Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Hansard source

Can I say at the outset that it is not unexpected to have some questions on the issue of AWB, and it is proper. I say as a true democrat that it is appropriate for the opposition to ask questions about major public policy issues, but in this instance we are dealing with a very significant issue that is the subject of a full royal commission. Therefore, we need to be very careful not to compromise the conduct of that royal commission. The royal commissioner has made it clear that he regards his terms of reference as sufficiently wide to enable him to inquire into all matters pertaining to the oil for food program and AWB’s involvement in that program and give him full authority to investigate all the issues highlighted in the Volcker report. Insofar as the specifics of US attention being drawn to the possibility of the rorting of the oil for food program, yes, of course there were allegations being made in that period—2000 to 2003—about the oil for food program, which I remind the Senate was conducted by the UN.

In the case of allegations raised by and emanating from the United States, the context was a situation where Australia as a major wheat exporter faced its most serious and aggressive competition from the United States, and obviously that was a factor in the Australian government’s attitude to concerns being raised from that end. Nevertheless, it is the case that, whenever concerns were raised over this period by the United States, agencies from the United States or in one case Canada, appropriate inquiries were made by the relevant government authorities of AWB and of the circumstances surrounding the allegations. In no case—particularly, I am informed, in 2003—was any substantive evidence presented to support the allegations that were being made. In all cases, AWB strenuously denied any involvement in any kickbacks or rorting of the oil for food program.

I am satisfied and the government is satisfied that certainly in the lead-up to and in this period—2000 to 2004—all allegations of this kind were investigated. They were never really supported by any evidence. Indeed, the Volcker report says that there was no evidence before it of any culpability on the part of AWB. But, in the light of what the report said, we undertook—and I think quite properly—to set up the Cole royal commission with wide terms of reference to determine whether there was any breach of Australian law by AWB, and the commissioner has made clear that his terms of reference allow him to question government officials and inquire into the state of knowledge of DFAT. With great respect to the opposition, I think we should respect the Cole inquiry and await the findings of the Cole inquiry before we start the witch-hunt.