Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish to make a statement on a matter of privilege. By letter dated 24 October 2022, Senator Thorpe has raised an issue of privilege—the question: whether her failure to declare a friendship with Mr Dean Martin in hearings or meetings of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement amounted to an improper interference with the work of the committee. Senator Thorpe has asked that the matter be referred to the Standing Committee of Privileges for investigation as a possible contempt. It is unusual for a senator to seek to self-refer a matter to the Privileges Committee. Senator Thorpe's letter does not go to her reasons for doing so and does not provide additional detail about the allegations or her responses to them. Senators would be aware of the media reports on the matter.

Where a matter of privilege is raised, my role is to determine whether it should have precedence in debate. In doing so, I am guided by the Senate's privileges resolutions, which seek to preserve the Senate's contempt powers for matters involving substantial obstruction to the Senate and its committees or to senators performing their duties. Privilege resolution No. 6 provides guidance on the types of acts which may be treated as a contempt and, relevantly, provides that a person shall not improperly interfere with the free exercise by a committee of its authority. The Senate has also declared that a senator shall not sit on a committee if the senator has a conflict of interest in relation to the committee. I have, therefore, concluded that the matter meets the criteria I am required to consider.

The usual practice, when allegations of misconduct arise in committees, is to see that the allegations have first been investigated by the committee concerned. There are some advantages in doing so. That committee will have access to relevant records and its members will generally be well-placed to determine whether the alleged conduct involved, or risked, substantial interference with the committee's work.

While I have considered writing to the joint committee, I have concluded that there are some mitigating factors—in particular, the committee in question was a committee of the previous parliament, with different membership and a different chair. As I have noted, it is also unusual for a senator to seek to self-refer a matter of privilege. In those circumstances, I have concluded that the Senate should be given the earliest opportunity to determine whether the matter warrants investigation by the Privileges Committee. If the Senate refers the matter to the Privileges Committee, no doubt it will follow its usual practice of seeking submissions from those affected by the allegations, which will necessarily require it to seek information from Senator Thorpe and from the joint committee.

For completeness, I also remind the Senate that I was a member of the joint committee during the last parliament. I can assure senators that that has not influenced my determination in this matter. I have, therefore, determined that it would be appropriate to grant the matter precedence as a matter of privilege. I table the correspondence and call on Senator Thorpe to give notice of a motion. Senator Chisholm?

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion, which has been circulated in the chamber, to refer this matter to the Committee of Privileges.

Leave granted.

I move:

That—

(1) The Senate notes:

(a) the matters canvassed in the media regarding a possible conflict of interest between an undeclared personal relationship of Senator Thorpe and her role while a member of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement; and

(b) the importance of maintaining the integrity of parliamentary committees.

(2) The following matter be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges for inquiry and report, whether Senator Thorpe's failure to declare the relationship:

(a) obstructed the work of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement;

(b) if so, whether this amounted to an improper interference with the work of the committee; and

(c) whether any contempt was committed in this regard.

I thank the President for her ruling and would like to acknowledge Senator Thorpe's intention to refer herself to the Senate Privileges Committee. The government considers it appropriate to refer this matter to the Privileges Committee to inquire into the conduct of Senator Thorpe, given the importance of ensuring that the integrity of parliamentary committees is maintained.

On Thursday 20 October, it was reported that Senator Thorpe may have been conflicted while sitting as a member of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement. The nature of this conflict has been outlined in media reports and has been addressed in statements by both Senator Thorpe and Mr Bandt, as the Leader of the Greens. The publicly known facts of this matter have brought into question the potentially serious implications of Senator Thorpe's conflict, including the possibility that the work of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement has been obstructed. This is particularly due to the sensitive nature of what the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement looks at and the agencies it oversees, such as the AFP. Both play such an important role in keeping Australians safe.

As the Prime Minister has said, these are concerning revelations and Australians are entitled to believe that the parliament's oversight processes over our legal system will be maintained in a way that ensures integrity and ensures that any information which is given there is kept on a confidential basis. The Prime Minister has also said that the Leader of the Greens, Mr Bandt, must give a full explanation of the exact circumstances here, including what he or his office knew and, if he wasn't informed, why that was the case, given that his office was aware.

It is important for the function of our democracy that Australians trust the integrity of this parliament and our parliamentary committees. It is also important for Australians to have the trust that members of this parliament will act with integrity. Where that integrity has been brought into question, it is contingent on all of us to ensure that matters are referred to the appropriate bodies for inquiry, as is the case with this matter. Thank you.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, President, for your ruling and statement made just before. Confidence in the integrity of the operations of the parliament is of supreme importance; confidence in the operation of this Senate chamber is of supreme importance; and confidence in the operation of our Senate committees is, equally, of supreme importance. A key pillar in maintaining confidence in the conduct of this parliament, its chambers and its committees is the disclosure obligations placed upon all of us. Those disclosure obligations seek to ensure that people can have confidence that each of us acts with integrity in relation to those we represent, the issues before us and the consideration of serious matters. Those disclosure obligations matter all of the time, completely; but they matter in supreme importance when it comes to sensitive committees, sensitive information and matters such as this, that can go to law enforcement operations.

As you have acknowledged, and as Senator Chisholm—who I thank for moving this motion—has acknowledged, Senator Thorpe has disclosed now, following media reports, that she was in a relationship with a known former member of the Rebels bikie gang. During that time, she was also a member of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement. As has been reported, in August 2021 that committee concluded a review of an amendment to reinforce the legality of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission's powers to conduct special operations and investigations, which, in July 2020, established a special operation on outlaw motorcycle gangs. In its report, the committee noted that the ACIC had offered to provide detail on the importance of evidence obtained through its exercise of coercive powers in tackling serious and organised crime, including evidence taken in camera. There are clearly questions that need answering, and therefore it is most appropriate that the Standing Committee of Privileges examine whether Senator Thorpe's failure to declare the relationship obstructed the work of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement; if so, whether this amounted to improper interference with the work of the committee; and whether any contempt was committed in this regard.

The allegations are serious ones, and the work of this committee is of paramount importance now in upholding confidence in the integrity of the parliament and of its committees. The freedom of individual members of parliament to perform their duties on behalf of the people they represent and the need for them to be seen to be free of any improper external influence are of fundamental importance. Matters such as these go directly to the central purpose of the law of parliamentary privilege, which is to protect the integrity of proceedings in parliament.

I do also note the references Senator Chisholm made to the fact that Mr Bandt equally owes some explanation for the operations within his office: when his office were advised and informed, and the failure for steps to have been taken until this became a matter of media and public interest. Those are matters that Mr Bandt should be forthcoming with, as should Senator Thorpe in her public explanations. The opposition strongly supports this referral.

Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish to make a statement regarding the recent reports written about me and Mr Martin in the media. Mr Martin and I met through black activism and briefly dated. We remain friends and have collaborated on our shared interest: advocating for the rights of First Nations people. All confidential information I received as part of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement was treated in confidence. I strongly reject any suggestion that I would do anything other than comply with the committee's requirements, and I note that no-one has offered any evidence to the contrary. However, I accept that I should have disclosed this connection with Mr Martin to my leader and also to the joint committee on law enforcement, of which I was a member. In light of this, last week I resigned as the deputy leader in the Senate.

Thank you to all who have sent messages of love and solidarity. The support and understanding have been overwhelming. My ancestors, my family, my elders, my community and the allyship out there are what maintains my strength—my strength to continue to be here. I wouldn't be here without those people I mentioned and I couldn't do it without those people I mentioned. That's why I'm here. I'm not going anywhere, especially while we don't have a treaty in this country, which I will continue to fight for. Having now given this explanation to the Senate, I will turn my focus to my important portfolio work, especially fighting for First Nations justice. Thank you.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek to contribute to the debate. We just heard from Senator Lidia Thorpe, but we need much, much more. She has established a pattern, through her behaviour in this chamber, of disrespect to the people, disrespect to the parliament and disrespect to the Senate. I can remember her recent swearing in: disrespect to the Queen, disrespect to the parliament, disrespect to the people. She wants to be an infiltrator. The Greens seem to forget our supreme governing instrument is not a monarch; it is the people's Constitution.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Roberts, your contribution needs be around the motion.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's what I am getting to.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not suggesting; I am directing you to be relevant to the motion, Senator Roberts.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Her many statements and her ill-tempered behaviour in this chamber require, I believe, much more—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Roberts, I remind you that Senator Chisholm's motion, which I understand was circulated throughout the chamber, deals with a reference to the Privileges Committee, and that's what your remarks need to be about.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We support the reference to the Privileges Committee that Senator Chisholm moved and we seek much more, because we believe Senator Thorpe needs to account for her behaviour in this chamber. We will be seeking to hold her accountable for that.

Question agreed to.