Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann. I refer to the minister's earlier answers. Given that former Minister McKenzie consulted the Prime Minister and his office on the final round of grants under the Community Sports Infrastructure program on 10 April, how could former Minister McKenzie possibly have made the decision on 4 April?

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

I don't accept the characterisation of Senator McKenzie's interaction with the Prime Minister's office on 10 April. As I've indicated, after the decisions were made in relation to those projects, of course there was interaction as appropriate to make arrangements in relation to announcements of decisions that had already been made.

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

Senator Bilyk, a supplementary question?

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What steps has the Prime Minister taken to satisfy himself that the document signed by Minister McKenzie was not backdated?

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

What I would just say again is that Sports Australia gave very, very clear, explicit and unequivocal evidence: this brief was dated 4 April.

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

Senator Bilyk, a final supplementary question?

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Will the minister guarantee to the Senate that the document signed by Minister McKenzie was not backdated?

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

All I can do is, again, to point you to the evidence of Sports Australia, which was clear and unequivocal: the brief was dated 4 April.

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

Senator Wong, on a point of order?

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

The point of order is on direct relevance—

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

Senator Cormann has concluded his answer, Senator Wong. I'm afraid it's not appropriate for a point of order.