Subject: Bob Day
E&OE…..
MICHAEL BRISSENDEN:
I’m joined now in the studio by Special Minister of State Scott Ryan. Senator Ryan thanks for coming in.
You first learned about these concerns with Bob Day back in August. You terminated the Government lease on the property connected to Bob Day on the October 7. Why did the Government sit on it then?
SENATOR SCOTT RYAN:
Let me go through what actions we took, particularly addressing what Senator Wong said in that interview. On August 4, then-senator Day approached me about the lease for his office. Upon making inquiries and seeking advice on the background of it and seeking internal advice, it became clear there was a potential breach of section 44 of the Constitution. On October 7, I terminated the lease for Bob Day’s electorate office – and I hasten to add, he doesn’t have an interest in the property – and we determined to seek expert, independent, external counsel, in this case Mr Jackson, widely regarded as one of the most eminent constitutional lawyers in the country. That advice we sought on October7. On numerous occasions since then, further information has been sought by Mr Jackson and we sought that advice from then-senator Day. He provided that advice and, this is the important point Michael, that advice was received just after the close of business last Thursday. We then informed the President of the Senate on Friday morning and I then informed then-senator Day.
On October 7, when I determined to seek advice, I informed Senator Day that we would be seeking this advice from Mr Jackson regarding section 44 of the Constitution, that was before the Parliament resumed the following week.
BRISSENDEN:
Since the Parliament has resumed, there have been a number of votes that he has participated in, including the vote on the CFA, which was fairly controversial at the time. Knowing what you knew, was it right to go ahead and accept his vote?
SENATOR RYAN:
The legal situation, Michael, as I understand it, is that a person remains a senator until a competent authority declares otherwise; in this case, the only competent authority is the court. We sought and received expert advice based on the information we had and extra information we sought from Senator Day. That advice came through last Thursday, it concluded that there was a breach and we took every available opportunity, at the first possible opportunity, to inform the President of the Senate, on Friday morning, of the facts and then to inform Senator Day. And I might add, that does put in context Bill Shorten’s outrageous comments on Saturday about the Prime Minister. We had already informed the President of the Senate about this issue before that.
BRISSENDEN:
What happens now? What happens with votes going from here?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well Senator Day, I understand, resigned from the Senate yesterday, so he is no longer a senator and the Senate can continue to meet as normal in the case where there is a vacancy.
BRISSENDEN:
So you now have to deal with the numbers as they stand don’t you? It’s a simple majority on the floor isn’t it?
SENATOR RYAN:
We deal with the Senate as it was elected and we now deal with Senator as it was elected, minus Senator Day following his resignation.
BRISSENDEN:
Do you stick with the legislative agenda that you had?
SENATOR RYAN:
We’ve got a very busy legislative agenda over the remaining three sitting weeks. We still have the plebiscite legislation , the commitment we made prior to the election to put the question of same sex marriage to a public vote. We have a range of other issues including reforms to the backpacker tax, superannuation and, of course, the Australian Building and Construction Commission and registered organisations. I might say though that the only reason the crossbench matter, with respect to reform of our building sector and all that goes on within it, is because Bill Shorten refuses to listen to any of the evidence or demands from the sector for reform.
BRISSENDEN:
But that’s the political reality, you face the Senate knowing that and you were relying, certainly, on Senator Day’s vote for the ABCC bill. Does it make it more difficult for you?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well I might say, I am not going to comment on the Government’s legislative program, that will be determined towards the end of this week as it normally is. But I think the fact that several people have made the observation you have made indicates that the Government has acted with entire probity with respect to this because we brought it to the attention of the Senate before the Parliament resumes and those issues come forward, just as on the seventh of October, I informed Senator Day that we were terminating the lease on his electorate office and that we were seeking this advice prior to the resumption of Parliament that week.
BRISSENDEN:
As I understand it, there is one point where this will really matter, where this change of numbers is, and that’s when there is a censure vote, for instance, on the floor of the Senate and in that case, you will need the full 39 votes. Is that right?
SENATOR RYAN:
I have not looked into those matters Michael. I have been focussed on ensuring that all proper steps are taken on behalf of the Government and with the Government, in order to ensure this important issue is resolved and brought to the attention of the Senate. Precedent is that this is a matter for the Senate, not the Government and that is why we informed the President of the Senate at the first available opportunity.
BRISSENDEN:
If it is decided by the High Court that Bob Day wasn’t entitled to hold the seat, then there will obviously be another discussion , another to and fro, about how and who fills that seat. What would you like to see happen?
SENATOR RYAN:
I’m not going to make observation on matters that will come before the Senate for a potential referral next week, nor matters that are for the High Court to determine.
BRISSENDEN:
Would you accept – presumably if the High Court determines it, then Labor gets the seat?
SENATOR RYAN:
The High Court is the competent authority here. We have taken every step to follow the process to ensure that the Senate is availed of all the information next week, which will allow it to refer it to refer the matter to the court under section 376 of the Electoral Act, if it so chooses, and then it’s a matter for the High Court, if appropriate.
BRISSENDEN:
You heard the story we ran first where there was some concern raised that this could impact and have implications for other politicians. Is that something you’re looking at, something you’re worried about?
SENATOR RYAN:
It is not something I am aware of. This is a complex matter, as your first story outlined, it is not a matter about which there has been a great deal of litigation before the High Court. I hasten to add that there is no interest that then-senator Day had in the property that his electorate office is in. It relates to, what has been outlined as, an indirect pecuniary interest with respect to the contract for the electorate office.
BRISSENDEN:
I guess there is a potential that others could be dragged into that somehow.
SENATOR RYAN:
I am not aware of any such circumstances.
BRISSENDEN:
Senator Ryan, thank you for joining us.
(ENDS)