Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence, Senator Reynolds. Mr Mark Sullivan, the chair of the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal, wrote to the minister out of concern that she had misled the Senate in her statement on 13 May regarding Ordinary Seaman Teddy Sheean. Can the minister confirm that Mr Sullivan's letter said that the 2019 tribunal review found 'new evidence was presented and the tribunal found that the evidence provided to the British Admiralty was inaccurate and that it understated Sheean's actions', and the tribunal determined that Sheean fulfilled the criteria for the Victoria Cross for Australia?

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Urquhart for that question. As senators know, in the last sitting period I did make a statement to the Senate in response to a question I took on notice from Senator Lambie regarding the matter of Ordinary Seaman Edward 'Teddy' Sheean. Since then the Prime Minister has made a public statement which I endorsed along with longstanding advice from the Chief of the Defence Force which has also been made publicly. We appreciate that there is a view by some in this place and by others in Tasmania and across Australia that Teddy Sheean didn't receive the recognition he deserved.

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

Can I just indicate that, if the minister wishes leave to fully explain her misleading of the Senate, we will give her leave at the appropriate time immediately after question time, but this is not a question about the mislead per se. This is a question asking the minister to confirm what Mr Sullivan's letter said. It goes to the subject matter of the mislead, not the process, and I would ask the minister to be directly relevant to that issue.

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

On the point of order, I take the point by Senator Wong that the quotation was in reference to whether it was contained in a document that the question asked that the minister received. However, given it was a long quotation, I'm going to give the minister some discretion to address that. But I do remind her of the first part of the very specific question, which asked about receipt of a document.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much. Had I been allowed to continue, I would have advised that I did come back to the Senate and clarify that statement. I clarified it, it was not misleading the Senate and I've already addressed that here in this place. However, if Senator Wong would allow me to continue, I have some news for the Senate on this matter.

Overturning a decision relating to a Victoria Cross nearly 80 years after Sheean's heroic actions needs compelling reasons. This is why the government's view and clear policy is that consideration of the awarding of a retrospective Victoria Cross would only occur in light of compelling new evidence or if there was evidence of significant maladministration. Given there are different views on whether there is compelling new evidence about Sheean's actions in 1942, the Prime Minister has today commissioned an expert panel to provide him with advice as to whether the 2019 review by the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal has, indeed, any new evidence not available to the previous reviews or otherwise available and if that evidence is compelling enough to support a recommendation by the government that Sheean's mention in dispatches be replaced by a Victoria Cross.

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

Senator Urquhart, a supplementary question?

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the minister confirm that Mr Sullivan's letter said that, after the tribunal's findings were presented to the Minister for Defence Personnel:

… the Minister advised me that he was comfortable with the recommendations and that he would be communicating with senior Ministers including yourself and the Prime Minister.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have said, I did raise this matter in response to a question from Senator Lambie and I did clarify that statement, which is available on the public record, about that letter. But that was advice to government, and the Prime Minister has been very clear that the government did not accept that advice. As I have just said, in light of these differences of opinion, the Prime Minister said—and I'll read out from his press release:

Given there are different views on whether there is compelling new evidence about Sheean's actions in 1942, I have today commissioned an expert panel to provide me with advice as to whether the 2019 review by the Defence Honours and Awards Appeal Tribunal—

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

Again, on direct relevance—and I again reiterate we'll give the minister leave to explain how she misled at the conclusion of question time if she wishes—Senator Urquhart's letter goes directly to the content of Mr Sullivan's letter which references Mr Chester's indication that he was comfortable with the recommendation and that that would be communicated with you. Senator Urquhart has asked whether in fact you could confirm that that is in the letter.

An honourable senator interjecting—

With respect—well, I'm responding to the interjection. I asked for an answer, and she hasn't answered it—

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

Senator Wong, on the point of order, I'll take Senator Cormann.

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

On the point of order, firstly, interjections are disorderly but furthermore repetitive points of order are also disorderly, and the minister could not have been more directly relevant to the question asked. It is not up to Senator Wong to determine how the question is answered. The standing orders require direct relevance, and the minister is directly relevant.

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

I'll rule on the point of order when there's silence. I have ruled before that to be directly relevant it must directly address material contained in a question or a preamble, or, in this case, a quotation. I believe the minister was being directly relevant by directly addressing part of the question. I cannot instruct her how to answer a question. Senator Reynolds.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, very much, Mr President. Again, I'll say for the third time—

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

Order! Senator Cormann, on a point of order.

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

I just make the point again: interjections are disorderly, and leaders in this place ought to lead by example.

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

Senator Wong, on the point of order.

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

If he's making the point, perhaps an example might be: don't mislead the parliament.

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

Order! Points of order are not an opportunity for debate across the central table of the chamber. All senators are reminded that interjections are disorderly. I assume people would like to hear an answer. Senator Reynolds.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr President, and, as it's been asked and answered three times now, the matter that Senator Urquhart raised was answered by me after question time to clarify the matter. It was not a case of misleading, but I did clarify one comment that I made. However, the bigger issue— (Time expired)

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

Senator Urquhart, a final supplementary question.

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Morrison has overruled an independent review tribunal, overruled the Minister for Defence Personnel and forced a cabinet minister to mislead the Senate. Why is the government so determined to refuse proper recognition to the actions of Ordinary Seaman 'Teddy' Sheean?

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Urquhart, I'm sorry I laughed out loud then but, clearly, you did not hear a thing I said about what the Prime Minister has announced today. I utterly reject the premise of your question. I did not mislead the parliament. However, let me read out—you clearly did not listen to the answer before. The Prime Minister has announced today that:

Given there are different views on whether there is compelling new evidence about Sheean's actions in 1942, I have today commissioned an expert panel to provide me with advice as to whether the 2019 review … had any significant new evidence, not available to the previous reviews and otherwise …

The expert panel will be chaired by former Minister for Defence and former Director of the Australia War Memorial, the Hon Dr Brendan Nelson AO, and will also comprise former Solicitor-General, Mr David Bennett AC QC, former Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Dr Peter Shergold AC, and Senior Curator and Historian at the NSW Anzac Memorial, Mr Brad Manera. The panel will report to me by 31 July 2020.