Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

DENT (): Senators, by letter dated 27 September 2018 Senator Burston has raised a matter of privilege, alleging that, by removing him from positions within Pauline Hanson's One Nation party and pressing him to resign from the Senate, Senator Hanson has sought to improperly interfere with the free performance of his duties as a senator and to penalise him for his conduct as a senator. Senator Burston suggests that these actions were intended to influence him to change his vote on government legislation in the Senate.

Where a matter of privilege is raised, my role is to consider whether a motion to refer the matter to the Privileges Committee should have precedence in debate. In doing so, I am bound to have regard only to two criteria in privilege resolution 4. The first of these criteria seeks to reserve the Senate's contempt powers for matters involving substantial obstruction to the Senate and committee processes or to the performance of senators' duties as senators. Any credible allegation that a person has sought to intimidate a senator to change their vote is a serious one, meeting the first of the criteria I must consider. The question of whether, in these particular circumstances, such an allegation warrants investigation is one not for me but for the Senate.

The second criterion, regard for the existence of any other remedy, recognises that the Senate is generally reluctant to deal with conduct as a contempt where another more appropriate avenue for redress is available. It may be that there is an alternative remedy available to Senator Burston for his treatment within his former party's organisation. However, only the Senate can deal with allegations of improper interference with its own proceedings. Accordingly, on the basis of the criteria I am required to consider, I have determined that the matter should have precedence as a matter of privilege.

As I have said, the question of whether the matter warrants investigation as a possible contempt is a question for the Senate. That being the case, I consider it appropriate to draw to the attention of the Senate the guidance provided by the Privileges Committee in a somewhat similar matter involving former senator Grant Tambling, whose preselection was withdrawn after he declined to follow his party organisation's directions on a piece of legislation. The committee's guidance indicates a high degree of reluctance to intervene in internal party matters but does not entirely close the door on the possibility that the Senate's contempt jurisdiction might be invoked in such circumstances. The matter was dealt with in the committee's 103rd report, for the reference of senators. I table the correspondence and I now call Senator Burston to give a notice of motion in respect of the matter.

Brian Burston (NSW, United Australia Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I will move:

That the following matter be referred to the committee of privileges for inquiry and report:

Having regard to the matters raised by Senator Burston in correspondence tabled by the President on 16 October 2016:

(a) whether, by removing him from positions within Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party and pressing him to resign from the Senate, Senator Hanson or any other person has sought to improperly interfere with the free performance of his duties as a senator or to penalise him for his conduct as a senator; and

(b) if so, whether any contempt was committed in that regard.

I seek leave to make a short statement.

Leave granted.

I just ask that this be dealt with during discovery of formal business tomorrow.