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

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Evans. Is the minister aware that last night, in an interview with Tony Jones on the ABC's Lateline, his colleague Mr Bill Shorten was asked:

If the AWU were to set up a slush fund, effectively a re-election fund today which called itself a fund for training and workplace safety, would that be legal?

Mr Shorten replied:

Well, you can't use members' money to engage in the re-election of officials. That would not be appropriate. … But you cannot ever use members' money for purposes other than the advancement of the industrial interests of the members.

Does the minister agree that it would not be appropriate to use members' money to engage in the re-election of officials and that it is wrong to set up a slush fund to do so?

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

I did see Lateline last night, although I have not seen a transcript of it, so I would not want to comment on exactly what Mr Shorten said. But it seemed to me that his comments were absolutely on the mark in the sense that he was commenting on the question of whether or not members' money could be diverted for the purposes of a campaign expense of officials seeking election. Quite clearly that is not permissible. But if he then goes on to suggest that somehow persons who were not officers of the union, or were not responsible for the operation of the account, are somehow responsible for that, that is clearly a nonsense.

I think Mr Shorten made the very obvious point about the use of members' money. As a former union official, many, many years ago, I was always taught by my secretary that you absolutely had to ensure that members' money was used only for the advancement of the members and you ought to be able to stand up at a general meeting of the union and defend any expense incurred. That has always been a principle that the vast majority of trade union officials have adopted, operating inside their unions.

It is absolutely correct for Mr Shorten—

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not everyone got the memo.

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

That is correct, Senator.

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

When there is silence on both sides we will proceed. Senator Brandis is waiting for the answer to be continued.

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

I was making a point and then Senator Fierravanti-Wells interjected to make the point that she thinks there have been examples where that principle has not been followed, and, quite frankly, from what we have seen inside the HSU, that is right. No-one is more disappointed about that than other members of the labour movement. (Time expired)

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

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that Ms Gillard admitted in a formal interview with the partners of Slater & Gordon on 11 September 1995, shortly before her sudden departure from that firm, that she had indeed set up a 'slush fund'—her own words—for the very purpose of funding union elections within the AWU, why is it acceptable for the Prime Minister's own conduct, by her own admission, to fall short of the minimum standards of probity demanded by her own Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations?

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

Senator Brandis, in his attempt to muck-rake again, seeks to confuse two issues. I made it clear when I referred to what Minister Shorten said yesterday. For the record, I will quote what the Prime Minister said in relation to these allegations, back in November:

My role here was that as a lawyer I provided advice on the incorporation of an association. I was never connected with the operation of any fund, never connected with the operation of any fund. I was not an office bearer of the association, I was not involved in its activities, I was not involved in any bank accounts it may have held, I was not an official of the AWU, I was not in charge of the conveyancing file. So you are effectively asking me why didn't I report to authorities things I did not know.

What Senator Brandis seeks to do is deliberately mix the two issues. What Minister Shorten said about the use of members' money for re-election is absolutely correct.

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

Given the Prime Minister's long and notorious history of making false and misleading statements, how can the Australian people have confidence in the trustworthiness and integrity of someone whose own conduct, by her own admission, falls short of her own government's minimum standards of acceptable behaviour? Will the Prime Minister make a statement to the House of Representatives next week, as the member for Dobell, Mr Craig Thomson, did, to give a full and truthful explanation of her role in this affair?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought the era of personal denigration was over.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She started it, Penny, as a deliberate campaign—you, Roxon and Plibersek.

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Order! There are two people calling across the chamber at each other; let's get that straight. It is completely disorderly.

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

Again, this complete denigration—this smear campaign—that Senator Brandis seeks to pursue does him no credit. I quote what his leader, Mr Abbott, said on 6 October:

I hope that after the nasty personal politics of the last few months, in particular, we can focus on how do we actually build a better country.

That was Mr Abbott expressing the opposition's views about nasty personal politics. They come in here today and try to smear up Minister Carr on the basis of his time as Premier—I do not know how many years ago, but a very long time ago. Then they come in and try to smear up the Prime Minister. This is an opposition with nothing to contribute to public policy in this country. They are so low that they cannot see over the ditch they have dug for themselves.

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

Mr President, I seek leave to table the transcript of an interview between Ms Julia Gillard and Mr Peter Gordon, the managing partner of Slater & Gordon—

A government senator: It is already on the public record.

which is already on the public record, indeed, and which was shown to the government before question time—in which Ms Gillard admits that she created a slush fund with the AWU.

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

Is leave granted?

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

Provided Senator Brandis guarantees that it is a real document and not one that has been fixed up, yes.

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

Thank you. I table the document, Mr President.