BRENDAN OCONNOR, SHADOW MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS: Good afternoon. Were here to discuss the ongoing saga that is the matter pertaining to the trade union Royal Commission and the role of the commissioner. Its clear now and its been clear for some time that commissioner Heydon has a, at the very least an appearance of a conflict of interest, or a conflict of interest as a result of him accepting an invitation to Liberal Party Fundraiser event.
Its clear from his statements yesterday that he did that as Commissioner, he did it knowingly, and therefore his position is untenable
We have from the beginning made clear that we were concerned with the government establishing this Royal Commission. The terms of reference were written of course by the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General, and the Minister for Employment with one focus and one focus only and that is to attack the political opponents of the government, and that has been our position since early last year.
Now as a result of the revelations of last week we believe its critical that the commissioner disqualify someone from office.
To borrow his own words in a 2011 high court judgement, he said any appearance from neutrality could indeed disqualify someone from office.
If its the case, and I believe it is the case and I think every fair minded observer would agree that the Commissioner has indeed through his actions brought into question his impartiality, his neutrality then he must stand aside. If he fails to do that weve made clear the Prime Minister who has of course commissioned him for this role should make a decision and withdraw that commission.
Up until now weve either wished that the Commissioner act or indeed we have been requiring the Prime Minister to consider the situation in light of the revelations and act. But weve seen no leadership from the government, from executive government or the Prime Minister on this matter and for that reason the parliament has to consider other options and I may hand over to Senator Wong to discuss these issues.
SENATOR PENNY WONG, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE: Thanks very much everybody. Well I think the revelations this week about the actions of Commissioner Heydon, that he did accept an invitation to a Liberal Party event, that he was advised it was a fundraiser on numerous occasions and yet still continued to plan to give the address at the event, does call into question I think for many fair-minded Australians whether this Commissioner is either impartial or at least seen to be impartial. Now we have said the Prime Minister should act. Well it is very clear the Prime Minister will not act and if the Prime Minister refuses to act then it is up to the Parliament to act. If the PM refuses to act, if Tony Abbott refuses to act in light of these revelations then it is up to the Parliament to act.
So we have today given notice of a very serious motion in the Senate. It is a Senate motion to send a formal message to the Governor-General requesting that he revoke Dyson Heydons Commission. Now this is a serious action, its not an action we take lightly, but it was very clear over these last days and increasingly clear at question time yesterday that this Prime Minister and this Attorney-General had absolutely no intention of doing what I think fair-minded Australians would expect, which is to request that the Commissioner step aside. So that is the motion that is before the Senate and it is a serious motion, a serious issue, because this is a very serious matter which goes to the heart of the impartiality of a very powerful body, which is the Royal Commission. Happy to take questions.
JOURNALIST: Why not leave it to due process, let the unions submit their written submissions and then take it to the Royal Commission on Friday?
WONG: I would make a couple of comments about that. First this is due process. We did seek advice from the Senate Clerk about the appropriate way for the legislature, that is the Senate, to provide its view on this matter. And this is the result of that advice. We have taken that advice and we have acted upon it and that is the motion that I have given notice of. But you do raise a reasonable question which is, is it appropriate for this motion to be dealt with after or to be held over pending the Commissioners decision on Friday as to whether he should step aside in light of the revelations. Unlike the Government we treat the crossbenchers with respect and we treat the Senate with respect. That is a matter we will be discussing with them.
JOURNALIST: So are you saying you are not planning to bring it on until after Friday?
WONG: We are saying that it is listed tomorrow but we will discuss the timing of that with the crossbench. We are conscious of the proposition that has just been raised. Look the outcome is what is important. I dont think any fair-minded Australian watching what has occurred believes that this Commissioner can be seen to be impartial. I dont believe that is the case. I also think it is quite clear that the Prime Minister is dug in, Tony Abbott has dug in behind Dyson Heydon. He will not act. If he refuses to act then I think it is up to the Parliament.
JOURNALIST: Even if the Senate does agree to this motion what are the chances of the Governor-General actually taking this step without acting on Government advice?
WONG: If the Senate does agree to this motion then what the Governor-General does is a matter for the Governor-General.
JOURNALIST: It would be extremely unlikely-
WONG: -That is a matter for the Governor-General and it would be a matter for him.
JOURNALIST: If the crossbench is amenable to moving a motion before Friday is that something-
WONG: -I refer to my previous answer. As I said we deal with the crossbench respectfully and appropriately and we will do so in relation to this matter.
JOURNALIST: But just to clarify what you are asking, you are asking them will they be amenable to moving it before Friday?
WONG: We have given notice that we will move it. The timing of consideration of it is something we will talk to the crossbench about. But look the primary issue is this. We have a Royal Commissioner who is inquiring into, lets be honest, one side of politics and the trade union movement, who has accepted an invitation to a Liberal event, who has been advised on numerous occasions that it was a Liberal fundraiser. Now I dont think people in this country do believe that in those circumstances this Commissioner appears to be impartial.
JOURNALIST: Senator Wong what is the Oppositions position when it comes to amending the EPBC Act?
WONG: I was advised about that, Ive been obviously focused on some other issues today so I will leave that to Mr Butler to respond to.
JOURNALIST: Are you pursuing this through Parliament where you have privilege because people like the Law Council are saying the public attacks are unacceptable?
WONG: I would make a couple of points. The first is Eric Abetz used the Law Council as a defence today in Parliament. I would remind Eric that the Law Council has actually been very strongly in favour of marriage equality and I look forward to Eric adopting their position in relation to that matter as he is so keen for others to adopt their position in relation to this one. The second point I would make is that this power of the Senate, the power of the Parliament to send a message via an address, a formal message to the Governor-General is an appropriate use of the Senates powers. And that is why we are pursuing it.
JOURNALIST: Just on the Governor-General, hasnt it been Labors long held position going back to well before the dismissal that the Governor-General must follow the advice of his ministers. He cant act independently can he?
WONG: What the Governor-General does with this message or this address as it is formally called will be a matter, if it is passed by the Senate, a matter for him. What we are saying is this is the appropriate way for Parliament to express its views about Commissioner Heydon to the executive.
JOURNALIST: Is it correct that this sort of motion hasnt come up in 80 or so years?
WONG: Well not quite, it is used for the address-in-reply which those of you who watch the Senate may know about. But it is true it has been some decades since it has been used in the way we are proposing to use it. But it remains under the standing orders of the Senate and it remains a power of the legislature to express the view to the executive.
JOURNALIST: And are you of the view that it is a matter of discretion for the Governor-General to decide to act on this advice without Government advice?
WONG: Im saying if this motion is passed it is a matter for the Governor-General how he chooses to respond.
JOURNALIST: Do you think if he chose to act on it, it could trigger some sort of constitutional crisis?
WONG: Now were getting into a lot of hypotheticals. I have said again it is a matter for him to consider how he acts.
JOURNALIST: Putting yourself in the feet, say if you were the Government-
WONG: -If I were in the shoes of the Government I would do the right thing and I would ask the Commissioner to step aside.
JOURNALIST: But you are saying the Governor-General has the choice to act on the advice of the executive or not. You said he had a choice to make.
WONG: No that is not what I said. I said if this is passed it is a matter for the Governor-General.
JOURNALIST: Just on the Law Council again, they have said the proper course is for an application to be made to the court or enquiry.
WONG: And I am saying it is also very clear - this is the doctrine of the separation of powers - it is very clear that the legislature can also send a formal message to the executive and that is what we are choosing to do because we think this is serious enough.
JOURNALIST: What is the point of pursuing Dyson Heydon over this, what is the public policy point as far as the average voter in the street is concerned?
WONG: I dont think fair-minded Australians would think it is appropriate for someone sitting as a Royal Commissioner, pursuing two Labor Prime Ministers, the trade union movement, for that person to knowingly attend a Liberal event and something that is demonstrably a Liberal fundraiser.
JOURNALIST: Can I just clarify what this motion does. Does it call on the G-G to sack-
WONG: -It is on the public record but I can provide you with a copy. It humbly requests, I think is the phrase, that the Governor-General revoke the appointment.
JOURNALIST: There was a big discussion in the Coalition party room about ChAFTA today. What is Labors disposition from here on changing ChAFTA and how would you characterise the campaign against it.
WONG: I think the Government has a problem here. The whole reason we engage in more open trade is to create more jobs for Australians. They have constructed an agreement which does not have sufficient safeguards in order to maximise Australian jobs. We have expressed concerns about that, others in the community have expressed concerns about that. The Government is not engaging with the detail of those concerns. We think the Government should do what John Howard did which is to sit down with the Opposition and deal with our concerns as to the lack of safeguards in ChAFTA. I think there are risks in this agreement in terms of Australian jobs. We want to fix that.
JOURNALIST: Are you comfortable with the messages unions are campaigning on about this?
WONG: I think it is legitimate for people to raise concerns about the effect on Australian jobs of this trade agreement and all trade agreements. And I think instead of frankly having a go at anybody who raises concerns, the Prime Minister and Andrew Robb should deal with some of the concerns that have been raised.