David Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Would it be odd if I simply forgot that I had a job? Would it be peculiar if I just misplaced the title deed to my home? Would it be rather strange if, after doing a job for over a decade, I completely forgot core parts of it? I would hazard a guess that all but one senator here would answer yes. Yet we are expected to believe that that is exactly what has occurred with Senator Sinodinos and his various directorships and shares. He simply forgot about them but, as luck would have it, a journalist was able to help him remember.

Although I suppose you would not need to imagine it, that is very much the gist of his speech to this chamber at five minutes to midnight during our last sitting period. Perhaps from someone brand-new to this parliament we might be able to understand the folly—a new senator fresh to this chamber, perhaps new to the vagaries of politics and to their duties representing their state. But Senator Sinodinos, to his credit, is not a new senator in the traditional sense of the word and he is certainly not a breath of fresh air. He is no political rookie. Perhaps one might say he is a Liberal Jedi.

This is a man who was the chief of staff to former Prime Minister John Howard in the long, lonely years of opposition from 1987 to 1989 and then, more famously, served as chief of staff to the Prime Minister from 1997 to 2006. In addition, this is a man who was an advisory director of Goldman Sachs JBWere. This is a man who was a manager in the business division of the National Australia Bank, who was president of the New South Wales Liberal Party from 2011 to 2012 and who joined us in the Senate in 2011. This is no rookie senator, and there can be no brushing over the matters to which he brought the Senate's attention at the end of the last session.

In the years that the senator served as chief of staff to Prime Minister Howard, my count is that some seven members of parliament and the ministry resigned due to matters surrounding the ministerial code of conduct, the code introduced by Prime Minister Howard and the Howard government. There were seven resignations while Senator Sinodinos was the Prime Minister's chief of staff, seven resignations that brought Liberal MPs into conflict with the code introduced by the then Prime Minister. Ethical expectations of ministers would be an area of knowledge that Senator Sinodinos would be intimately involved in. Yet Senator Sinodinos waited until a journalist had this story in the bag before he said a word, and even then his brief statement was dragged out of him at the very last possible moment. So, sadly, the only lesson the Liberals will take from this whole sorry mess is: do not get caught. I do not believe that Senator Sinodinos did not know what was required of him because he was a rookie. This is a seasoned operator.

With regard to Australian Water Holdings and the senator's claim that he has voluntarily abandoned his shareholdings in AWH, let me ask some questions. Can Senator Sinodinos assure us and assure the Senate that he does not have or does not continue to have a scheme or a set of arrangements in place which will enable him to retain ownership of those shares? Why did he never register the shares in his name with ASIC, as is normal practice? Even if Senator Sinodinos did wish to relinquish his shareholding in Australian Water Holdings, I question whether he has effectively executed this transaction. I question whether sending a simple letter, even one from a lawyer, is sufficient to relinquish a legal interest in a company's shares. If Senator Sinodinos was entitled to the shares—a word he uses—as newspaper reports suggest, what is to stop him enforcing his ownership of the shares later, perhaps when the issue has died down, when his political career is over or at some future juncture? I am not sure a simple letter cuts it. If Senator Sinodinos is serious about giving up his shares then he should execute a legally binding agreement with the company to that effect and produce it for the Senate.

Next I would like to question whether the shares were correctly registered with ASIC. Senator Sinodinos has reportedly said that the shares were held by a current director of Australian Water Holdings and majority shareholder, Mr Nick Di Girolamo, on Senator Sinodinos's behalf. Wouldn't it have been simpler to have registered the shares directly in his own name? Can Senator Sinodinos confirm that Mr Di Girolamo properly informed ASIC that he was actually holding the shares on behalf of Senator Sinodinos rather than for his own benefit? Did this have any implications for Senator Sinodinos in his capacity as chair of Australian Water Holdings at the relevant time? I am mindful of the fact that as chair and director of the company Senator Sinodinos owed significant duties under corporate law. Further, despite the immense and unrivalled authority enjoyed in his position of chair of Australian Water Holdings, Senator Sinodinos insists that he was entirely ignorant of the intimate involvement of the Obeids or the fact that the Obeids had extended a $3 million loan to the CEO of the company secured against shares in the company itself. There remain questions to be answered about these private interests and these dealings with Australian Water Holdings.

Mr President, I put it to you that Senator Sinodinos would be well advised to make a further full and frank explanation to the Senate to clarify these continuing issues and to make sure that he has satisfied the Senate and indeed himself and his own party. As Senator Collins has correctly identified, this is not simply a question of Senator Sinodinos's credibility. It is an important question of judgement for the Leader of the Opposition.

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

Order! Time has expired for the debate.