Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Energy, Senator Birmingham. On Monday, Minister Frydenberg said in relation to the government's grant of almost half a billion dollars in taxpayers' money to a small private foundation that his department had undertaken a 'first phase of due diligence' which looked at the foundation's 'fundraising history'. Can the minister advise the Senate exactly how much the private foundation has raised from corporate or private sources over its entire history?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Keneally for her question. In terms of the precise dollars, I am quite happy to take on notice anything that can be provided, in addition to information that Minister Frydenberg has a ready provided. I can happily say that the Great Barrier Reef Foundation has absolutely raised millions of dollars. I say that with some degree of confidence because I remember the fact that the former Labor government gave them $12 million. That's right—the Labor Party saw fit to give the foundation millions of dollars.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins on a point of order.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is not about what government funds may have been provided. The question is around the fundraising history from philanthropic and other sources that this body, which has been given half a billion dollars, may in reality have.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I believe the minister is being directly relevant to the entirety of the question asked.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Labor Party can't have it both ways. They can't try to drag down the name of a foundation that has done good work raising money to support the protection of the Great Barrier Reef and investing funds in projects to support the protection of the Great Barrier Reef. The Labor Party were happy to give millions of taxpayer dollars to that foundation, yet when the Turnbull coalition government gives millions of dollars to the same foundation, the Labor Party seek to drag the foundation's name through the mud. That's the Labor Party way, isn't it? It's all about cheap, base politics rather than the interests of the Great Barrier Reef.

Government senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I'll call Senator Wong when there's silence on my right. Senator Wong.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm tempted to say 'very expensive, base politics on the other side', but what I'm actually coming to is direct relevance. The minister himself raised the fundraising history of—

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are not special rules for you.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sorry, Senator; are you speaking to me?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald, please let me hear the point of order.

Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—

Senator Macdonald, please let me hear the point of order before I rule on it. Senator Macdonald! Senator Wong, please resume.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is direct relevance. The minister himself has said—

Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald, I've asked you several times—

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm responding to Senator Cameron.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald—

Senator Cameron interjecting—

It doesn't help, Senator Cameron. Senator Macdonald, I've asked you to remain silent on a couple of occasions. Senator Wong, please resume your point of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. The point of order is direct relevance. The question is about fundraising history. We want the amounts that the corporation has raised from corporate or private sources over its entire history. This is precisely the justification for the grant.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand, Senator Wong. You have reminded the minister of the second part of the question. I understand he's taken part of the question on notice. As long as he's directly relevant to part of the question, I cannot instruct him how to answer the question.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, indeed I took that on notice. But, in a question that was asking about funds provided to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park foundation, at a time when the Labor Party are criticising the coalition government for giving funds to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park foundation, it is highly relevant to remind the Labor Party that they gave millions of dollars to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park foundation.

Now, we are proud to have made an investment into the future of the reef. We're proud to be making record investment through the Reef Trust into the future of the reef. We're proud to have been the government that got the reef taken off the 'in danger' list. We are proud to have made sure that the reef is in good hands. (Time expired)

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask a supplementary question. In the last week, Minister Frydenberg has variously claimed that the private foundation has raised over $90 million, around $80 million, $65 million, more than $60 million and tens of millions of dollars. Which of Minister Frydenberg's figures is correct?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Keneally is simply asking the first question in a different way. I took the information that was requested on notice in relation to the first question. I don't need to take it on notice again, because it is effectively the same question. But the truth is: the Turnbull government are the government that confronted the issue of the Great Barrier Reef when we came to government, and it was on the 'in danger' list according to the World Heritage Committee. We have worked to make sure that it was taken off that 'in danger' list.

We've taken the steps to ensure that dredge spoil never again is dumped in proximity to the Great Barrier Reef. We've taken those steps. We've taken the steps to establish the Reef Trust and to have record levels of investment and planning with the Queensland government—and, yes, in this year's budget, we took the step to give funds to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park foundation, a foundation with a long history of involvement, a long history of fundraising and a history of getting grants from the Labor Party, and that will add to our good work in the protection of the Great Barrier Reef. (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Keneally, a final supplementary question.

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The private foundation itself says on its website that it has raised $57 million from corporate and private philanthropy.

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So which is correct, the private foundation's figure or one of Minister Frydenberg's five figures? And is this the level of due diligence the government considers appropriate—

Honourable senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

for a grant of almost half a billion dollars?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There were interjections on both sides during that question. I will remind senators of my request to hear questions in silence.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government are proud of every step we've taken in terms of our work for the Great Barrier Reef—our work to ensure that the Great Barrier Reef was taken off the endangered list, our work to deal with dredge spoil, our work to deliver a reef plan that is a long-term plan to improve water quality in the reef, our work to ensure that the reef has the funding that it deserves. But I'm not going to sit here or stand here and take lectures from Senator Keneally on due diligence. Perhaps we could talk about Sydney Metro as an example of due diligence.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Birmingham, please resume your seat.

Government senators interjecting—

Order on my right! Senator Wong on a point of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is direct relevance. The government's given half a billion dollars away. We want to know about the due diligence in a circumstance where the minister has given five different figures. It is a reasonable question. Could the minister please answer it?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As senators know, I cannot instruct a minister how to answer a question. You reminded the minister of the terms of the question. I take this opportunity to do so and note he has 29 seconds remaining to answer. Senator Birmingham.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I took the initial question to answer and have simply had repeats of it. To help you out, $412 million was the cost of Sydney Metro—$412 million that could have, in the New South Wales equivalent, gone to something like the Great Barrier Reef Foundation.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Birmingham, please resume your seat. Senator Collins, a point of order?

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, again on direct relevance. We have the minister here ducking and weaving because the minister cannot provide information that demonstrates any due diligence.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins, what is your point of order?

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What Metro has got to do with this is irrelevant.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Birmingham, it is a struggle to relate a project I'm not familiar with to the Great Barrier Reef. I'll ask you to return to the question.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't know; what are we to assume from the Labor Party's questions—that they would rather $400 million or $500 million was not being spent on the Great Barrier Reef? Is that what we are to assume from the Labor Party's questions—that they would rather the future of the reef did not have this investment, this focus, this continuing to build— (Time expired)