Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

Australians were told this prime minister and his government—straight from his own lips—would be honest, open, fair and accountable. Well, for the last three years, we've seen anything but this in the way he's treated people and this parliament. We are a democracy, yet he treats us as a socialist union controlled government. The one time he gave Australians a real say about any issue was the Voice to Parliament, and they rejected and humiliated him. They showed him he was completely and utterly wrong, and he's never forgiven the Australian people for that. That's why his government is now more secretive than ever. They're doing everything they can to avoid scrutiny and accountability, hiding their true plans and motives.

The Prime Minister has sole discretion to choose how many advisers One Nation and other crossbench senators are allocated. So what did the Prime Minister do? He radically cut the staffing of those senators who do not support the Labor Party. Which party opposes the radical, unworkable policies of Labor more than any other? Of course—One Nation. When the Prime Minister cuts the staffing of those senators who take an opposing political view, he has an obvious conflict of interest. The incentive for the Prime Minister is to cut the resources of his political opponents in seeking to take political advantage and cut us off at the legs. Reducing the number of support staff for a senator effectively reduces the ability of a senator to function on behalf of their electorate and to provide an effective opposition, which is a foundation of our Westminster system of democratic government. Before continuing, here's some background.

Each member of parliament is allocated electorate officers to serve constituents. These are the same in number for all senators. Crossbench senators have, until recently, been allocated two parliamentary advisers who are designated personal advisers. Their duty is to assist senators with researching proposed legislation, assist senators in writing speeches, advise on parliamentary tactics, be the first point of contact with community groups and deputise for senators in meetings when the senator is engaged in the chamber or elsewhere in the state. You may wonder why we need the extra staff. It's because we must do the same work as the major parties with far fewer resources for scrutinising legislation, liaising with effective stakeholders and getting the input of the Australian people, let alone trying to get our legislation drafted to put on the floor of parliament, which is another issue.

On 23 June 2025, Prime Minister Albanese notified me he would not allocate any additional staff to One Nation's two new senators, giving me the responsibility of allocating the same staff resources across twice as many senators. In doing this, he had exercised a discretion authorised under section 4(1), 11(3) and 12 of the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984, MOPS. I now present his allocation of senators across the crossbench. Some crossbench senators, including Senator Roberts, were not allocated any personal staff. Senator Payman, who left the Labor Party in disgust, has had no personal staff allocated to her. Senator Lambie, though, who often supports Labor, has been granted three personal staff to assist her in the relatively small state of Tasmania. She's not the only senator. Remember, they've also got 12 senators, including Senator Lambie.

The state I represent, Queensland, has around 10 times the number of constituents as Tasmania. One Nation secured Senate seats in New South Wales, which has more than 8.2 million people, and Western Australia, which has more than three million people—but no personal staff. Remember, Tasmania, with half a million people, has three extra personal staff. Yet we don't get anything for Western Australia or New South Wales; these offices were allocated no staff at all. Significantly, Senators Lidia Thorpe, David Pocock and Tammy Tyrrell are often supportive of Labor and the Greens and have retained their allocations of two each—surprise, surprise! One Nation senators, who often hold Labor accountable—very often, I should say—are cut to an average of one each. Senator Ralph Babet, who holds Labor accountable, was slashed to one. The pattern is clear. Crossbench senators who support Labor were unaffected. Those who hold Labor accountable were halved, gutted.

This clearly shows the Prime Minister to be incapable of fairness and clearly displays his vindictiveness, incompetence and bias. He breached important provisions of administrative law, as defined in common law through decisions in courts including the High Court. These breaches include that he gave no reason for his decision, he had not consulted or sought input from any One Nation senator and he did not act in good faith. Further, he did not act with a proper purpose. He had not considered relevant matters. He had not acted on reasonable grounds, given that One Nation had doubled its existing number of senators from two to four with no increase in personal staff allocated. He did not act based on supporting evidence. He had not provided affected persons with procedural fairness, including personal staff and senators. Senators and affected staff were given no opportunity to put their case to the Prime Minister before his decision to reduce staff.

He or his office ordered the employment of Senator Roberts's staff to be terminated before they were made aware. It's the only senator's office in which that occurred. Senator Roberts was given 12 minutes notice to respond to a deadline late on a Friday night. Senator Roberts worked that night until 10.30 pm and did not check his emails. The Prime Minister had not properly considered the merits of the decision. He has still not indicated that he had evaluated all relevant evidence. He had not acted reasonably or fairly, as senators were not allocated staff on the basis of need, nor were senators treated evenly. Some senators had savage cuts made to staffing, and some had no cuts made at all. The Prime Minister did not inform senators that he had made a decision that affected them. Some senators found out via the media—the respect that is not shown in this place!

The decision flies in the face of the recent review by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet of health risks to parliamentary staffers from workplace stress and excessive work demands. This raises serious workplace health and safety issues. The Parliamentary Workplace Support Service's review concluded that staffing levels overall are not adequate to meet all the parliamentary and electoral work demands placed on staff in some offices. It was stressful to some of the staff—because I've had to deal with it. It's just absolutely disgusting, the way in which it was done. Like I said, it was done through the media. That's how they found out. Also, what's their future? Where are their jobs? The way this has been handled is absolutely disgusting.

In essence, this meant personal staff were overworked. That translates further to workplace health and safety issues. Clearly, the way in which this prime minister actioned core staff to be brutalised shows he doesn't care about workers, especially not One Nation workers. He rants and raves about how he cares about the Australian workers and everything like that. That's a load of garbage, as far as I'm concerned. It has been shown in his actions and his behaviour in this matter.

The Prime Minister and his chief of staff refused to meet Senator Hanson and Senator Roberts. He refused to meet me. I had a meeting with him. This affected Senator Roberts's office. He is the one whose staff had to go. Senator Roberts and I went around. I said: 'No, you have a right to meet with the Prime Minister, Senator Roberts. You will come with me.' So we went around to the Prime Minister's office. The chief of staff came out and said: 'No, he's not meeting with Senator Roberts. He's only got a meeting with you.' I said: 'This affects Senator Roberts. He should have a right to be there in the meeting.' He said, 'I'll go and see what happens.' He came out, and guess what he said: 'Senator Roberts can come in. You can't.'

I'm the leader of the party. I've been given the authority to disburse staff to where I believe they should go. I'm not a parliamentary party. I am an individual senator heading a political party. We are not a recognised parliamentary party, but he's telling me I have to authorise where the staff have to go. Therefore I was also denied the right to go into the office. He couldn't face two of us. He couldn't face me. He didn't want to face me; only Senator Roberts. This Prime Minister is weak, and he couldn't face the two of us to put his case across for why he did what he did. The chief of staff refused to meet with both of us.

In his meeting with the Prime Minister, Senator Roberts raised three main issues: the unfairness of the Prime Minister on staff allocation; the Prime Minister's actions breaching recognised process expected under administrative law provisions; and his partisan decision imposing needless stress on staff, who were already working hard in the taxpayers' interest. The Australian courts have clearly recognised that the exercise of administrative decisions, including the decision to reduce support for senators, must follow the procedural principles set out in Australian case law. The Prime Minister didn't follow any of these principles.

If the Prime Minister supports a fully functioning parliament, democracy and accountability, then he should ensure that members and senators are provided with reasonable resources, including qualified and professional advisers as personal staff. After securing re-election based on claims of transparency, the Prime Minister has abused his position, disrespected Australian law and courts and jeopardised democracy for his political advantage. He has shown that he is incapable of fairness. Our staff have been treated unfairly. This stinks of corruption. That's why we have notified the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and it's why we will be taking this matter to the Fair Work Commission.

The Prime Minister's politically motivated decision will lead to a lack of accountability and, without that, he will be prone to overstepping and bringing himself down. He will be more able to hide behind reduced opposition and scrutiny. That hurts Australia and undermines democracy. This is clearly a further example of the Prime Minister seeking control over the democratic process. I remind everyone that always beneath control there is fear. Why is he afraid of democratic scrutiny? Why is he afraid of losing the control that he covets?

Under the new bill, the government retains over 520 staff while it also retains access to thousands of departmental staff. This bill provides a fairer allocation to the government, opposition, Greens, other parties and crossbench Independents. This bill is well-considered, well-written and fair. Its co-sponsors include the Liberals, Senator Payman, Senator Babet and One Nation, indicating broad support. The bill offers career progression for crossbench staff. It only nominates minimum standards. The Prime Minister can allocate more.

We're all tired of partisan politics that threaten to destroy our country and destroy our democracy. The bill will ensure that support for senators and Australian democracy is not subject to the whims of a recalcitrant prime minister who puts his own personal agenda ahead of the effective operation of this chamber. Both preceding coalition prime ministers allocated equal numbers of personal advisers to each crossbench senator, showing they both saw merit in fairness and democracy. Prime Minister Albanese hides from democracy. He buries democracy. He prevents democracy. One Nation welcomes the spirit with which many diverse senators approached this issue in a united way.

Look, I have my differences with a couple of the other crossbench senators here, but the fact is we've been treated unfairly. I believe that Senator Payman has been treated unfairly too. She has not been given any personal staffing allocation at all. That clearly shows that he never got over the fact that she walked away and turned her back on the Labor Party, and with good reason. That is not fair in this place. This is where the allocation of staff should be fair right across the board for everyone here. We were actually allocated the staff because crossbench senators don't have the huge machine behind us.

As I said, the Labor Party has 520 staff, plus all the departments. You have all that staffing available to you, then you have consultants and you get others in to help you. We don't have that. We have to deal with the legislation, which can change on a daily basis. We have to be across the legislation and what we have to vote on in this chamber—and you've cut our staff. It is disgusting what this Prime Minister has done. I will keep following up.

Our staff that have lost their jobs are going to take this to the Fair Work Commission. I will follow through with the national crime commission. According to the national crime commission, the way this has been handled is wrong. This is not the Prime Minister that we deserve.