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 Attorney-General, Senator Brandis. I refer to the censure of the Attorney-General passed by the Senate on 2 March 2015 for behaviour including failing to defend the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Professor Gillian Triggs. In light of the censure does the Attorney-General now accept it is his duty as Attorney-General to defend statutory officers?

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

Senator Wong, I had been asked by Senator Carr about some remarks made by Senator Macdonald two days ago, which, as I said, I have neither seen nor read. If what you have in mind is the Office of the Solicitor-General, I have been asked about the Solicitor-General on one occasion by Fran Kelly on Radio National last week, and I said some very gracious things about him.

Senator Cameron interjecting—

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

Order on my left. Senator Wong, a supplementary question.

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

Thank you. I refer to statements made by Senator Macdonald in the Senate yesterday in relation to the Solicitor-General, including that he had 'diminished the position he holds', that his advice 'has not been all that hot' and that his submission to a Senate committee was 'terribly unprofessional'. Why did the Attorney-General refuse to defend the Solicitor-General, a statutory officer, from attacks by a government senator? (Time expired)

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

Because I am unfamiliar with the speech. I did not see or read the speech, and I have not been asked to.

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

George Brandis, the lying rodent.

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

Senator Cameron, you will need to withdraw that comment. That was a direct accusation. It was very unparliamentary.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought he was quoting.

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

Order! I just made a decision. I do not need any further points of order. Senator Cameron, please withdraw that remark. Senator Cameron, the way you directed that at the Attorney-General—it is the manner as well as the content.

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

I will withdraw, but—

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

Thank you.

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

if I could—

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

No. Just—

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

I just want to indicate, if I could, that Senator Brandis called the former Prime Minister 'a lying rodent', and then he defended that because he said—

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

Order! Senator Cameron, resume your seat. Senator Cormann, I probably do not need assistance, unless you have something new to add. I just want to make this observation. In particular, Senator Cameron, what you did it—it is sometimes what is said but it is also how it is directed, and you directed remarks that were unparliamentary towards the Attorney-General. That is what I asked you to withdraw. You did not assist by then quoting other matters that gave context to your quote. You have withdrawn that remark. I respect and appreciate that. We will now move on. I think you had concluded your answer, Senator Brandis. I will now call Senator McKim.

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

Mr President—

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

Sorry. My apologies. I was hoping to move on to Senator McKim. Senator Wong, a supplementary question.

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

We were all a little out of order. Thank you, Mr President.

Having refused to disassociate himself from Senator Macdonald's comments yesterday, will the Attorney-General now do the right thing and take this opportunity to repudiate Senator Macdonald's attacks on the Solicitor-General?

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

Senator Wong, I have already explained why I have taken the position I have. To complete the record, I have now been provided with a copy of what was quoted selectively by Senator Carr from my interview with Kieran Gilbert yesterday:

Kieran Gilbert: My final question is in relation to one of your colleagues, Ian Macdonald, yesterday, accusing Justin Gleeson of playing politics with this.

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

A point of order, Senator Wong?

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

I am taking a point of order on direct relevance. I did not ask him the question Senator Cameron asked him. I asked him a different question. I asked him if he would take this opportunity to repudiate Senator Macdonald's comments. He is referring back to a question that has been previously asked. If he wishes to do that, he should do it at the conclusion of question time.

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

Thank you, Senator Wong. I will remind the Attorney-General of the question. But I think we have to be fair and give the Attorney-General some context in which to place his answer.

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

Mr President, the reason I have approached the answer this way is: in the primary question it was falsely asserted, by taking out of context an answer to a question from Kieran Gilbert on Sky News yesterday, that I had said something and that, therefore, I had a familiarity with the speech. And that statement is incorrect.

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

Thank you, Senator Brandis. I will take that as speaking to the point of order of Senator Wong.

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

Thank you. I appreciate it, Mr President. By his own words, he just demonstrated my point of order. He is referring to a primary question that I did not ask. My primary question was in relation to the censure. He is referring to a different primary question. He cannot possibly make his answer to a supplementary relevant by referring to a question a different senator asked.

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

Thank you, Senator Wong. I will remind the Attorney-General of the question. The Attorney-General.

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

So, Mr Gilbert said what I have just read and he asked, 'Do you agree with him?' to which this was my reply—and this goes to your question, Senator:

I'm not going to associate myself with that remark. I have always, as I've said before, had a courteous and professional and respectful relationship with Mr Gleeson. I regard Mr Gleeson as a very good lawyer and I don't walk away from that.

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

Thank you, Attorney-General.