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

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Attorney-General (Senator Brandis) to a question without notice asked by Senator Conroy today relating to the Commissioner of the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption.

I rise today to take note of Senator Brandis's answer to my question in relation to the now exposed Liberal stooge Justice Dyson Heydon appearing as a keynote speaker at a Liberal Party fundraiser. Justice Heydon is another who was hand-picked by Tony Abbott.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Abbott.

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

Mr Abbott, thank you. He was Mr Abbott's captain's call to head up what is an escalating $80 million witch-hunt into the Labor Party and anyone who has ever heard of the Labor Party.

Today's damning revelation that Justice Heydon is moonlighting as a fundraising operative for the Liberal Party confirms what Australians have known all along—this royal commission is nothing more than a witch-hunt designed to smear and slander Mr Abbott's and the Liberal Party's political opponents. The information uncovered today is truly extraordinary. It was an invitation to a Liberal Party fundraiser at which Justice Heydon would be the keynote speaker, the keynote speaker while he is running a witch-hunt and accusing the Leader of the Opposition of being a less-than-credible witness. It is a witch-hunt which has dragged people before it, does not follow procedural fairness, ambushes witnesses in the stands, distributes documents to the press—the smear people—on a daily basis is now exposed for what it is—$80 million of taxpayers' money fronted by a Liberal Party stooge to smear the political opponents in this country. It is a disgrace.

So the Liberal Party supporters were invited to enjoy a three-course dinner with Justice Heydon at a boutique hotel on 26 August. In exchange for this privilege, the donors were required to pay $80 per ticket. We have had some attempt in this chamber from Senator Brandis to pretend it was not a fundraiser. Tragically for Senator Brandis, despite the fact that the invitation says pay your money to the New South Wales Liberal Party division—here is how to declare it; here is what the rules are for giving donations to political parties—he still tried to say it was not a fundraiser. Unfortunately Mr Abbott said the following in the other place:

Plainly, the royal commissioner himself believed that it was inappropriate to give the address at a Liberal Party fundraiser.

This was exactly what Mr Abbott said because the commissioner issued a statement. At this, Mr Speaker intervenes and Mr Abbott goes on to say:

…obviously, the royal commissioner himself believes that it is wrong for people in his position to address party fundraisers, as the statement issued on his behalf this morning said.

So do not let anyone come in here, Senator Abetz or Senator Brandis, and pretend this is anything other than a Liberal Party fundraiser. This is a man who has disgraced himself in his conduct of this royal commission. He has been clearly biased in his treatment of witnesses. He has given an absolute dream ride to witnesses that he thinks can hurt the Labor Party. It has been a disgrace.

But when it comes to Justice Heydon, I say this: I am concerned about his credibility in the commission and his self-interest as a Liberal Party stooge because that is what is at stake here. Justice Heydon should resign. His position is untenable, he is being paid—no-one knows how much because the government wants to hide it—and he handpicked his best mate from his chambers to get paid $4 million nearly so far. (Time expired)

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

The Sir Garfield Barwick address is a public, professional lecture delivered by distinguished Australians. The last address was delivered by the former Chief Justice Murray Gleeson AC. It is in address advertised by the New South Wales Bar Association on their website. It is a fact that this is a public professional lecture auspiced by the New South Wales professional lawyers in the Liberal Party.

Can I say there has been a long tradition of judicial officers going to functions of various political parties. Indeed, my colleague the Attorney-General indicated that Justice Kirby, when he was President of the Court of Appeal, addressed the Society of Labor Lawyers. Did we hear any criticism of that? No. Might I add, did we on the Liberal side condemn Justice Kirby at the time for doing so? No, we did not because there is a long tradition.

Indeed, I now speak of our dear departed former governor, who was not necessarily of my persuasion in the state of Tasmania, Chief Justice Peter Underwood. He addressed a Liberal Party forum auspiced by the Liberal Party on the issue of sentencing whilst he was Chief Justice and also, might I add, a serving magistrate did the same. Was there any criticism at the time from the Australian Labor Party? No, because it is part and parcel of the accepted task of judicial officers to address community organisations including those auspiced by political parties.

The New South Wales Bar Association in fact advertised this function as follows:

The sixth annual Sir Garfield Barwick address will be delivered by the Honourable Dyson Heydon ACQC at a dinner to be held at the Castlereagh Boutique Hotel on Wednesday 26 August at 6 to 6:30 pm.

Being a highly sensitive individual and a man absolutely oozing integrity, Mr Dyson Heydon, on becoming aware that this had the possibility of being a Liberal Party event and before this matter even hit the media, had his spokesperson issue a statement which said:

As early as 9.23am this morning (and prior to any media enquiry being received) he advised the organisers that 'if there was any possibility that the event could be described as a Liberal Party event he will be unable to give the address', …

That is the right and proper thing to do. The Australian Labor Party worked themselves into a lather about the $80 somehow representing a fundraising event. Think about it: an inner city Sydney hotel where you are going to have judges and barristers eating, I dare say $80 would just cover the costs. In case you think an $80 lunch is an extravagance can I remind those opposite of a fundraiser that was. It had Senator the Hon. Penny Wong as attending, but do you know who the special guest was? Tim Harcourt, a serving commissioner of the Fair Work Commission of Australia. And do you know what else? The ticket was not $80, not $100 and not even $800. It was $1,000 a ticket. What a big meal that would have been to cover costs! There you have a fundraiser, well and truly! $1,000 per head! There is no pretence there of only covering costs, but we have Mr Tim Harcourt doing it, and no criticism from Labor. (Time expired)

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What another pathetic performance from the Leader of the Government. This attempt to try to say that what Dyson Heydon did was not a political exercise is just nonsense. He has been hung out to dry by his own Prime Minister who said today:

… the royal commissioner himself believed that it was inappropriate to give the address at a Liberal Party fundraiser.

He said that because the commissioner issued that statement, which I quoted. The Prime Minister was clear on what it was and he went on to say that obviously the royal commissioner himself believed that it was wrong for people in his position to address party fundraisers.

The only reason this nonsense is going on in here is that it is clear that it was a fundraiser. What Senator Abetz failed to do was to show the invitation that went out and to show the party-political donation statement on the back of that invitation. It was clearly and unequivocally a party-political fundraiser. So all the nonsense and arguments that are going on here are simply that, nonsense and arguments, to try to justify the unjustifiable. This was not a public professional lecture; this was a party political fundraiser. It is there in black and white from the New South Wales branch of the Liberal Party. More lies and more distortion in here will not take away from that fact.

Dyson Heydon has been exposed as being the star turn at a Liberal Party fundraiser. Again, it has exposed the real nature of this so-called royal commission which is nothing more than a witch-hunt. Dyson Heydon should do the right thing—he has not been doing the right thing for some time now—and he should resign. He is the PM's hand-picked royal commissioner in a political witch-hunt. He is no more than the political vassal of the Liberal Party. He was going off to pay political homage and allegiance to the Liberal Party legal elite. That is what he was about to do, and it was discovered. The only reason he did not do it is that it became a public issue and one of huge embarrassment. That is the only reason he did not do it.

This royal commission is no more than the modern day equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition. You target the heretics, you target your political opponents—and they are the ALP and the unions. You get a biased judge in Justice Heydon, you get an outcome that is inevitable and you set about debasing the concept of a royal commission and you debase the role of a royal commissioner.

Dyson Heydon is unfit for any role that requires independence and impartiality. Dyson Heydon, a self-stated devout conservative, chose to preside over a witch-hunt against Labor leaders and the trade union movement. This commission was never going to be fair, it was always going to be biased. It was prejudiced towards Liberal policies and against the trade union movement. It was prejudiced against the Labor Party, and Heydon presided over a distortion and an abuse of royal commission processes. He is not fit to be in the position he is in. This is a perversion of royal commission processes. It is clearly set up as a political tool to attack the trade union movement and the Labor Party. So-called Justice Heydon is improperly exercising his powers as a royal commissioner in the interests of the Liberal Party. Neither this government nor Dyson Heydon can be trusted. The arrogance of the coalition in trying to deny that it was a political fundraiser, and the arrogance of Justice Dyson to say that he would not talk about it, means that this man has to go. He has no credibility. (Time expired)

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to respond to a number of the claims that have been made by both Senator Conroy, in his disgraceful address, and of course Senator Cameron. As we look at this public address, I am reminded of Bill Shorten saying, when claiming travel for the Light on the Hill fundraiser, that of course it is not a fundraiser. His argument was that the Light on the Hill, being a public lecture at about $85 a head, apparently to cover costs, is not a fundraiser. But in this case a public lecture, according to the Labor Party, is in fact a fundraiser and somehow fundamentally different. Not credible!

But let us go a little bit further. Senator Conroy used abusive language towards Justice Heydon, calling him a stooge because he delivered this public lecture. Did anyone call Michael Kirby a Labor stooge because he addressed a public lecture for the Society of Labor Lawyers? Is Senator Conroy calling former Justice Kirby a Labor Party stooge? We never heard that language, but that is the absolute correlation if you are going to go into the game and say, 'If you go and deliver a public lecture, you are a stooge of the party.'

Senator Carol Brown interjecting—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Society of Labor Lawyers. Would that make him—

Senator Carol Brown interjecting—

And then we go to the question of a fundraiser. As Senator Abetz has highlighted, is Dr Tim Harcourt of the Fair Work Commission, at a $1,000-a-head fundraiser with Penny Wong, a Labor Party stooge? $1,000 a head. Now, that is a fundraiser. Not many dinners actually cost $1,000 for the food. Is he a Labor Party stooge?

Let's get fair dinkum. What this is about is the Labor Party trying to claim that what has been uncovered at the royal commission is not true. Let us look at some of what has been uncovered at the royal commission, which they want to pretend is not serious: 'There's nothing to see here.' We have seen a number of people arrested just here in Canberra for their alleged activities with the CFMEU as a result of some of this work, including Fihi Kivalu, after evidence to the commission revealed that he demanded tens of thousands of dollars in payments from tradesmen in return for them getting work. We have seen the abusive threats to workers from John Setka—the private details of over 300 construction workers leaked by the construction industry superannuation fund Cbus to the CFMEU.

We have seen that Bill Shorten's close friend Cesar Melhem ran a slush fund called Industry 2020. It received significant funds from companies which had EBAs with the union, but it employed no staff and had no premises of its own—

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

He was forced to resign.

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and he was forced to resign. Of course, Bill Shorten's close friend Cesar Melhem, it is claimed, repeatedly issues false invoices. We have seen that the construction company Boral suffered a 75 per cent reduction in its market share after refusing to comply with the CFMEU's unlawful demands.

We have seen the exposure of Bill Shorten, and this is where the sensitivity is. Bill Shorten has been exposed, depriving workers of penalty rates, public holiday pay, overtime and shift loadings, in his dealings with some companies. All the while his union was getting payments.

Senator Carol Brown interjecting—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These are all on the record. These are all facts. These are all undisputed. These are all undisputed facts. We had the construction company Unibilt pay for Bill Shorten's campaign manager in 2007. Of course, he did not want to tell anyone about it. He did not want to disclose it. This is what the Labor Party wants to try to distract attention from. The Comanchero bikies employed as debt collectors in the building industry—this is the kind of behaviour you are defending and seeking to cover up by besmirching the commissioner. This is the kind of behaviour you are seeking to cover up as you protect the CFMEU, you protect their corrupt behaviour, you protect their criminal behaviour, and you try to pretend there is nothing to see here.

Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's what you're doing. That's exactly what you're doing.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So those arrests—the police are arresting these individuals because there is no evidence?

Senator Carol Brown interjecting—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brown, I have called you to order on a number of occasions.

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are arresting them because there is no evidence, according to the Labor Party. We have seen evidence, day after day after day, that is damning for some of these individuals in the construction union. It is damning for Bill Shorten in the way that he behaved as a union leader, selling out workers, and you are now seeking to besmirch this man in order to protect the corrupt behaviour of the people who fund— (Time expired)

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to make a contribution in this debate. I want to say at the outset that there are some judicial guidelines around conduct of judicial officers. Basically, they go to the merits of whether you need to sever the ties with your political party of choice. It would be prudent, I suppose, that the current royal commissioner would be apprised of those guidelines and sever all ties with his links to a political party. The easiest way to do that is to decline the invitation to a Liberal Party fundraiser. He did that at a very late time, at 9.23 this morning.

I really want to go to some of the substance that Senator Seselja has put onto the table as fact. In just a cursory glance at the interim report of this royal commission, you find a very long statement about the standard of proof and findings of fact. Senator Seselja has alleged that there are several findings of fact against unions and against Mr Shorten and others. Let us just read this:

A Royal Commission is not a court of law. There are no civil or criminal proceedings before it. The rules of evidence do not apply. The concept of the onus of proof does not apply. Strictly, it follows that neither the civil standard of proof nor the criminal standard of proof applies to the Commission.

We have had very good royal commissions and very good royal commission outcomes in the history of the Australian parliament. We know that the conservatives have always used royal commissions against unions and their political opponents. And we know that they have not always gone the way they thought they would go. The bottom of the harbour comes to mind. The royal commissions actually got their own life and found out that the great majority of people who were at risk of improper behaviour was not the unions; it was the people doing their bottom-of-the-harbour tax schemes.

We know that this commission has taken an enormous amount of evidence. I know from my personal experience as a former President of the Transport Workers Union and as a former secretary of the South Australia/Northern Territory branch that multiple copies of approximately seven years of financial records were subpoenaed and trucked all the way to the royal commission for forensic examination. I also know that not one question emanated from seven years, or thereabouts, of the forensic evaluation of union records that has happened right across this country. This commission has spent millions of dollars—and incidentally tied up millions of dollars of union funds in meeting its requirements, and hundreds of thousands of hours of union employees' and members' money in meeting their requirements—to find, in our case, zero. And they have tuned in to some peripheral activities, mainly outside of the bread and butter work of unions—which is representing their members and getting deals done. They have over a seven-year period identified some peripheral issues and homed in on those. This royal commissioner needed to demonstrate impartiality and lack of bias, and instead he has done exactly the opposite. I watched the media reports emanating from hearings of this royal commission. They home in completely on his bias and on any suggestion that he has been critical of one of the witnesses. They publicise that, and the Paul Murrays of the world give it a guernsey. They act as if it is an earth-shattering revelation. Just the other day I turned on Sky News and there it was: a 'bombshell' in the royal commission—more unsubstantiated fact and allegation portrayed as truth. This royal commissioner allows it to happen, and this royal commissioner thinks it is okay to go to a Liberal fundraiser.

I do my best to get outside this environment here and mix with the general community. A member of the public said to me, 'This is going to blow up on this conservative government because when they don't find anything, when there's no proof, it'll be seen for what it is: a witch-hunt by a biased commissioner against good union people.

Question agreed to.