Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. I refer to an email from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet on Monday, 1 June at 5:30 pm, which states that the secretary of the department, Mr Thawley, called to ask if the Attorney-General's Department had corrected the record on the provision of the Monis letter to the Martin Place siege review. Why did the Attorney-General ignore this request from the Prime Minister's departmental secretary, Mr Thawley, and fail to correct the record for a full parliamentary week?

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

Senator Wong, the document to which you refer came to my attention about one minute ago, and I have it with me. It is the first time that I have seen it.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer to the same email which states that Mr Thawley made the call regarding the misleading Monis letter evidence from the Prime Minister's office. I ask the minister what was the involvement of the Prime Minister's office in this matter?

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

Senator, I am not quite sure what matter you are referring to, but—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President—

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

Can I continue with my answer please?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, I cannot see a point of order arising out of this, but I will allow you to—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, if he is going to use that fact to not answer the question, I am happy to clarify: it is his misleading of the Senate.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There was no point of order, Senator Wong. The minister was in order.

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

I do not write Senator Wong's questions; it is a matter for Senator Wong to phrase her own questions, but it is not apparent to me what matter she is referring to. However, if this is an intended reference to the circumstances in which the letter from Monis to the Attorney-General was not provided to the Martin Place siege review, then there is, I understand, a large body of evidence about that to the Senate inquiries which are currently under way, and I would refer her to that. If she wants to ask me about some particular aspect of the matter, she should identify it.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to table the email from the Prime Minister's department which demonstrates that a telephone call was made from the Prime Minister's office in relation to this matter.

Leave granted.

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I refer to that email, which does confirm that Mr Thawley rang from the PMO, from the Prime Minister's office, and I ask the Attorney-General did the Attorney discuss his request for a full internal review by his department and his delayed correction of the misleading evidence with the Prime Minister's office, and, if so, when?

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

No, I do not believe I did discuss the matter with the Prime Minister's office, but I do dispute the characterisation of these events by Senator Wong, because I corrected the record immediately I was satisfied that an error had been made. Having been advised by my department early in the afternoon of Thursday, 4 June that an error had been made, I immediately corrected the record within a little over an hour.