Senate debates

Monday, 2 March 2015

Questions without Notice: Take Note of Answers

Australian Human Rights Commission

3:13 pm

Photo of Catryna BilykCatryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of answers given today by Senator Brandis, specifically dealing with Professor Triggs, who is the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission. The answers given today were completely unsatisfactory. I am a member of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. I sat there for hours of questioning of Professor Triggs by senators. Can I say that I have never seen, in the nearly seven years I have been here, such an attack on a statutory officeholder during estimates. We all know that through estimates things can get a bit uptight. In fact, I have been in some Senate estimates hearings where the chair has closed down estimates so that people could catch their breath. None of that was forthcoming through estimates. While he was chair, Senator Macdonald was taking points of order on himself and deeming them out of order. It was a pretty bizarre day, all in all.

One thing that confuses me is that the secretary of the department was sent along by the Attorney-General—who obviously did not want to do the work himself—to make three points to Professor Triggs. There seems to be a debate—the word 'inducement' has come up and been knocked back. Maybe it was an incentive. I am not sure what word people want to use. I am very concerned about the fact that the Attorney-General thinks you can say to someone, 'I've lost confidence in you but here's another role we think you'll be good at'—and I would be pretty shocked if the general public think the two are not linked. In the Hansard, even the secretary of the department seems to think they are linked. I quote:

Senator WONG: I am suggesting to you that you knew perfectly well that the two propositions—the resignation and the offer of a new position—were linked.

Mr Moraitis : I did not know whether there was an express linkage. All I was asked to convey was that there was a lack of confidence.

Senator WONG: Sorry, what was your answer?—'I did not know if they were expressly linked'.

Mr Moraitis : I did not think there was an express linkage.

Senator WONG: Did you understand there to be a linkage?

Mr Moraitis : As I said, my view was that one could not fulfil the second legal role while doing the first.

Senator WONG: So, they were linked?

Mr Moraitis : One would follow from another, possibly.

It is all there in the Hansard. It is on page 54 if you are interested in looking at it.

Comments

No comments