Subjects: Bob Day; Rod Culleton; ABCC Bill; plebiscite legislation; Hazelwood plant.
EO&E…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
PATRICIA KARVELAS:
Scott Ryan welcome to RN Drive.
SENATOR SCOTT RYAN:
Good evening Patricia.
KARVELAS:
You took the Bob Day matter to George Brandis’ office, he said that on 7.30 last night. Exactly when did you know that Bob Day’s election may be invalid?
RYAN:
So the dates are important here.
On August 4, two days after he was declared re-elected in South Australia, Senator Day approached me about the lease for his office. It wasn’t an issue with which I was familiar. We had some discussions and I sought advice, made enquiries to the former special minister of state and looked at documentation. After a number of weeks it became apparent to me that there was the prospect of a risk of a section 44(v) breach of the Constitution, which has become the subject of public debate this week. I then, through the Attorney-General, sought advice from the Australian Government Solicitor. That came through in early October and while it was not conclusive, it did make it clear there was a serious risk. And then on October 7, that’s when we briefed Mr Jackson QC and I advised Senator Day that we were going down this path and I advised him that the lease on his electorate office had been terminated, or would be terminated.
KARVELAS:
Did Bob Day vote on any legislation when these questions were being considered, during this period of time that Mark Dreyfus has questioned, where he thinks there was too much of a lag before you made your declaration that it was potentially in breach.
RYAN:
I want to address what Mr Dreyfus said earlier this week. He didn’t even read the statement we put out on Tuesday. We put this in the hands of the President of the Senate last Friday morning, after we received the advice on Thursday evening. After I informed the President of the Senate, I then informed Senator Day that we had informed the President of the Senate. Under the Electoral Act, under precedent from 1988, this is a matter for the Senate. It’s not a matter just for the Government. It didn’t relate to a Government Senator either, and so that was the most appropriate course of action. Mark Dreyfus’ hyperbole and conspiracy theories are almost getting to the point where he doesn’t believe we landed on the moon –
KARVELAS:
(interrupts) No actually, but I’m not sure if they’re his conspiracy theories, in fact pretty much wall-to-wall all journalists are now asking why there was this lag.
RYAN:
Well earlier in the week Mr Dreyfus asked – made the allegation that we only released a statement because it was related to Senator Day’s resignation. Now Senator Day resigned on Tuesday. We informed the President of the Senate on Friday, less than 24 hours after we’d received the advice. This is a complex constitutional matter. It is not a simple issue. It is something that we need to be careful of making assumptions. Through the course of seeking the advice prior to going to Mr Jackson and following going to Mr Jackson, we sought further documents and information from then-Senator Day and he provided that information and then we acted within 24 hours of receiving the advice.
KARVELAS:
The Commonwealth signed a lease on the property in December 2015. When the Prime Minister pulled that trigger on the double dissolution election during July, did the Government know that Bob Day’s election could be contested at a later date, given it had signed this lease?
RYAN:
I wasn’t in this portfolio at the time. I took over the Special Minister of State portfolio –
KARVELAS:
(interrupts) That’s right, you’re not the one I’m asking, but no doubt you’ve gone to find out what exactly the Government knew.
RYAN:
In my view, when this matter was raised with me by Senator Day, it was only after looking at it that it became clear to me there was a very real risk of a section 44 breach. I informed Senator Day of that, he knew that, and we sought formal, expert, independent legal advice from one of the country’s most pre-eminent constitutional lawyers.
KARVELAS:
But the Government was advised by the Department of Finance about the potential conflict in 2014. I know you weren’t the minister, but your Government was in power and this is what’s making everyone very uncomfortable. The Department of Finance, 2014, why wasn’t action taken then?
RYAN:
In 2014 the Department of Finance provided some advice to the then-minister. The then-minister, Michael Ronaldson, in coming to terms with Senator Day, reflected that advice and the conditions for the lease were that Senator Day disposed of any interest in the building, which he did, and documents were sought to that effect and it was demonstrated. It was done so there was no net cost to the Commonwealth, so we weren’t paying any money on an empty office, and at no point over the term of this lease was any money paid. The lease became effectively an issue after Senator Day approached me as the new Special Minister of State following his re-election in August, or declared re-election in August.
KARVELAS:
With the benefit of hindsight, did Minister Ronaldson go through the right motions at that time?
RYAN:
The whole system we have, whether you nominate for election and the way the Parliament operates, is that we act based on the assertions and the commitments made by Senators. In this case, every action was taken based on the assertions and information provided by Senator Day including where we got to this point, last Friday when we received the legal advice and provided it to the President of the Senate. There was no capacity in my view, over the last three months to act any more quickly on this –
KARVELAS:
Shouldn’t the special minister of state at the time, Michael Ronaldson, have said ‘no you can’t move office, this isn’t appropriate’. Isn’t that what he should have said and followed the advice of the Finance department?
RYAN:
The department was concerned about paying rent on a second office as well, that Senator Day didn’t want to occupy. Senator Ronaldson then made it clear that the Commonwealth wouldn’t pay the extra rent and Senator Day paid for the fitout of his office himself.
KARVELAS:
Have you been in contact with the previous senator, he’s not now, Ronaldson, to ask questions about exactly the way he behaved?
RYAN:
I haven’t spoken to Senator Ronaldson. I obviously have spoken to my ministerial colleague Senator Cormann, who was the minister in the first part of the year.
KARVELAS:
And will the Government make contact with Senator Ronaldson, given that that Finance department advice was given in 2014 and there is, there are question marks about the way he responded to that advice?
RYAN:
The most appropriate thing that needs to be done now is that we continue through the process that I commenced and that culminated in the forwarding of the advice to the President of the Senate last Friday. We indicated that we will move to refer the matter to the court under section 376 of the Electoral Act, which is the precedent that has been used previously. I think that is the most important thing we can do now to ensure the matter is dealt with.
KARVELAS:
Bill Shorten said today, and the Prime Minister laughed it off, that it’s a Government in chaos. You’ve got two sSenators now with question marks over who will take those positions, they could go to even other parties, particularly that Family First position, it’s potential. Given all of that, how does the Government execute its agenda in the last three weeks? Which bills will you ensure get voted on in the Senate?
RYAN:
Bill Shorten’s hyperbole, it doesn’t make his assertion any reality at all –
KARVELAS:
(interrupts) Well how would you describe two senators being taken, their positions being taken to the High Court?
RYAN:
There are two members, not of the government, two crossbench members of the Senate. The Electoral Act sets out a procedure to deal with these questions. The Government sought advice, received advice, and acted on that advice within 24 hours. It is being – we’ve proposed a referral to the court as is appropriate, as has been done in the past.
KARVELAS:
So what does the Senate deal with, what business? The ABCC?
RYAN:
The Senate – we have three sitting weeks left, we’ve got a number of very important and prominent pieces of legislation to deal with next week; the plebiscite, the –
KARVELAS:
(interrupts) So will that be voted on next week?
RYAN:
I can’t control whether the Senate votes on something. The Government can introduce legislation but we can’t necessarily stop it being debated.
KARVELAS:
Do you hope that it’s voted on next week?
RYAN:
I would hope the plebiscite legislation is voted on next week and I hope that it would be supported.
KARVELAS:
Despite the fact that two Senators now – I mean one’s resigned, but the other one, One Nation Senator Rod Culleton seems to be changing his mind about whether to vote or not. Yesterday he said he’d abstain from voting on contentious legislation, now he’s asked George Brandis for confirmation there will be no further legal challenges to his election so he can vote. Will the Government give him these assurances?
RYAN:
I haven’t seen that particular claim. I doubt very much that’s an option, but I haven’t seen that particular request.
KARVELAS:
Should he be voting?
RYAN:
It is common, however for Senators not to vote on every piece, on every matter that comes before the Senate. There are people that abstain or don’t attend the chamber on a not irregular basis and –
KARVELAS:
Sure but that’s a whole different thing.
RYAN:
The Senate has also sat before when there are vacancies – when someone resigns and the state parliament hasn’t filled a vacancy. The Senate meets regularly with less than a full complement.
KARVELAS:
Should Rod Culleton be voting on, for instance, the plebiscite legislation next week?
RYAN:
Well this is an important legal point, Patricia. The only competent authority to declare someone to not be a Senator once they’ve been certified as elected, the only competent authority to declare someone otherwise, is the High Court. There’s a provision in the Act for the Senate to refer a question over someone to the High Court for determination. But only the High Court can say someone is not a Senator.
KARVELAS:
So in that context you’re saying he does have the right to vote. What’s the impact of the changes now that these two senators and the composition on your plebiscite bill? I mean you say you hope it will pass, but of course any smart person does the numbers – do you really think it’s realistic?
RYAN:
I remain optimistic, hopeful –
KARVELAS:
Where’s your optimism coming from? Because I’m not saying I’m a maths whiz, but I can count.
RYAN:
But look, on the point of Senator Culleton, that’s a matter for him. I was outlining the legal situation and it’s an important point, only the High Court can declare someone who’s been certified as elected to not have been validly elected, and that is a very important point. It’s why we have this process. Senator Culleton is not a member of the Government, neither was former-senator Day. They are members of the crossbench.
We are going to progress the legislation we took to the election and if the Labor Party and the Greens want to constantly stand in the way of issues that were front and centre in this election campaign because they have more interest in continuing a fight about an issue like same sex marriage than resolving it, then I think the people will judge them. But we’re not going to fail to try to implement our promises because the Labor Party and the Greens are constantly playing politics –in this case, with same sex marriage, in the case of the Australian Building and Construction Commission – because they get massive donations form the CFMEU.
KARVELAS:
Sure, but has there been any change to make you feel confident about the plebiscite bill? Anything that you can point to that you can really, realistically say that this bill will pass the Senate?
RYAN:
I didn’t say it will, I said I remain hopeful. And we’re going to prosecute the case.
KARVELAS:
So nothing’s changed.
RYAN:
Not – well let’s wait and see what happens with the vote.
KARVELAS:
But you haven’t had any conversations that indicate anything’s changed?
RYAN:
I have conversations with Senate colleagues all the time. For the last few days I’ve been occupied on one matter that’s been obviously the subject of a lot of public attention. I’m not going to go into conversations with colleagues, but look we don’t have a majority in the Senate. Our job as a Government is to implement our election commitments, address the concerns of Australians and in this case, we hope the Senate respects the mandate we sought and received for this policy, the same sex marriage plebiscite that was front and centre in the election campaign.
KARVELAS:
Is the ABCC likely to be voted on next year instead of this year?
RYAN:
We decide our legislative program on a week-to-week basis.
KARVELAS:
But it’s not listed for next week.
RYAN:
Yeah we’ve got three sitting weeks left and I think as the Prime Minister alluded to today, no-one can doubt our commitment to it, but we’re going to introduce it when we believe we have the maximum opportunity to see its passage. It’s an important piece of legislation for Australia. And remember this, it only matters what the crossbenchers do because Bill Shorten and the Labor Party refuse to heed the calls from business right around Australia that this construction sector is completely out of control and particularly in my home town of Melbourne. We’ve seen videos coming out of Brisbane, behaviour in any other workplace that would see disciplinary action, or that would see health and safety issues because of bullying. But that’s apparently ok for Bill Shorten because of the CFMEU.
KARVELAS:
Just a final question on another topic that’s obviously been huge in the news today. The Federal Government announced a $43 million dollar package of support for the La Trobe Valley today. The Hazelwood power plant pays out a hundred million in wages each year. Is $43 million enough to support the La Trobe Valley? Is it realistic that those people will find jobs?
RYAN:
It is a very difficult day for the people of Morwell and Churchill down in the Valley and the surrounding communities. The sad thing about this is what will happen to those families. The package that the Government has introduced, along with the taskforce that has already been created, is focussed on supporting workers and their families, improving local infrastructure which will improve employment opportunities, and also looking at the transition to different forms of employment. It’s an important step to announce today. But let’s not also forget that the Victorain Labor government increased royalties that made Hazelwood more expensive to operate only in the last budget.
KARVELAS:
Is there a real risk that Victorians will face higher power bills now?
RYAN:
I’ve seen some observations on that today, but I have to admit that is well outside my level of expertise or portfolio focus. So I don’t particularly want to refer to any numbers, other than to say I understand that there may be a small impact on household bills.
KARVELAS:
Scott Ryan, thank you so much for coming on RN Drive.
RYAN:
Thanks for having me Patricia.
(ENDS)