Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann. After Senator Sinodinos stood aside while being investigated then Prime Minister Abbott said, 'Senator Sinodinos has done the right thing.' Why is Prime Minister Morrison refusing to ensure Minister Taylor does the right thing—by standing aside while he is being investigated by the special strike force, Strike Force Garrad, established by the New South Wales Police Crime Command's financial crimes squad?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can tell Senator McAllister precisely why—because the circumstances are very different. Here is an assessment by New South Wales Police, which has been triggered by a single, politically motivated, partisan letter written by a political opponent, who couldn't get into the Attorney-General's job at an election, so he continues with his serial political smears. He's a serial letter writer anyway. Could you imagine if a letter from Mr Dreyfus became the new test of whether or not somebody can keep their ministerial job? He would be writing even more letters. It's a completely ludicrous proposition. You should reflect on it. One day perhaps the Australian people will elect you back into government. Do you want to expose yourself to the letter writers on this side of the parliament? Do you really think that a job that you may have in the future should depend on whether or not a political opponent of yours writes a letter? That is just ridiculous.

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

Senator McAllister, a supplementary question?

Opposition senators interjecting—

Order on my left! Senator McAllister is on her feet.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

After Minister Brough stood aside while being investigated by the AFP then Prime Minister Turnbull said, 'In offering to stand aside, Mr Brough has done the right thing.' Why is Prime Minister Morrison refusing to ensure Minister Taylor does the right thing—by standing aside while he is investigated?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you're going to go down this road, do you want me to go through the list of former Labor ministers and prime ministers who were being investigated and didn't step aside? Do you really want me to go down that path? Really? Let's just remind ourselves. I think the media are well aware of the plethora of Labor ministers in the most recent government who were subject to investigations and stayed in their positions, including a Prime Minister. Let me just say that it's completely inappropriate for you to suggest that a minister should be stood aside on the basis of a politically motivated letter from a political opponent. That is not an appropriate basis. That should never become the trigger.

Hon. Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Order around the chamber! Senator McAllister, a final supplementary question?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I refer to the minister's earlier answers. Why is the minister bringing into question the decision by the New South Wales Police Crime Command's Financial Crimes Squad to establish a special strike force, Strike Force Garrad, by dismissing it as partisan and politically motivated?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I refer you to the public statements of the New South Wales police commissioner, who said that the reason they are assessing it is because of the person who wrote the letter, who happens to be a shadow Attorney-General—who happens to be a political opponent, who happens to be a serial malicious letter writer and who happens to be in the business of pursuing political smears. That is their track record. And let me tell you: you would not want a single politically motivated partisan letter to become the test on whether or not a minister is stood aside.

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

Senator Keneally, on a point of order?

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On direct relevance. The minister is not answering the question asked by Senator McAllister, which paraphrased is: why is he impugning the New South Wales Police Force?

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

I would ask people to not paraphrase. Paraphrasing can sometimes be as unhelpful as restating. Are you continuing your answer, Senator Cormann?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I reject the proposition that I didn't answer it; I answered it directly, and I quoted the public comments. I completely and utterly reject that proposition.

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

You're impugning the Police Force.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I reject that interjection by Senator Wong absolutely, 100 per cent. I'm referring to the public statement by the New South Wales police commissioner, who made very clear why the New South Wales Police are assessing this particular issue, and that is because of a single letter from the shadow Attorney-General. (Time expired)