process?

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

I repeat: the government at all stages followed legal advice in considering all of the issues that were relevant. During the period between the government's initial decision to put the Australia Network to an open tender and the finalisation of the independent panel's deliberations, we saw a significant number of international changes take place, including significant political transformation across the Middle East and North Africa. A number of consular crises also underlined the importance of ensuring that strengthened information services would be available from a range of sources. Consistent with its view that the Australia Network was a matter of national importance, the government—

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

Senator Conroy, I do draw your attention to the question.

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

I draw your attention to the answer I have given already. I have already referred to the legal advice. Consistent with its view that the Australia Network was a matter of national importance, the government wanted to ensure that the tender took account of these rapidly changing international events.

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order: this is the third clear defiance of your ruling in relation to relevance. I ask you to demand of the minister that he answer the question.

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

Senator Conroy is dealing with a complex issue. He is dealing with an issue that involves an inquiry into the leaking of information during the tender process. Senator Conroy has made it clear that his primary response to the questions asked of him is that the government is acting on that legal advice. That is perfectly directed to the questions asked of him. He is then trying to provide some information regarding those processes. He has made it clear there is an ongoing investigation and an ongoing process inside government, and I think he is directly relevant to the question being asked of him.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order, I would also like to draw your attention to the comment made by Senator Conroy towards you. I think it was a reflection on the chair and that you should ask him to withdraw that comment.

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

Senator Conroy has three seconds remaining in which to answer the question.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you going to ask him to withdraw?

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

I have already asked Senator Conroy to come to the question that was raised. The minister now has three seconds remaining.

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

As I said at the beginning of my answer, and I reiterate for those opposite, we considered all of the legal issues. (Time expired)

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

Mr President, when you review the transcript, as I have requested you to do, you will note that, for four times now, the minister has defied your ruling.

My second supplementary question is this: given that the government regards the matter as being of sufficient gravity to call in the Australian Federal Police, will the government also request the Auditor-General to determine the loss to the Commonwealth of the debacle of this corrupted tender process? If not, why not?

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

The leaking of the information, as mentioned just then by Senator Brandis and as I have previously advised, compromised the process. The government viewed the leak as serious, so serious, as Senator Brandis has indicated in his question, as to justify calling in the AFP. This action was in line with the advice of all departments involved. Taking this into account, as well as the fact that the leaking of confidential information was a matter which required investigation by the Australian Federal Police, the government was forced to abandon the Australia Network tender process. There was no way to assure ourselves that the final result in a negotiation as yet to take place was not open to challenge.

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

On a point of order, Mr President, as you are aware, all I asked was whether the government would call in the Auditor-General—and to explain if not why not. The question was only related to whether the Auditor-General would be engaged. The minister has only addressed the issue of the request to the Australian Federal Police to investigate the matter. Although the minister is treating your rulings with contempt, it must be said, Mr President, I do ask you to draw him to the question.

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

The question was broader than that which you have indicated. The minister is answering the question. The minister has 10 seconds remaining.

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

Much of the commentary on the leaked report has failed to appreciate that the next step in the tender process was to firm up bidder claims in contractual form. (Time expired)