George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Attorney-General, Senator Ludwig. I refer the minister to his answer to my question on Monday last week, when I raised the issue of the possible breach by the member for Robertson of section 139.2 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. Why did it take the Attorney-General seven days before he referred the matter to the Australian Federal Police? What new fact or piece of information was available to the Attorney-General yesterday that was not available to him on 16 June or earlier?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This matter—and I thank Senator Brandis for raising it—has been the subject of an investigation by the New South Wales police. The New South Wales police can investigate allegations that Commonwealth offences have been committed. They can also charge and prosecute. Alternatively, they can refer a matter to the Australian Federal Police. In recent days, further allegations of a different type have been made in relation to this matter. Following a discussion that took place, yesterday the Attorney-General asked his department for advice on what role the Australian Federal Police should play in this matter, given the investigation which is being conducted by the New South Wales Police Force at the moment.

The Secretary of the Attorney-General’s Department has advised, under the arrangements which exist between the Commonwealth and the state of New South Wales, that New South Wales police are able to investigate and charge people with Commonwealth offences. Where the New South Wales police are already conducting an investigation, the usual practice of the Australian Federal Police—if the same event or circumstances are referred to it—is to liaise with the New South Wales police to see if they can provide any assistance in relation to the investigation. This arrangement avoids any unnecessary duplication of work and inconveniences to the people and witnesses involved in the investigation. In these circumstances, I am advised that an appropriate course of action would be to request the Australian Federal Police to contact the New South Wales police to ascertain whether they would be assisted by the Australian Federal Police conducting an investigation as well. That is what the Secretary of the Attorney-General’s Department has advised. On the basis of that advice, the Attorney-General did write to the Australian Federal Police yesterday stating:

In light of the fact of the investigation and matters now in the public domain, I would appreciate you considering liaising with the NSW Police Commissioner to confirm the extent of their investigation and whether those investigations would be assisted by an investigation conducted by the Australian Federal Police …

This morning, the New South Wales police issued the following statement:

Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty and New South Wales Commissioner Andrew Scipione have spoken this morning following a request from the federal government for the AFP to offer assistance. The commissioners have agreed that New South Wales police will remain in charge of the investigation until its conclusion, which is expected in the near future.

The Commonwealth government take this very seriously. The government have at all times acted appropriately in the matter and, now that the matter is with the New South Wales Police Force, I am not going to provide a running commentary in respect of those matters that are under investigation. I am sure the opposition would understand that. The appropriate course of action is to let the police investigation be conducted without political interference.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that neither Mr Cornall’s letter of advice to the Attorney-General dated yesterday nor the Attorney-General’s letter to the Australian Federal Police Commissioner, also dated yesterday, identified any new facts that were not known at least on 16 June this year, what are the new facts which have subsequently come to light, to which the minister referred in his answer?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have said, the Rudd government take this matter very seriously. What we are not going to do is provide a running commentary on it. It is unfortunate that the opposition feel that they need to have a running commentary. These are serious matters. They are best left with those who are charged with investigating them. The New South Wales police have it in hand and it would be inappropriate for the government to provide a running commentary in respect of the matter.