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

During the adjournment debate on Monday 27 February, Senator Brown raised a point of order in relation to remarks made by Senator Macdonald. I undertook to review the Hansard and consider the matter. Having done so, I consider that there was no point of order because there is no prohibition in the standing orders on referring to matters that are before committees.

However, in the general—and I hope that people listen and understand that I am speaking in the general—I remind all senators that I have made several statements relating to a particular matter before the Privileges Committee and that I have warned senators against continuing to canvass those or related matters whilst they are before the Privileges Committee.

All senators have a right to feel that any matter before the Privileges Committee that may concern them is dealt with in accordance with its well respected practices without any attempts to argue the case in the chamber. There is an issue of fundamental fairness at stake. I remind senators that privilege resolution 9, which enjoins senators to exercise the great privilege of freedom of speech responsibly, refers specifically to the damage that can be done by allegations made in parliament and to the need for senators to have regard to the rights of others.

Whilst it is not my intention to constrain the rights of individual senators to debate, within the Standing Orders, matters of their choice in the chamber, it is clearly my intention to honour the spirit of privilege resolution 9. Therefore, as a matter of fundamental fairness, it is becoming intolerable to have contributions in the chamber refer to this matter whilst it is under consideration.

There will be time, when the committee reports, for the Senate to consider the committee's findings and recommendations and for there to be a robust debate. I therefore seek the cooperation of all senators to desist from engaging in any further comments and remarks on this matter until the Privileges Committee reports.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a short statement.

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

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, your ruling is correct, and your quote on the matter is quite correct. But the Senate needs to reflect that, as far back as 1984, the Privileges Committee noted the possibility that the reputation of senators might be damaged if matters such as this were to continue to be raised. Damage to the reputation of senators was clearly—one has only to look at the Hansardan outcome of Senator Macdonald's contribution the other night. You are quite right, Mr President, to have called it to order and to have made a breakthrough ruling that it should not happen again.

The Privileges Committee's deliberations at the moment are unprecedented in that there has been no result despite the matter's having been referred to it some three or four months ago. That in itself, in my view, is a travesty, and I am sure that Senator Milne shares that view. Never should this chamber lend itself through its debate system to the sorts of repeated accusations that were earlier referred to the committee.

Your ruling is correct, Mr President, and I hope that it will be implemented in the future so that the behaviour which Senator Macdonald engaged in on Monday night cannot ever be repeated in this Senate.

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

Mr President, I seek leave to make a brief statement on this matter.

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

Leave is granted for two minutes.

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

I thank the Senate. Mr President, the coalition accepts your ruling and understands the manner in which you have approached this. I might say it is fair and reasonable. I simply remind people listening in that those that complain about canvassing these issues should remind themselves that they issued media releases about this issue: for example, commenting that certain issues 'highlights the opposition's highly compromised position as accusers' or, on another occasion, 'We have absolutely nothing to fear from this fairly sleazy move'—statements in the media by the Australian Greens. When they want to attack the accusers, they do so publicly. Yet again it seems as though there is one law for the Greens and another law for everybody else.

I also briefly remind honourable senators of the occasion when I was referred to the Privileges Committee on a certain matter. Might I say they kindly, and unanimously, found that I had acted in good faith at all times and the matter was dismissed. But, whilst that matter was before the Privileges Committee, I am sure all honourable senators will recall that other senators took it upon themselves to do media, constantly referring to the fact that I was before the Privileges Committee—

Government senators interjecting—

There are interjections from those opposite. Mr President, in this game every now and then these things occur, but what is astounding in this matter is—including the point of order that was raised previously by Senator Bob Brown—and I simply say to the Australian Greens, that those that live in glass houses should not throw stones. Were the Greens stopped from talking about me when I was before the Privileges Committee? No. But should others be stopped when they are before the Privileges Committee? Yes, and that is the double standard.

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I seek leave to make a short statement.

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

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It had not been my intention to comment further, but the disingenuous remarks of Senator Abetz require a response. Firstly, the Australian Greens did not discuss any matter concerning Senator Abetz and its referral to the Privileges Committee at that time. Let me put that on the record. Secondly, Senator Abetz referred to media releases. What he did not say was that the media releases were in response to media releases and media coverage generated by Senator Abetz. Both in this chamber and outside on 6 July Senator Abetz put out lengthy press releases and chronologies which canvassed the matters which some months later became the subject of a reference to the Privileges Committee. Any media generated subsequently was in response to his attempt to beat up a story to besmirch the reputations of Senator Brown and me. I think it is important for anyone who is interested to realise that Senator Abetz on 6 July 2011 started the process in the media, and it was reported in Tasmania on the Tasmanian Times.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a short statement for no more than 60 seconds.

Leave granted.

Mr President, I did hear your ruling. I heard that you completely rejected the point of order and found that there was no point of order, which was quite appropriate, if I might say so. I have heard what you have said subsequently and, as always, I will abide by your urgings. I ask that the Greens also do that when it happens to someone else. So thank you for that ruling.

Lest anyone listening might be in any doubt, Mr President, having heard Senator Bob Brown say that you upheld his point of order, you rejected the point of order comprehensively. You did not, as Senator Brown attempted to suggest, uphold his point of order. You never did that and I appreciate your ruling. I thank you for it and I will abide by your urgings.