Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business (House)) Share this | Hansard source

In raising this issue, Mr Speaker, I'm also raising the matter with respect to the administration of the House and to the Speaker's role in protecting the dignity of the House. I won't go through all of the information twice but wish to raise it in both ways.

As the House has not been sitting for some time, some of these circumstances have only come to light today and I have only now been able to properly consider all the relevant material. I'm therefore raising this matter at the earliest opportunity. As you would be aware, the practice around raising a matter of privilege requires me to set out the matter in some detail. I will try to be as brief as possible, although there is a lot of conduct to refer to.

The first item is the conference call. Mr Geoff Wilson of Wilson Asset Management has been perhaps the most vocal critic of Labor's policy to remove refundable franking credits for those who don't pay any income tax. This is the subject of the committee's inquiry. On or before 7 September 2018 and before the Treasurer had even asked the committee to undertake its inquiry, Wilson Asset Management announced that it would hold a shareholder presentation in Sydney at the Westin Hotel at 1 Martin Place, Sydney, on 20 November 2018. On 25 September 2018, Mr Geoff Wilson of Wilson Asset Management reportedly conducted an investor conference call, the audio of which is publicly available. During that conference call, Mr Geoff Wilson said, 'I was actually talking to the chairman of the Senate committee for this hearing into franking and I was saying it'd be nice if we could have—if one of the hearings could be on a day that we're doing our roadshow. Then we could do a little protest, we could have our placards and we could all walk down.'

On 20 November 2018, the committee did hold a public hearing of the inquiry—at the Law Society of New South Wales at 170 Phillip Street, Sydney. The committee's public hearing occurred on the same day and some 400 metres away from the shareholders' presentation organised by Mr Geoff Wilson. This raises a question as to whether the chair organised the committee's hearing schedule and locations at the behest of a person with a vested interest in the inquiry. This also raises a question as to whether the actions of the chair amount to an improper interference with the free exercise of his own committee's authority or functions such as to constitute a contempt of the House.

The next issue relates to conflict of interest. The fact that it has since been revealed that the chair is also a shareholder in two Wilson Asset Management investments raises other concerns about his conduct. It also raises questions over the chair's reported failure to declare this obvious conflict of interest to the committee, including when Mr Geoff Wilson appeared before a public hearing of the committee on 30 November 2018 while it was being chaired by the member for Goldstein. I note that at one point during the hearing Mr Geoff Wilson spoke about his shareholders, and the chair even then failed to declare his obvious conflict of interest. Again, this raises the question as to whether the chair's actions amount to an improper interference with the free exercise of his own committee's functions so as to constitute a contempt of the House: by chairing a hearing and asking questions of a committee witness when other committee members and, indeed, the people attending the hearing were not aware that he had a pecuniary interest in investments run by that witness. It also raises the question whether the chair is in breach of standing order 231—

Mr Falinski interjecting—

See this speech in context