Since the establishment of the Joint Select Committee on Electoral Reform in 1983 and its successor, JSCEM, parliamentary inquiries have reviewed federal elections and provided a bipartisan vehicle for improving Australia's democratic system. Through this process, the coalition, Labor and the crossbench have worked together to improve elections, bolster democratic participation and ensure Australians can participate in a free and fair democracy.

I have had the honour of serving on JSCEM for many years, as a member, deputy chair and chair. During that time, my Labor counterparts have worked with me in a collegiate manner, including when the coalition submitted a dissenting report into the committee's inquiry into the 2022 election. As shadow special minister of state, I also regularly work in good faith with Minister Farrell on electoral reform. When it comes to Australia's democracy, this is how competing political parties should behave, with the interests of all Australians at the forefront. Ironically, the committee charged with reviewing the most partisan event, an election, has been defined by its lack of point scoring and political partisanship over the previous years, because we all want to protect and grow our democracy.

Shamefully, under Prime Minister Albanese and JSCEM's current chair, Jerome Laxale MP, the committee's inquiry into the 2025 election has destroyed the bipartisan convention of electoral committee inquiries. Decades of political goodwill have evaporated, and a once-functional committee formed to protect our democracy has become a vehicle for savage, partisan attacks and a witch-hunt against Australians based on their religious beliefs. This inquiry is fatally flawed, with any recommendations compromised by bitter partisanship. I have no confidence in the chair or any recommendations resulting from this inquiry, and I am aware that a number of independent stakeholders and commentators share my concerns.

During the inquiry, Labor and Mr Laxale, along with teal MPs, have repeatedly targeted the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church. Why? Because members of this religious community exercised their democratic right to participate in an election. Since when did being a Christian disqualify someone from engaging in a democracy? Can we imagine if this committee put similar questions to Hindus or Sikhs or Muslims or Jews or Buddhists or Catholics or Protestants? I would suggest to Mr Albanese and Mr Laxale that they brush up on section 116 of the Constitution, which protects the free exercise of religion.

Despite this, the Prime Minister has described the Plymouth Brethren as a cult, and Mr Laxale described the involvement of church members in the election as an assault on democracy. I note that the Romans called early Christians followers of a cult. Imagine if these men made such comments about Australians of another faith. There would be an outcry. I am no cheerleader for the Plymouth Brethren Church. I have no relationship with them. I am not aware if they have ever supported any of my elections because, quite simply, I do not ask the religion of people who support me and my election.

In a free, liberal democracy, freedom of religion is an absolute right. It is not a qualified right depending on the actual religion. A determinant of your right to participate in politics should not be predicated on whether you pray to a certain god or certain gods or pray to none at all.

Labor's treatment of this group has gone well beyond legitimate parliamentary scrutiny. The committee has examined allegations of aggressive campaigning, intimidation and confrontational behaviour at polling booths, yet Labor parliamentarians have struggled to explain how they have identified allegedly troublesome volunteers as members of the Plymouth Brethren church. The committee has even heard evidence that Labor MP Andrew Charlton filmed and harassed volunteers while asking them whether they were members of a particular church. This is Stasi-like behaviour, and apparently Labor are okay with it.

But if you want to talk about poor behaviour at polling booths, let's talk about what Labor get up to, particularly in relation to their supporters and union thuggery. As a political member for many years, I have personally witnessed busloads and planeloads of union members being shipped in and around Queensland to intimidate voters at polling places. But in typical Labor fashion, this union thuggery is apparently fine. And please don't get me started on the CFMEU, whose business model is to stalk, harass, intimidate and threaten their political opponents, yet Labor wants to focus its outrage on members of a minority religious community. Standards of acceptable behaviour must apply consistently regardless of political affiliation or religious belief. This is something I have spoken about in this chamber before. I've written about it. Indeed, I've made recommendations about the standards of political behaviour required on polling day.

But we also need to go into how Mr Laxale has actually chaired the inquiry. It is with a distinct lack of professionalism. Mr Laxale publicly threatened to issue summonses to the Brethren to appear before the JSCEM inquiry, an extraordinary use of parliamentary powers. There's only one problem: the church had written to Mr Laxale and the committee on three occasions, offering to make a representative available to the committee. In August, Mr Grimshaw, on behalf of Plymouth Brethren, appeared before the committee and faced three hours of questioning. In comparison, the Australian Electoral Commission, responsible for administering the entire federal election, appeared for just 90 minutes.

There are also serious questions about the conduct of the chair's own office, including allegations it leaked confidential committee correspondence to the media, and an employee of Mr Laxale made—

Senator McGrath, I'll just caution you on how far you're going in casting aspersions on people. I appreciate that they're your perspectives, but I'm just asking you.

I am entitled—I do have the right of parliamentary privilege—to say this. If the Labor Party wish to kick a stink up about it, they can certainly make a contribution.

I am here chairing this session as the Acting Deputy President, and I would pull anybody up from any party if I felt that they were potentially straying into territory that may not be becoming of this chamber.

Well, certainly, I take that point, but it is unbecoming that an employee of Mr Laxale made a submission of the Plymouth Brethren without disclosing their employment by Mr Laxale, so let that sink in and let sink in what the Labor Party thinks about that. A staff member working for the chair of this parliamentary inquiry made a submission concerning an organisation being scrutinised by that very committee and failed to disclose that connection. Where was that conflict-of-interest declaration?

Labor loves lecturing Australians about transparency, but submissions have been subjected to sweeping redactions. Even the Liberal Party's name was removed from its own submission. Members of parliament have had their names redacted from submissions they personally lodged—Liberal members of parliament—yet submissions from parliamentarians such as Zali Steggall have remained unredacted. JSCEM was once the premier committee of this parliament and one I was proud to serve on, but quite simply the inquiry is cooked. The chair is compromised, and any recommendations are fatally flawed. The job of JSCEM is to examine elections and recommend improvements that strengthen public confidence in our democracy, not to settle political scores.

The JSCEM inquiry into the 2025 election is tainted by the ugly, bitter partisanship of the chair, the teals and the Labor Party members. Parliament should be encouraging political participation, not conducting political witch hunts of a minority political group. The conduct of this inquiry and of this chair is the worst I have experienced in 12 years in this parliament, and I will not be quietened by anybody. The political malfeasance of the Labor Party and the teals offends my belief that we should be working together to protect our democracy rather than targeting members of a minority religion. It is a shameful slur on Australia's democracy.