David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I inform the Senate that the President has received the following letter from Senator Lambie:

Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that today I propose to move "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

The need for the Australian Government to adhere to principles of transparency and accountability for good government instead of ignoring them".

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

"The need for the Australian Government to adhere to principles of transparency and accountability for good government instead of ignoring them"

I rise to speak to the need for the Australian government to adhere to the principles of transparency and accountability for good government, instead of ignoring them. I will say the last bit again: instead of ignoring them. When I'm out there with my boots on the ground, the thing people say to me the most is that they don't trust politicians. They don't trust them do the right thing. They don't trust them to choose the needs of the Australian people over their own, and they don't trust them to choose people over politics.

Polling done By the Australian Institute late last year found that three out of five Australians elected politicians, party officials and candidates were found to be the second-biggest threat to our democracy. Three out of five—isn't that just plain awful? We should be ashamed of ourselves. I know that I give a lot of my colleagues in this place a hard time, but I would also say that there are many politicians who are here for the right reasons. They believe in our democracy, and they believe in fighting for what is best for their communities. The problem is not them. The problem is the lack of transparency in our political system, especially when it comes to the major parties. Despite the Prime Minister's promise to lead a government with integrity and transparency, Australians are yet to really see that. Yes, we have a national anti-corruption commission, but that simply is not enough. We need real action on transparency, but I think it's clear that the last thing this government wants is transparency.

I brought a motion to the Senate last year asking for the Prime Minister's diary to be published. The Prime Minister's office has resisted multiple freedom of information requests to disclose his diary. Time after time, these requests have been refused. His office claims that seeing that PM's diary would divert the office away from its usual important tasks. What a load of absolute rubbish! The Premier of Queensland, the Chief Minister of the ACT and even the President of the United States all proactively publish their diaries, and I would suggest that the President of the United States has quite a few more important tasks before him.

Transparency and accountability are key principles of good government. They are what makes a country great and its democracy strong. According to the Prime Minister, we're about 18 months from the next federal election, and this government and this Prime Minister are running out of time to show the Australian people that they really believe in transparency and integrity. The last election saw a fall in the primary vote for the major parties. Australians voted in unprecedented numbers for Independents and micros. Many of those elected ran on a platform of integrity and greater transparency in our politics. This clearly scares the bejesus out of both major parties, and so it should. This government is working hard behind the scenes to lock down the system that worked so well for them. They are planning to change our electoral laws, and they are saying lots of reassuring things about putting donation caps on campaigns, which sounds good but, when Victoria did it, it wiped out Independent candidates. It's as simple as that.

The government is also talking about upping public funding. That is the amount the candidate receives for each vote that they get. It's your—taxpayers'—money. This was introduced by the Labor government and was meant as insurance against the possibility of corruption, but increasing the public funding will mean that major parties will run their candidates in electorates that they know they can't possibly win, but they will get enough votes to get the public funding so that they can spend more on the next election and the one after that. What this government is not talking about is doing anything about the transparency of the amount of cash that is funnelled through their entities. I think most Australians would understand the term 'money-laundering'. It's when you take dirty money obtained through crime and spend it in a legitimate business to 'clean' the money. That's basically what these political entities are; they are to funnel cash from big donors to candidates. It's basically electoral money-laundering. Both major parties have these entities. They are like shelf companies that are set up to hold events, take donations and funnel them back through the campaigns. There is no transparency on these entities and this government could do something about that right now.

This government and this Prime Minister could be bold and put real transparency measures into parliament and into our electoral system, but they probably won't because, despite what the Prime Minister says and what his government says, they don't want transparency. If they did, they would clean up the electoral funding system, get rid of those money-laundering entities and publish the Prime Minister's diary. Instead they just keep telling Australians, 'It's all fine—nothing to see here.' Australians are smarter than that. They see what you're doing and they see your lack of action. That's why I believe they will keep voting for Independents and microparties in record numbers, but you can wear that at the next election. Once Independents and micros have the balance of power in both houses, Australia will finally get, I can assure you, the integrity and transparency they deserve, and we will lead by example, unlike the government of today.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Lambie for bringing this issue to the attention of the Senate, and I rise to speak on behalf of the government. This is a really important issue. Senator Lambie is right to say that this is something that the public is concerned about. I know, as someone who's been in this chamber since 2016, that it is an issue that I was well aware of when I was elected and that I talked about in my first speech as well, and it is something that the government is committed to.

You need to consider this motion in the context of what we inherited when we came to government and the track record of our predecessors, and what we have done to turn that around. Not only was that an important focus during the lead-up to the election but there is what we have achieved in government as well. I think that Senator Lambie didn't go near giving the government some credit—and I know that's not her job to give the government credit, but I think there could have been some acknowledgement of the decisions that the government have made which have boosted transparency.

When you think about what we inherited from those opposite, particularly from the term of the Morrison government—a lot of that was gone through on TV on Monday night, on the ABC—it was a complete mess. We all remember the multiple ministries that the Prime Minister swore himself into. One of the first things that Prime Minister Albanese did when he came to power was order an inquiry into that to try and uncover how that could possibly happen in a democratic government here in Australia but also what we can do to prevent it from happening again. We took action on that and passed legislation to ensure that something like that—where you have a prime minister appointing himself to multiple ministries—can't happen again.

I also want to talk about the integrity commission that we have brought in, the NACC. The previous government for years promised to bring in an integrity commission, yet they progressed absolutely nothing in that regard. It is something that this government delivered on and it's something that I think will be an important legacy of this government—that we have brought this in. I'm sure that that will help ensure public accountability as well as help to restore public confidence in the actions of government.

The other important changes that we've been making are around the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The previous government stacked multiple former Liberal and National Party hacks and members of the party onto the AAT. It was something that this government said that we wanted to reform, and we have taken action on that. We have introduced a merit-based selection process to ensure that the people who are appointed to the AAT are capable of doing it, as we go about the more significant reform of ensuring the AAT is fit for purpose and serves the Australian people as was intended.

So, when you talk about the integrity of this government and the role that we have played, since coming to power, in ensuring that we are doing our bit to help restore integrity in government, we have a proud record in the almost two years that we have been in government. Whether it is bringing in the NACC, which I think will be an important reform; whether it is ensuring that a prime minister can't appoint himself to multiple ministries again; or, indeed, whether it is bringing in important reforms to the AAT that ensure that there is a merit-based selection process, this is a government that is delivering on its promises to the Australian people and doing its part.

We know that there is much more to do because this challenge of restoring the public's confidence in government is an ongoing one, and we continue to do that day in, day out, whether it's responding to questions on notice or responding to orders for the production of documents—and, on both counts, in government we have already responded to many more than our predecessors did, and that is only two years in. What we are doing is ensuring we walk the walk on this in terms of our reforms, because we want the Australian public to have confidence in this government. We understand the importance of restoring integrity to government. We want the public to have confidence in our decision-making as we act in the national interest and continue to restore integrity to government.

James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would just like to remind those who are listening at home of the motion that is before us here in the Senate moved by Senator Lambie:

The need for the Australian Government to adhere to principles of transparency and accountability for good government instead of ignoring them".

I would like to commend Senator Lambie for bringing forward this motion to the Senate, because this is a government that promised to be the most transparent ever, and in its practice is turning out to be the least transparent in terms of how it deals with questions from the opposition and questions from the crossbench. But, more importantly, the most intrinsic part of transparency and accountability is telling the truth. It is making sure that you do not purvey untruths; that you do not mislead the Australian people; that you do not, to quote old English, hornswoggle; and that, to use the language of young people, you do not cap—that you are not a capper.

Unfortunately, we have a government that was elected on an untruth.

I will take the interjection from Senator Smith. It wasn't an untruth; it was many untruths. But the main untruth is that this government said it had no plans to change the stage 3 tax reforms. And guess what? Over the last almost two years, Prime Minister Albanese and members of this Labor Party, with their fingers and legs crossed, day after day said they had no plans to change the Australian taxation system. We all knew that they were befuddling the Australian people. We all knew that they were prevaricating. We all knew that untruths were being told. But it was not until the last few days that the Prime Minister did come clean. That's why this motion is so important, because it talks about transparency and accountability.

In question time today, members of the coalition asked senior members of the Labor Party where the Labor Party stood on reform or changes to negative gearing. The response from the Labor ministers was that they had no plans. We know what that means. It means they do have plans but they just haven't told us yet. Questions were put to the Labor Party about whether they would put capital gains tax on the family home. What did the Labor Party ministers say? They did not deny it. They did not deny that they had plans to do it. They did not rule out putting, effectively, an inheritance tax on the family home. They did not rule out smashing the aspiration of Australians who want to get ahead in life.

This debate comes down to that core element of truth, of making sure that, when you speak to the Australian people and when you commit to do something, when you as a politician make a promise, you deliver on that promise. What we've witnessed over the last two years is a Labor Party that made a series of promises that they would not change the stage 3 tax plan, and they did. So, if they're prepared to make that change, to break that promise, to purvey that untruth to the Australian people, what does that say about what they're going to do about a capital gains tax on the family home? What does that say to the Australian people about negative gearing? What does that say to the Australian people about anything that is uttered by Prime Minister Albanese or by any member of the Labor Party? Quite simply, you cannot believe a word they say, because this government is a purveyor of untruths and needs to be thrown out at the next election.

Ralph Babet (Victoria, United Australia Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Obviously, I rise here in support of Senator Lambie's urgency motion. Of course I do. As Australians, we pride ourselves on having an open and transparent society—or at least I hope that we do. I hope there is not a single person in this place who would argue that we should act in the shadows or work to cover things up. Yet increasingly, as far as I can tell, that's exactly what we can see. Would you call the government's COVID inquiry 'open and transparent'? I wouldn't. It's an inquiry that deliberately avoids examining key issues relating to the pandemic. It's an inquiry that purposefully rules out questions that the public want answered. My fellow senators, don't sit here and agree that we must be open and transparent while failing to call for a royal commission into the greatest health disaster in the history of our nation.

There are many issues in this place that are being conveniently swept under the carpet in the hope that they'll just disappear, but they have not disappeared. The public still want and need answers, and in an open and transparent system that we, hopefully, should all aspire to have, senators like you and me must ask questions no matter where the answers might lead. By all means, let's agree on the need for openness and transparency, but agreeing on that whilst doing nothing to facilitate it is, unfortunately, the height of hypocrisy. That's what it is.

If we want to build trust with the people that we represent, let's demand a royal commission into the pandemic response. Let's demand a full inquiry into the handling of the Brittany Higgins compensation package. Openness and transparency—let's have at it.

Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor talks a big game about transparency and accountability. Any whiff of a cover-up from the Liberals, and you can bet they'll be the first asking for heads to roll. But, as soon as the tables are turned and the spotlight is on them, Labor quickly demonstrates that they're no better. Yesterday I expected documents about the Federal Circuit and Family Law Court in Burnie to be handed over after my successful order for the production of documents last year. Now that it's time to deliver, the government's decided they can't stump up the documents. It's not unreasonable for the government to say that making some of these documents public could impact current negotiations. I don't want that. I want this issue to be resolved. But that argument doesn't stand for all of the documents I asked for, and the government is hiding behind weak excuses so they don't have to comply with the Senate's order and hand them over.

This is why people hate politics. They just want politicians to tell them the truth when they've stuffed up something or something's gone wrong. Instead, the major parties lie through their teeth. They're in it to save their own skin and hold on to power. It doesn't matter whether or not that means doing the right thing for the people they're supposed to represent. Neither party has taken responsibility for how the family law court in Burnie ended up in this position. The coalition stuffed it up, Labor has stuffed it up and the Tasmanian Liberal government has stuffed it up as well. We have no idea why three years on we're still talking about this and it hasn't been fixed. I'm frustrated. I just want a good outcome for the people of North West Tasmania. Both Liberal and Labor at state and federal levels are more interested in playing political games than in telling the truth and getting on with it, and Tasmanians are wearing the consequences. We need to stop stuffing up.

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

Thank you to Senator Lambie for pointing out in this motion the need for this Labor-Greens-teal-Pocock government to start adhering to the principles of transparency and accountability for good government as Labor promised before the election. Since assuming office in 2022, the Albanese government and their Greens and teal coalition partners have completely ignored these principles. It's clear that on big issues Labor uses the deliberate tactics of hiding facts and lying or telling half-truths to deceive Australian voters. The list of examples is long, and I'll touch on some of them. The Prime Minister promised to hold a royal commission into the government's response to COVID-19. Where is it? Dragged kicking and screaming, the government agreed to set up a whitewash committee of inquiry lacking the powers to inquire, with insiders and cheerleaders of state and federal governments heading the whitewash and with terms of reference excluding the states' actions. What are they trying to hide? Admittedly the government did not oppose my successful motion to refer the drafting of terms of reference for a possible future royal commission. However it was forced to do so after the announcement of its whitewash inquiry was ridiculed and panned in this chamber and across Australia.

What about the abuse of Senate processes? Labor have mastered the art of guillotining debate on major issues in this Senate. This is to avoid public scrutiny of government bills when the government have the numbers to pass a bill yet do not want debate that may reveal the deficiencies and inequities of proposed legislation that would embarrass the government or expose Labor power grabs in conjunction with their Senate coalition partners the Greens, teal Senator Pocock and, sadly all too often, the Jacqui Lambie Network. In the same vein, orders for the production of government held documents are routinely delayed and the documents withheld. Replies to requests may say they hold them yet decline to provide them, without giving reasons. Right to information requests become the norm, even though senators should be able to access the documents routinely.

Today, the government is introducing industrial relations legislation that the private sector, from small businesses to major employers, almost universally canned as overly complicated, deceitful and damaging to the Australian economy. Workers and employers see government industrial relations bills as giving union bosses enormous power as the reward for steering members' union fees into Labor campaign funding. One Nation is introducing an amendment to clarify the rights of so-called casual black-coal miners who have been underpaid, on average, around $33,000 a year. The culprits are labour-hire firms, including the world's largest labour-hire firm, with the agreement of the CFMMEU union bosses who chose to shaft their members in return for favours from employers. The government's own Fair Work Commission signed off on sham enterprise agreements without proper scrutiny. One Nation will hold this dishonest government accountable.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support this motion brought by Senator Lambie. Canberra can be a dark place, but there's no place darker in Canberra than inside the Australian Defence Force and the Department of Defence. The two so-called parties of government—others would say war parties—have fostered a toxic culture in Defence where a small group of mates in a dark, smoke filled room operate with no oversight, no scrutiny and no accountability. Just today, we spoke about a bill that would've taken a small step towards some oversight of Defence, and it was voted against by the Albanese government. It was voted against not on principle but on some flimsy speaking notes from a Defence flunky that were just regurgitated by the minister.

Defence has over 16,000 active contracts, with a total value of over $200 billion. That's on foot now. There's no effective oversight and sod all accountability. There's just a bunch of mates patting themselves on the back, giving themselves Orders of Australia, giving themselves promotions and giving themselves blank cheque after blank cheque. No wonder they don't want to let the light in. No wonder they don't want people to know what's going on behind closed doors. Let's just run through a couple of those examples. Do you want to know who decided to sign off on spending $45-plus billion to get currently—I don't know—eight but probably six, five or four Hunter frigates? It's the single biggest live procurement contract the Commonwealth's entered into. Do you want to know who did this without any value-for-money assessment? Do you want to know who or why this contract was signed? You don't get to know. They've lost the records, apparently. Do you want to know who we sell military equipment to or what that equipment is—whether it's Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Israel or both sides of the conflict in Sudan at the same time? You don't get to know. They don't tell us.

Do you want to know why we've been waiting more than half a decade to just get a patrol boat in the water and actually into commission? Do you want to know who's responsible for that delay or how much it's cost? You don't get to know that either. Do you want to know why Defence is currently chopping up and burying a bunch of billion-dollar helicopters that just a few months ago they said were fine and terrific and dandy? Do you want to know how or why? No, you don't get to. Silence. And do you want to know why the flight safety standards for those same helicopters aren't in the public domain? Do you want to see the flight safety standards and the testing that happened, maybe, to get some idea, given that four lives were lost on those same helicopters? No, you don't get to. Silence. You don't get accountability from Defence.

It's as bad under the Albanese Labor government as it was under the coalition. We get all this rhetoric about transparency. We got all these social media posts and spin from the Albanese government when they were in opposition that things were going to be different, things were going to change. But, instead of that transparency, we've got the same brick wall that separates the public interest and the public from the decisions and the decision-makers shielding mates, shielding people who should be held to account and shielding people like senior officers in the AFP, who we found out this week spent heaven knows how much money and how many resources issuing a covert operation against a 13-year-old boy with autism. We don't get the transparency. We don't get to see who did it. Without that, we don't get the accountability.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in favour of Senator Lambie's urgency motion. I thank her for the opportunity to shine a light on a couple of issues that I think are critical for the Senate to not just think about but address. Transparency in political donations at the federal level is an absolute joke. Unfortunately, as of yet, nothing has changed since we had a change in government. Last week we learnt that some $259 million has poured into political parties in the last financial year, yet we know very little about the sources of much of the funding. In fact, the source of 27 per cent of Labor's income is unknown. That's roughly $23 million of dark money fuelling their political machinery. The coalition, not to be outdone, received some $27.5 million in dark money. Even if we just look at the roughly $160 million in declared funding to the major parties, it's impossible to distinguish between political fundraising and other sources of income.

This isn't good enough. We should be able to see where funding is coming from and who it's coming from. Dodgy business forum memberships and fundraising dinners mean that Australians just don't know who is buying access to their politicians. I welcome the government's commitment to lowering the donation threshold, but more needs to be done to clean up some of these dodgy sources of income and prevent dark money from entering politics. We're clearly running out of time to do this. This is urgent.

The other thing that I think we need to be shining a light on is access to this building. Access is a good thing, but we know that there are now over 2,000 people who have access-all-areas passes to this building, and the Australian public have no idea who they are. This is the people's house. Australians deserve to know who is accessing these halls, who is able to visit senators and members and ministers to talk about upcoming legislation and exert pressure. Access is a good thing. We shouldn't stop access, but I would argue that there needs to be transparency when it comes to who is lobbying. Who are all these in-house lobbyists?

We learnt during Senator McKenzie's inquiry into air services, with the big concerns around the decision made regarding Qatar and Qantas and some of the allegations there, that the current infrastructure minister provides sponsored passes to Qantas government relations staff, and the former coalition infrastructure minister also provided sponsored passes. I think if most Australians heard this, they'd probably say, 'Hang on, maybe that's something we should know about,' when these decisions are made—that this infrastructure minister gave this company an 'access all areas' pass and now he's making a decision. I certainly would love to see more colleagues in here disclosing who they're giving sponsored passes to. And I would love to see, at some point in time, a public registry. Just as we make disclosures through our register of interests, I think details of who we give access to should be on there.

Question agreed to.