Senate debates

Tuesday, 15 August 2017

Questions without Notice

Deputy Prime Minister

2:09 pm

Photo of Anthony ChisholmAnthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Brandis, the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Yesterday, the minister told the Senate:

The facts of Mr Joyce's case are much clearer to us than were the facts as known to Senator Canavan at the time he made his decision.

Can the minister confirm that the only fact that is clearer about the Deputy Prime Minister's case is that he is clearly a citizen of another country?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Well, no, I can't confirm that at all, Senator Chisholm, because that is not the only relevant fact—and if you reflected on the matter for a moment you would realise what a foolish suggestion that is.

But I think we do now know who is under acknowledgement or allegiance of a foreign power, and it is not Mr Joyce and it's not Senator Canavan: it's Mr Bill Shorten. Because what we've had confirmed today is that the Australian Labor Party, in conspiracy with the New Zealand Labour Party, has been using the parliamentary processes of New Zealand, a foreign government, to subvert the government of Australia—to subvert the government of Australia! And I say to those opposite: if you want to engage in partisan conflict with the Australian government, you fight your fights in here. You fight your fights in here! You fight your fights over there in the chamber of the House of Representatives. You fight your fights in Australia! Don't go sneaking around the back stairs and back corridors of the New Zealand parliament, trying to find some gormless New Zealand Labour politician to try to use the parliamentary processes of a foreign country in order to try to fight your political wars in Australia.

This is what the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Mr Bill English, had to say about the matter in question time there a short while ago. Mr English said this:

These are serious issues—to interfere in another country's politics—and it appears there have been significant misjudgements by the member's fellow Opposition party.

Senator Wong interjecting

That is the Australian Labor Party, Senator Wong! So don't go using the New Zealand parliamentary processes to interfere in the politics of this country. (Time expired)

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, a supplementary question?

2:12 pm

Photo of Anthony ChisholmAnthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Yes, Mr President. Last night, the Leader of the House, Christopher Pyne said, 'When Matt Canavan chose to step down, he didn't have all the facts at his disposal that he has now.' What facts about Senator Canavan's position have changed since he resigned from the ministry and decided that he would not vote in the Senate?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, when the matter is determined by the High Court, all of that material will be before the High Court in affidavits and submissions which will be filed on behalf of Senator Canavan and supported by the Australian government.

But let me return to where I was, Mr President, because this is extraordinary. It's very easy on an occasion like this to forget that Senator Wong is the shadow foreign minister, because she, of all people, should know that there is something profoundly serious about interfering through the political processes of a foreign country in the political processes of Australia. That is utterly inappropriate.

And Senator Wong, or Senator Chisholm: you go to any pub in Australia and you try to justify yourself that you are using the parliamentary processes of New Zealand to try to interfere with the internal politics of Australia and see what sort of reaction you get!

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, a final supplementary question.

2:13 pm

Photo of Anthony ChisholmAnthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Last week, Senator Canavan told the Senate:

I wish to fully respect this process, and that is why I have resigned from the ministry and I will also not vote in the Senate until this matter is resolved.

Why is the Deputy Prime Minister not willing to meet the standard set by Senator Canavan?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Yes, I can confirm that Senator Canavan had that to say and I can also confirm, as I pointed out to one of your colleagues yesterday, that the legal and factual issues of the two cases are quite different. But what they have in common, Mr President, is that neither Senator Canavan nor Mr Joyce have any issues about loyalty to Australia—unlike Mr Bill Shorten, who has been disloyal to and betrayed every person and every institution with which he has ever been associated. Just as he betrayed both prime ministers whom he served in government and just as he betrayed the workers whose interests he was entrusted with when he was a trade union leader, now he has done something which is even more serious—even more treacherous—than that. What he has done is he has sought to interfere in Australian politics, not through the legitimate processes of parliamentary debate here but through the back door method of slinking around the New Zealand parliament.

2:15 pm

Photo of Richard Di NataleRichard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Attorney-General. When my former colleagues, Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters, discovered they were ineligible as dual citizens, the member for New England, or is it the member for New Zealand, Barnaby Joyce, told the local paper, the Northern Daily—as we heard earlier:

… you can't be a member of parliament and have dual citizenship—it's black and white.

He also said:

… unfortunately, ignorance is not an excuse.

Minister, why does the government believe one set of rules apply to other MPs and a completely different set of rules apply to the Liberal Party and the Nationals?

2:16 pm

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, we don't believe that. When your former colleagues, Mr Ludlam and Ms Waters, chose to resign that was their decision. Now, they say, and I believe you say, that they made their decision on legal advice. I haven't seen that legal advice and I can't comment on it. But you, Senator Di Natale, yourself moved the motion under section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act to refer the cases to the Court of Disputed Returns. It was an option available to you, and available to them, to make that reference under Section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act and wait until the Court of Disputed Returns had determined their eligibility. But, you chose not to do that. They chose not to do that. They chose to resign. They didn't have to resign, but they did. Perhaps that was a catastrophic error of judgement on their part. But, in any event, we're all in the hands of the legal advice that we receive.

The government has received advice from Dr Steven Donaghue, the Commonwealth Solicitor-General, and, on the basis of Dr Donaghue's advice, the government is confident that both Senator Canavan and Mr Joyce would be found by the Court of Disputed Returns to be within, not beyond, the disqualification provisions of subparagraph 1 of section 44 of the Constitution. We have a body and legal authority, referred to by the Solicitor-General, which is reasonably well known—including Sykes v Cleary—to support that position. I wonder if those who gave legal advice to Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters also considered what the judges of the High Court would have to say in Sykes v Cleary, and, had they done so, whether they might have advised a different course?

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, a supplementary question?

2:18 pm

Photo of Richard Di NataleRichard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

Because the member for New Zealand—New England—is confirmed as a New Zealand citizen, the High Court is going to have to overturn previous decisions and elevate a minority judgement as a new law of the land. Is this the advice that the Attorney-General is relying on to make him absolutely confident that Barnaby Joyce's position is okay? Or, is the advice of the Solicitor-General not to be taken literally?

2:19 pm

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, maybe you're relying on the same lawyer who advised Mr Ludlam and Ms Waters, because neither of the propositions you've stated are true. In order to succeed, we will not be asking the High Court to overturn any previous authority whatsoever. The remarks that I have referred to in media interviews, from Sykes v Cleary and Nile v Wood are not the remarks of judges in a minority on that point. They were observations made by judges in those cases from which none of the other members of the court demurred.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, a final supplementary question.

Photo of Richard Di NataleRichard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

My colleagues did the honourable thing, the decent thing, the right thing. They acted with integrity because, when they stood down from parliament, they upheld the Constitution. We then saw Senator Canavan adopt some sort of halfway house of being a member of this parliament while no longer being a minister. We've now seen the Deputy Prime Minister stoop even lower. We have the issue with Senator Roberts. When will this government do a comprehensive audit and settle this question once and for all?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, you speak about integrity. I don't deny, by the way, that Mr Ludlam and Ms Waters did act with integrity. I suspect that they probably acted a little prematurely in resigning, but the government, you'll recall, Senator Di Natale, did support your reference, under section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act, as the appropriate course. I don't criticise your conduct in this, and I don't criticise the conduct of Senator Roberts either, but the point you make, Senator Di Natale, reminds us that it behoves every member of this chamber and of the other place to behave with integrity if they have reason to be concerned that there may be an issue about their citizenship. They ought to come forward, as your colleagues did, and as my colleague did. And we wonder why it is that nobody from the Australian Labor Party, about some of whose members serious doubts have been expressed, has shown the same integrity. (Time expired)