Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry, representing the Minister for Employment. Will the minister outline to the House why it is important for employer and employee organisations to act in a way that promotes transparency and manages the potential for conflict of interest? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Canning for his very important question. Yesterday in the House I referred to a $27½ thousand payment made from AustralianSuper to the AWU in 2006-07, when the Leader of the Opposition was the national secretary of the AWU as well as a member of the board of AustralianSuper. The Leader of the Opposition made a personal explanation after question time in which he stated that no conflict existed. But I can reveal that the APRA rules state quite clearly that a director who is nominated by a different body—in other words, a union—to a superannuation fund has the strong possibility of a conflict between the interests of beneficiaries and the interests of the nominating or appointing body, and the director must avoid, if not manage, any resulting actual or perceived conflict. In other words, being a member of the board and the national secretary of the AWU was, under the law, a conflict of interest that needed to be managed. So, the Leader of the Opposition was badly advised yesterday and should correct the record in this House to say that he did in fact have a conflict of interest.

But the substantive issue remains: when AustralianSuper gave $27½ thousand to the AWU, did the Leader of the Opposition take any steps to manage his conflict of interest? Did he, for example, disclose a conflict of interest? Did he disqualify himself, or did he participate in the deliberations when he should not have? Did he act in his own interests in preference to the interests of the beneficiaries of the superannuation entity? They are the tests required under the APRA guidelines.

The Leader of the Opposition is very quick to demand that the Prime Minister stand up in the House and explain his financial arrangements since being a member of parliament. And the Prime Minister has never hesitated to do so. He has stood up and taken the House and the press gallery through his financial arrangements that prove that he does not have a conflict of interest. So the Leader of the Opposition has a responsibility—if what is good for the goose is good for the gander—to explain to the press gallery and to this House how he managed his conflict of interest as national secretary to the AWU and a director of AustralianSuper. If he does not do so, in the end it goes to his character: not only did he sell out the workers at Cleanevent and not only did he sell out the workers at Chiquita Mushrooms but he also sold out the beneficiaries of the AustralianSuper fund. He needs to explain his position.