The wrap
It has been another long day and we have another marathon ahead of us tomorrow, so I am going to call it a day with the politics live blog for Thursday. I’m not the only one feeling that way – the House has just adjourned until 27 November.
But first, what have we learned?
The government is holding on to Michaelia Cash, backing her in, despite the pressure from Labor to sack her over the leak from her office in regards to the AWU raids. Labor members of the estimates committee who had hoped to get some last questions answered won’t get that opportunity – while the Registered Organisations Commission will be back, the minister will not.
Will we find out the details she said she still needed to ask her staffer, David De Garis, about? Well, I don’t know. Cash has recommended the ROC refer the matter to the federal police. If they take her up on that suggestion, then it will become a police investigation.
So there is still some way to go on that.
Looking ahead to tomorrow, have we seen Barnaby Joyce’s last appearance in the House for a while? Will we see Matt Canavan, Fiona Nash and Malcolm Roberts back in the Senate? Nick Xenophon has all but packed up his office, because regardless of what the high court finds, he is heading to the South Australian state election. Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters have already gone.
Nash has been quiet, while Canavan seems to have enjoyed these last few months free of the cabinet muzzle, letting us know what he thinks on almost every issue under the sun – and it hasn’t always been what the government has been thinking.
Joyce has spent the week clearing the decks just in case, and Roberts still believes he’ll be wearing his senator pin come Monday.
I won’t be making a prediction about what how the high court will rule. Mostly because there are seven justices, I am not a lawyer, and I have no idea how they will interpret section 44. Listening to the arguments earlier this month, I thought Justin Gleeson and Ron Merkel, who were representing Tony Windsor in his challenge against Joyce’s eligibility had the simplest and cleanest argument, which was a pretty black and white interpretation of the section. But the court could just as easily decide to take the solicitor general’s argument, that if you are a ‘natural-born’ Australian who did not take any active steps to retain or obtain your dual citizenship, then you are OK.
But we won’t know the answer until after 2.15pm tomorrow. I’ll have the blog fired up by then, so worry not, you’ll be kept as up to the minute as I can manage.
In the meantime, please check out some of Mike Bower’s pics on his instagram, because I don’t always get to load as many on here as I would like (all those pesky words to put on the record) and you’ll find him on Twitter at @mpbowers. You can find me at @amyremeikis. Most times I even respond. Most times.
A big thank you to everyone for sticking with me this week as I tried to wrap my brain around the very rapid moving events, and to the Guardian Australia brains trust for keeping everything on track.
See you tomorrow for one more round (for a while) of fun and games. Have a wonderful night.
Updated
A bit more from that Shorten speech:
But I have to say, and I don’t mind admitting this, even as leader of the opposition: when member for Wentworth rolled the former prime minister, I thought my job would get harder but I actually thought politics would get better. I think the Australian people thought it was a chance to put some faith and hope back into politics. But the prime minister, by all his actions ever since that event two years ago, has systematically destroyed the faith and hope of people who thought he would be better than what he has turned out to be. And what we know is that the Prime Minister has a particular style of destruction. When all else fails him, he chases his opponents:
· Ask Peter King, the former member for Wentworth
· Ask Brendan Nelson
· Ask Tony Abbott
· Ask Kevin Rudd
Well, I just want to advise the government on this fact: Australians have worked this prime minister out.
Updated
The sitting schedule for next year has just been decided on.
The govt just tabled next year’s sittings schedule. #auspol pic.twitter.com/iLKGvhI1YG
— Andrew Leigh (@ALeighMP) October 26, 2017
Updated
Kevin Rudd has also weighed in on the Michaelia Cash issue. He was talking to David Speers as part of his book promotion tour and had this to say:
“A warning to Mr Turnbull is, if you are going to try and play macho politics, frankly use the machinery of state to throw at the opposition, be careful of the consequences, my friend.”
Here is a section of Bill Shorten’s speech following question time:
Labor’s criticism of the governments bungled raids is not about the integrity of the AFP, it is about the lack of integrity in this rotten government. And I had to say that yesterday morning, I said these raids were the desperate action of a grubby government, led by quite frankly a grubby prime minister and I repeat that today. This isn’t a throw away line, but because of everything that has happened in the previous 36 hours since I first made that statement, everything this government has done, since yesterday morning, confirms the truth; that Australia has a grubby government and an increasingly grubby prime minister. During question time this point was most clearly illustrated, when the prime minister had a chance to defend Senator Cash, when the opposition moved a resolution condemning her, they did not defend her, they simply gagged the debate.
.
While this day starts to wind down, I am reminded that it was only Monday that we were all talking about the lost security manual.
It honestly feels like that happened a year ago.
Updated
Barnaby Joyce’s office have sent out a media release a little under 24 hours from when Joyce will learn his fate in the high court.
The headline?
“Investing in leadership to ‘raise the baa’ across the agriculture sector”
Some more Mike Bowers magic.
Updated
The employment estimates committee has agreed to meet again for an extra hearing on Friday, but employment minister Michaelia Cash will be a no show.
A spokesman for Cash said: “The minister is unavailable due to previous commitments in Perth that day.”
The hearing can still examine witnesses from the Fair Work Ombudsman and Registered Organisations Commission.
This morning Labor senators hit a brick wall on who the “media source” that tipped off Cash’s senior media adviser, David De Garis, about the AFP raid on the AWU because De Garis refused to tell Cash on Wednesday night who it was, and she hadn’t spoken to him since.
Cash and De Garis are due to have a conversation this afternoon – but given Labor will not be able to examine her on Friday, it appears Cash is using these “previous commitments” to avoid further scrutiny.
Updated
In news outside of Michaelia Cash, Labor senator Pat Dodson spoke to the ABC about the government’s reported decision not to back the recommendation for an enshrined Indigenous Voice in Parliament.
That’s a real kick in the gut to the referendum Council, and certainly a slap in the face of those proponents for the entrenchment of a voice of the Indigenous peoples in our constitution. In other recommendations that have been made over a long time to the government and the Australian people, that go to constitutional reform as well as to legislative responses, for truth telling and for agreement making, and those matters are still afoot, and I would hope that the effort of the prime minister will be to bring people together to see if there’s away forward on such matters. If that doesn’t happen, then not only has the prime minister and the cabinet killed the constitutional proposition, the entrenchment of the voice of Aboriginal people in our Constitution, but the rest of those significant recommendations that would improve our constitution will also lie in abeyance.
Updated
Bill Shorten has just finished giving a speech on the Michaelia Cash issue in the chamber.
I’ll bring you some of that in just a moment.
As #qt ends, Bill Shorten calls out: "catch you later Barnaby."
— David Crowe (@CroweDM) October 26, 2017
Updated
Kelly O’Dwyer gets a go on the dixer express after all of that to tell us how well the government is working to protect workers’ money. She uses this example of why the government says there needs to be more transparency:
Questions were asked of the former RBA Governor and industry fund director Bernie Fraser in a recent Senate committee inquiry about a payment made by Australian super to the AWU in the 2006-7 financial year, specifically described by the AWU in its 2007 declaration as a donation. The $27,500 payment was made at the same time that the leader of the opposition was the AWU national secretary, and also a director of Australian Super. Alongside Bernie Fraser, current Labor senator Doug Cameron, and former Labor MP Greg Combet. A subsequent donation was subsequently made by, yes, the AWU, to the leader of the opposition’s political campaign in the seeds of Maribyrnong, but it was only when this payment by Australian Super to the AWU in June following reports by the Australian newspaper that the AWU resubmitted its original declaration, changing the very nature of the AWU payment from donation to other receipt on 15 June this year, some 10 years later. What role did the leader of the opposition have in deciding that a payment should be made to his own union when he was both a director of Australian Super and the national secretary of the AWU? What steps did the leader of the opposition take to fully disclose his conflict to the board, and how did he and fellow Australian Superannuation directors satisfy themselves that this was an appropriate use of members’ money?
And question time has officially ended.
Updated
Divisions are still occurring in the house, but it’s not a time waster for everyone.
Katharine Murphy, who is in the chamber tells me that Barnaby Joyce spent most if his time in question time signing documents and spending more time on his folder than usual. Watching Joyce on the feed, he seems to have been isolated today. He is definitely not engaged in what is happening around him.
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull put a new test in that question time for ministerial responsibility:
A minister is accountable for what she says and her obligation is to speak the truth. She was misled, as she said. She was misled, as she said. And once her staff told her the truth and made the admission that he had done the wrong thing, she corrected the record. She acted entirely properly.”
Labor came prepared. Here are some of the examples Bill Shorten’s office had prepared on Turnbull’s previous positions on ministerial responsibility:
Utegate:
“But the fact of the matter remains that the seriousness of the treasurer’s conduct cannot be overstated, because it is not simply a matter of misleading the house – that in itself is bad enough and justification for him to resign.
Speech – 22 June 2009
“… when I criticised the prime minister and said that, unless he could justify his actions and reconcile the contradiction between the evidence of the treasury official and his own statements, he should resign.
“The opposition’s calls for the treasurer to resign rely on the solid, incontrovertible evidence drawn from those emails presented by Treasury. All of that evidence is authentic and beyond dispute.
Speech – 24 June 2009
“Wayne Swan has misled the parliament about the way in which he’s dealt with John Grant, this crony and benefactor of the prime minister, and he must resign.
Look, the only person whose tenure in the parliament is in issue today is Wayne Swan. He’s the one that has misled the parliament. That is an offence that should result in the dismissal or resignation of a minister. It is perfectly clear.
Doorstop – 23 June 2009
Updated
Labor tries again, with Brendan O’Connor managing “the prime minister must show some leadership” before there is another gag motion.
Anthony Albanese manages to get in: “It’s time to cash out this minister” before he is also interrupted by a second gag motion and the house divides again.
Updated
Updated
Side note from me: given that the government is clearly moving to back Michaelia Cash, with the prime minister using question time to defend her, her actions and her integrity, it seems a little strange that the government would seek to gag this debate. It doesn’t look good. The smarter move would have been to allow the debate, and continue to defend your minister. But maybe there is a reason I am not a politician (and never will be).
Updated
Labor calls on Turnbull to sack Cash
Tony Burke is back to suspend standing orders.
Maybe the prime minister should have got Burke to give his pre-question time briefing, because the back bench is suddenly very excited.
I move that so much of the standing orders be suspended from moving the following motion immediately. The house notes that yesterday morning the media aired an allegation the Employment Minister’s office had leaked the raids, which allowed television crews to turn up to the rates before the police did. By midday yesterday the Employment Minister had five times denied that her office had been involved in leaking the raids. At the Prime Minister’s QuestionTime briefing yesterday attended by the Employment Minister and the senior media adviser who has now resigned for leaking the raids, the Prime Minister according to the government’s account failed to ask a single question about the involvement of the Minister’s office in leaking the raids. At 6:10pm Alice Workman, an employee of Buzzfeed confirmed journalists received a tipoff before the raids began. At 7:30pm, after the truce had been exposed, only then did the Employment Minister finally admit that she had misled the Senate on five separate occasions. And during the Utegate scandal the Prime Minister himself said that misleading Parliament should result in the resignation or dismissal of a minister. It’s perfectly clear. And therefore calls on the Prime Minister to therefore sack the Employment Minister for breaching ministerial standards for misleading the Senate, and explain to the house his involvement, is officers’ involvement and his government’s involvement in this serious public matter where the public statement of events does not add up.
Josh Frydenberg moves to gag the debate. The house divides.
Bill Shorten: Is the reason why it the employment minister has not been sacked by the prime minister the fact that the prime minister is up to this to his neck?
The speaker, Tony Smith, has a problem with the question and thinks it might out of order. He goes to hear from Tony Burke, who begin to move a motion, but Smith shuts him down and moves to the next question.
It’s a dixer for Peter Dutton. He has not finished speaking, but I can take a guess that the answer is basically – you are very safe, the Coalition respects the police, unions have thugs and Labor does not support the working class.
Updated
Christopher Pyne takes a dixer on behalf of Michaelia Cash’s portfolio and has a lot of fun talking about what the royal commission into trade unions found.
A lot of fun.
It is the most alive anyone in the government has looked in days.
Updated
Tony Burke: My question as to the Prime Minister. During the recent scandal, the prime minister spoke of following, saying it was ‘an offence that it should result in dismissal and minister, it is clear’. Given it is patently clear that the employment minister misled the Senate five times, why won’t the Prime Minister, in his own standards, sack the employment minister?
Malcolm Turnbull: ...The minister for employment, senator Cash, gave evidence in the course of estimates in which he described the facts of the matter as known to her at the time. When a staffer admitted to doing the wrong thing, she corrected the record, in light of that admission. That is precisely what she should have done, and she did it with integrity that the Honourable member might reflect is has been all too readily shown by those who claim to represent and lead trade unions in this country.
Bill Shorten: My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the prime minister’s answer: Is even now the position of the government that staff can mislead their ministers? How are your ministers meant to be running the country when they can’t even run their offices?
Malcolm Turnbull: The honourable member knows very well that the minister is accountable. A minister is accountable for what she says and her obligation is to speak the truth. She was misled, as she said. She was misled, as she said. And once her staff are told her the truth and made the admission that he had done the wrong thing, she corrected the record. She acted entirely properly.
That stands in stark contrast to the actions of the leader of the opposition, Mr Speaker. It is not a question of his staff. It is a question of the people that own him. He is a wholly owned subsidiary of the CFMEU. He is a wholly owned subsidiary of a trade union, a military trade union,cashed up and powerful, that defies the law.”
There is more, but he is yelling so much that not even Tveeder, the service which captions question time, can make sense of the words. It’s along the lines of Labor is the party of the workers’ representative, not the worker.
Greg Hunt gets his ride on the dixer-go-round, this time about hospitals in Queensland.
Updated
Barnaby Joyce, in what may be one of his last times in the chamber for a while, depending on how the high court rules tomorrow, gets his go on the dixer express. He gives his usual “Labor have given up on the blue collar worker: answer, which is becoming his standard answer, no matter the dixer.
He finishes and Labor claps and waves, yelling things such as “valedictory” and “bye, bye Barnaby”.
So at least some people are having fun.
Updated
Tony Burke to the prime minister: Does he expect Australians to believe that the media reported yesterday an allegation that the employment minister’s office had leaked the raids? The employment minister then came to the prime minister and said she herself had not personally leaked the raids, and the prime minister, with all his training as a cross examiner, didn’t think to ask if her office had leaked the raids, which was the only allegation that had been made? Did the prime minister in fact ask this question or had he already been advised it was safer not to ask?”
Malcolm Turnbull: Mr Speaker, the member for Watson does his best at innuendo, but he’s not a particularly talented cross examiner. Mr Speaker, here are the facts: the minister gave me the assurance. I told the house about it yesterday, that she had not disclosed the matter to journalists before the raid. And that was the assurance that she gave me. Subsequently, as honourable members know, her media adviser admitted o this wrongful conduct and he has resigned. Mr Speaker, I understand why the Labor party want to focus on the wrongful conduct of our ... a ministerial staffer, focus on that, rather than why $100,000 of AWU money was given to an organisation that wants to put most of those workers out of a job. That is the question, that’s the question. And they want to know why, when the Registered Organisation Commission, asked for documentary information from the AWU, they weren’t provided it. They want to know about that, too. MrSpeaker, what I think Australians will find it very hard to understand is why the opposition, at this time of economic challenges, at this time of high electricity prices, why Labor has not...asking about the National energy guarantee.”
And he finishes with a rousing defence of Michaelia Cash.
No interest in talking about measures that will improve employment. No interest in economic issues. They are only interested in one thing, and that is to protect union officials from transparency and accountability. And, Mr Speaker, the law is catching up with those traditions of the trade union movement, thanks to the hard work and dedication of the employment minister, Senator Cash.”
Updated
Josh Frydenberg is next to ride the dixer-go-round. It’s on energy and attacking the Queensland state government for its energy policy.
Bob Katter has the crossbench question today and the whole chamber holds it breath to see if the member for Kennedy can get his question out before time runs out.
“In May 2014, I raised the issue of skyrocketing North Queensland insurance premiums. ATCC figures show premiums raising 80% in five years with 400% increases. North Queensland is the lead contributor with pre cyclone Tracy old building code buildings all gone. This discrimination cannot now be justified. 2006 Cyclone Larry damage is $1.5m, only $800m. When will the minister establish an authority to underwrite exceptional circumstances, providing a platform for profiteering insurers?”
He does it, he gets there! In a rare moment, both sides of the chamber cheer.
Kelly O’Dwyer says the government is monitoring it. Katter does not look impressed with the answer, despite his feat.
(For those not here last week, Katter stormed out of the chamber after he didn’t get his question out in time, despite having been given 45 seconds to ask it – longer than what is usual.)
Updated
The camera turned to Brendan O’Connor at quite the unfortunate time just then. I am not a lip reader, but it looked like he may have said something quite unparliamentary in response to some Coalition heckles as the prime minister was speaking.
Looks like Tony Abbott was late to question time again ... and potentially also missed the pre-QT briefing, unless he was held up at the door.
Tony Abbott enters #QT just as Turnbull speaks of how Cash has "ensured the integrity" of registered organisations
— Michael Koziol (@michaelkoziol) October 26, 2017
Updated
Back to opposition questions:
Brendan O’Connor: My question is to the prime minister. Does he expect Australians to believe the employment minister’s office watched the minister misleads the Senate five times yesterday but didn’t say a thing? The senior minister who has now resigned attended the briefing with the minister and said nothing, and the adviser then heard the prime minister asked twice about the matter during question time but still did nothing.
Malcolm Turnbull: I thank the honourable member for his question. Mr Speaker, he has addressed a number of questions to the media adviser concern, who has properly resigned after a very, very wrong, improper act of indiscretion, and he was wrong to do what he has admitted to,but he was right to resign.
Turnbull then begins to read from Andrew Colvin’s AFP statement. O’Connor objects, but Turnbull is allowed to continue.
South Australian Labour MP Nick Champion becomes the first member thrown out under 94A.
Updated
Scott Morrison then takes his turn on the dixer merry-go-round, and again talks about energy policy.
No one seems to be listening. Labor can’t even be bothered to heckle that hard.
The first dixer combines how great the government is at protecting workers, at the same time as lowering energy prices.
Moving on.
Tanya Plibersek: My question is to the prime minister, and I refer to his answer of yesterday. Can the prime minister confirm the employment minister and her senior media adviser, who has now resigned for leaking details of imminent raids to the media, attended that question time meeting yesterday? At what time did it take place? Did it take place in his personal office? And who else was present, including two but not limited to, MPs and members of the prime minister’s office?
Malcolm Turnbull: Well, Mr Speaker, the deputy leader of the opposition is not going to do a very good impression of Perry Mason today. Mr Speaker, she may embark on a fishing expedition, but, Mr Speaker, I repeat what I said yesterday, that the minister for employment is sure she did not advise any journalists about the raid, and that is precisely what she has said in the Senate during estimates.
Updated
The gee up before question time must have worked – the back bench is doing its very best to look engaged and peppy.
Malcolm Turnbull is at the dispatch box:
What I can confirm is that Senator Cash defends the interests of trade union members in a way the leader of the opposition never did. She defends them. She defends them. Mr Speaker, Mr Speaker. Let’s look at this bastion of advocacy for the members of the AWU ... He said, Mr Speaker – this is the leader of the opposition – it’s perfectly consistent with the tradition of the trade union movement to have services provided by unions, paid for by employers. Well, regrettably, it is, Mr Speaker, and one of the services provided by unions to employers is trading away their penalty rates. That’s what they get paid for, MrSpeaker. Example after example ... Hundreds of thousands of dollars, over $1m ... paid to the AWU by employers when the leader of the opposition was the secretary, and, Mr Speaker ... that really worked out well for the members, didn’t it? One payment after another was found by the royal commission to have no benefit for members, and indeed to compromise the interests of the members, because it compromised the ability of the union to represent them. Now, what we have done is passed legislation to prevent those corrupt payments being made, to prevent secret payments being made, and the Labor party ... They said there was nothing worse than allowing members to know when the employer was actually paying money to their union. And, if the fact is... Mr Speaker, the fact is what Senator Cash has done is she has ensured that the standards of integrity, impartiality are applied to the union movement. That’s what she has done, and in a way that the Leader of the Opposition never did, trading away penalty rates, taking money from employers.
Updated
Question time begins
Bill Shorten is straight into the Michaelia Cash issue.
“My question is to the prime minister. Can he confirm the following events? By midday yesterday, Senator Cash told the Senate five times her office was not aware of imminent police raids before they began, but at 6:10pm, Alice Workman of Buzzfeed reported journalists had received the leak from Senator Cash’s office and, at 7:30 pm, realising the truth had been exposed, Senator Cash finally admitted she had misled the Senate.
The Prime Minister has the call.
Updated
I see there are a few questions about the number of AFP officers involved in the raids, with the AFP commissioner saying there were 13, in total, while yesterday we were told there were 32.
The best answer I can give you is there were a lot of people in the offices, from different agencies, potentially including other police, who were not attached to the AFP.
Updated
Prime minister gathers troops for pre-question time briefing
Once again, the prime minister has taken the unusual step of calling a pre-question time briefing.
For those MPs who are yet to check their email, here you go:
Members, including ministers, should attend the Members’ Annex at 1:55 today for a pre-Question Time briefing with the Prime Minister.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Regards
Nola (chief whip)
Once again, you are welcome
Updated
Craig Laundy is on Sky for his regular chat.
And it has to be said that he is not looking as chipper as he usually does. He is asked if he honestly believes that Michaelia Cash did nothing wrong and answers with a simple:
“Yes”
AFP responds to claims of political interference
The Australian federal police commissioner, Andrew Colvin, has released a statement:
Thursday, 26 October 2017, Publish time:1:01pm
The AFP has this week been the subject of commentary and innuendo regarding its independence and the ability of AFP members to carry out their work objectively and without political interference. The AFP requires the ongoing assistance and support of the public to serve the community in which we all live, and undertakes its activities without fear or favour. The AFP rejects in the strongest terms any suggestion to the contrary. The AFP makes all its operational decisions independently, based on experience, operational priorities and the law.
The AFP’s primary obligations are to ensure the safety and security of the Australian community and enforce the rule of law. The AFP prides itself on its independence and integrity, and has a proven track record of these values while operating under the remit of eight individual prime ministers and their governments since it was founded in 1979.
Much of this week’s commentary has been prompted by search warrants executed in Sydney and Melbourne on Tuesday, 24 October 2017. The AFP has obligations to assist a wide range of other commonwealth agencies in their activities, including the Registered Organisations Commission. The AFP had no operational reason to decline to execute a search warrant that was authorised by a magistrate.
Some of the reporting concerning this activity has inflated the number of AFP members involved. In executing these search warrants on Tuesday, 24 October 2017, the AFP deployed a total of 13 members across both cities – eight members in Melbourne and five in Sydney. Suggestions that more AFP members were involved are incorrect.
Updated
An hour or so out from question time and two of the people we have not heard from are Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten.
It’s not unusual for leaders to allow their praetorian guards out to lead attacks for them in these sorts of situation. Labor has been largely content for the committee hearing to speak for itself.
The government is attempting to limit fire until question time.
Core competence of the minister will be the basis of the question time offensive. Labor is pushing the Westminster conventions, where a minister should take responsibility for their staff. The Coalition will respond with all the times Labor ministers survived when their staffers acted out of their bounds (examples we have heard today, are when a Julia Gillard staffer alerted protesters to Tony Abbott’s location on Australia Day in 2012 and Penny Wong’s staffer who spoke to New Zealand Labour during the Barnaby Joyce citizenship investigation).
Note: the Queensland election is expected to be called very soon.
Hanson votes with Turnbull to sell out battlers & now runs a protection racket for dodgy Michaelia Cash. Watch, like and share. #Estimates pic.twitter.com/lBGkmkUSnb
— Senator Murray Watt (@MurrayWatt) October 26, 2017
The veterans affairs minister Dan Tehan is talking to Sky and says Michaelia Cash “won’t be resigning and nor should she resign”.
She took the proper course of action, she went immediately into Senate estimates once she knew the true facts, she disclosed those, she has been back in Senate estimates this morning and she has been a highly competent minister, who has done outstanding work, in particular, in getting legislation through the parliament on the Registered Organisations bill and the Australian Building and Construction Commission bill; two bills which will make a significant difference to the industrial relations landscape in Australia. So, she’s been behaving appropriately and truthfully and therefore she’ll continue in her position.”
It might be worth pointing out that there have been issues with both of those commissions Tehan just mentioned – Nigel Hadgkiss was made to resign from the ABCC after being found to have contravened the Fair Work Act and it is the Registered Organisations Commission’s raid of the AWU offices which kicked all of this off.
Updated
And let’s remember that tomorrow, the high court will hand down its decision on the seven MPs who have citizenship concerns.
Of most concern to the government are the decisions on Barnaby Joyce, Matt Canavan and Fiona Nash. Canavan was meant to go back into cabinet, if cleared. If those three are found to have been in breach of the rules, that’s two more ministers (Canvan has already resigned from the cabinet) the government loses. If Michaelia Cash is also made to resign, we are heading to a situation where the government could basically lose 20% of its cabinet in one week.
(For those who were asking, yes, I will be running a live blog on the high court decision tomorrow.)
Updated
Will Michaelia Cash be back before the committee?
I understand that the committee is meeting at 1.15pm to discuss that exact thing.
Cash has not been able to answer questions in relation to what David De Garis knew and who he spoke to, as she said she needs to sit down with him.
She told the committee she was worried for his welfare, and last night described his condition as “very distressed” .
But she also said she had instructed her chief of staff to continue to call De Garis to set up that meeting.
Labor wants her back before the committee after that, most likely tomorrow morning, to finish answering those questions.
We’ll keep you updated.
Updated
Australian Workers' Union lodges freedom of information request
The AWU has released a statement:
The Australian Workers’ Union has today lodged an FOI aimed at revealing how senator Michaelia Cash’s office knew about the AWU raids and to what extent the minister was instructing her staff.
“How did Cash’s office know about the raids? And who knew? These are the questions we need answered,” said Daniel Walton, National Secretary of the Australian Workers’ Union.
“It seems completely inappropriate that the minister’s office, which is meant to be completely removed from the independent operations of the ROC and the AFP, seemed to know all the detail necessary to tip off media.
“My members, and the broader public, deserve to know how this came about. Why were media camped outside the offices of my staff 20 minutes before police arrived?
“We have suspected from the start that the Senator Cash’s office has had been exercising an inappropriate level of influence over the ROC and its actions. We know the ROC is loaded with former Liberal staffers. We need to understand this connection in better detail.
“The minister’s throwing of a staff member under the bus isn’t going to cut it.”
Walton also rubbished suggestions that a lack of cooperation with the ROC had triggered Tuesday’s raids.
“Firstly, the AWU has always complied with notices to produce. We received 40 notices to produce from the Royal Commission and handed over literally thousands of documents — huge files, USBs, computers,” Mr Walton said.
“The ROC only launched its investigation on Friday last week. Previously it has issued notices to produce, which we have fully complied with. But as regard the current matter, the only thing we had received from them was informal inquiries, of which we were disputing the legitimacy.
“On Tuesday the ROC said it was raiding our offices because they suspected documents were being shredded. Today we hear that it might have been because of our failure to cooperate instantly with informal inquiries. Which is it?”
Updated
Outside of Michaelia Cash:
Australia’s corporate regulator has just warned that Rio Tinto executives could face charges.
In a Senate estimates this morning, Greg Medcraft, the chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (Asic), was asked a series over questions about Rio Tinto’s disastrous $4bn purchase of Riversdale Mining Company in Mozambique in 2011.
Rio purchased the company while Tom Albanese was chief executive, and Guy Elliot was chief financial officer.
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a complaint in federal court in Manhattan, alleging Rio Tinto, Albanese and Elliot failed to follow accounting standards and company policies to accurately value and record the asset.
It has claimed that within months of the 2011 purchase, Rio’s internal modelling found that the value of Riversdale was really worth between negative $3.45bn and negative $9bn, but that Albanese and Elliot did not tell shareholders about the write down immediately.
Medcraft told senators on Thursday that Asic has worked with the SEC for a long time on the case.
He then warned Rio executives could face charges in Australia.
Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson asked why Asic wasn’t the first regulator to prosecute the case, given Rio is a dual-listed company in Australia and the UK.
Medcraft said Asic had been working on the case from day one.
“We’re not finished yet,” he said. “As I always say it’s a journey, the journey hasn’t finished yet.”
Whish-Wilson replied: “So you potentially could bring charges as well?”
Medcraft said: “We could. Correct. Watch this space.”
Whish-Wilson: “You do seem to use mostly civil [proceedings]?
Medcraft agreed, saying “all enforcement options” were on the table.
Updated
Meanwhile, some organisations seem to be doing OK out of this
the #BernadiEffect strikes again!
— simon holmes à court (@simonahac) October 25, 2017
gov't attacks @GetUp ➡️ donations increase 7x in one day to $171,000, gains 1145 new members. pic.twitter.com/ZyyqJpGtm0
Labor will maintain its pressure on Michaelia Cash to resign, and on Malcolm Turnbull to make her, as the day progresses.
But she still has her supporters, including Senator Ian Macdonald, who said Cash “should be promoted”, and Pauline Hanson, who questioned whether it was a “political witch-hunt by the former union bosses”.
Christopher Pyne, Darren Chester, Mathias Cormann, Simon Birmingham and Christian Porter have been among the government members defending Cash this morning.
It seems split on whether she will survive in the ministry or not at this stage. If it is revealed another of her staffers did speak to the media, it is hard to see her being able to continue. But it’s not the first time the “I didn’t know I was being misled” defence has been deployed, and not all of those who use it, fall.
Updated
Recap
Sorry, just took a short breath.
OK. A lot to unpack there. The basics, as I see them:
- Michaelia Cash is maintaining she did not mislead the Senate when she denied (five times) neither she or her office had leaked the AWU raids to the media, because she was misled by a staffer.
- That staffer, David De Garis, resigned overnight. He refused to tell Cash who told him about the raids, only saying it was “a media source”.
- Cash has not been in contact with De Garis since then.
- Cash has written to the Registered Organisations Commission asking them to consider referring the matter to the Australian federal police.
- Cash’s remaining media officer worked with the Fair Work Ombudsman’s media officer in former Victorian premier Denis Napthine’s office.
- The FWO media officer is “on loan” to the ROC.
- The Fair Work Ombudsman’s media director, Mark Lee, was informed by the ROC media advisor, warrants were being sought for a raid, at 12.30.
- Lee was not in the office when the raid occurred.
- Buzzfeed reported journalists were advised at 3.30 of the raids by De Garis.
- Lee has told the FWO that he did not communicate in any form with anyone outside the agency until after the raids had commenced.
- The FWO said she was “confident” he had not communicated with anyone else.
- Cash said she has asked her staff if anyone else knew about the raids, or spoke about them (ie did anyone else make calls to the media), and no one else has come forward.
- She says she has to believe they are being honest.
- Cash advised the prime minister on Wednesday she was not the source of the leak, after erroneously believing Anthony Albanese had said she had called journalists (he said her office may be the source of the calls, not the minister).
- She says the prime minister did not ask her any further questions.
- The minister ate a toasted sandwich on her afternoon tea break, but did not clarify with her staff whether they were the leak.
- Buzzfeed published its article just after 6pm.
- Cash went back to her office and her staffer confessed, and resigned.
- Cash maintains she did not do anything wrong and said she will not resign.
- She will not say whether the prime minister asked her to.
What we don’t know
- Who the “media source” is who told Michaelia Cash’s staffer of the upcoming raids.
- If the prime minister asked Cash to resign.
- Whether the AFP will investigate as Cash has suggested.
Updated
Updated
Committee adjourns
As the clock runs down, Doug Cameron and Murray Watt go over the facts. Michaelia Cash restates her earlier answers.
She is now reading verbatim from a statement in front of her, after Watt asks how she can be trusted again.
She says she didn’t know and as soon as she was aware her advisor had misled her, she notified the committee.
Murray Watt says the committee needs to reconvene on this matter, as the minister has not been able to answer all the questions in front of her.
Linda Reynolds says that will be discussed in a private meeting.
The committee adjourns.
Pauline Hanson asks whether this is "political witch hunt" to stop "effective minister"
The One Nation senator looks to be running interference for Michaelia Cash. Hanson asks why she introduced the ROC bill, and what she knows about leaks in parliament, bringing up the raid of the One Nation office.
Hanson: This would not be the first time we’ve been talking about a leaked to the media. This is not the first time that leaks have been made from parliament, is it?
Cash: I think, as I stated this morning, when Michael Williamson and Craig Thomson were raided, there were media present, and that was under the former Labor government.
Hanson: Were you aware that, when One Nation was raided, there was media in attendance as well?
Cash: I’m certainly aware of reporting in the media in relation to what you have referred to, the raiding of the One Nation offices.
Hanson then asks whether Cash thinks this is a now “witch hunt” from former union bosses.
Minister Cash you are a very effective minister and you have actually have put pressure on the unions, do you feel that this is a political with hunt by the former union bosses now who are actually interrogating [you over this].
The room breaks into laughter.
Cash says Hanson is correct, that the matter at hand is about whether or not donations made by the AWU when Bill Shorten was boss, were properly authorised.
Updated
Cash says she has not considered resigning
The hearing starts to get heated, as Labor turns attention to whether Michaelia Cash had considered resigning and whether the prime minister had asked it of her resignation.
She earlier said she would not apologise to Anthony Albanese, for erroneously believing he had referred to her leaking, when he had said her office.
Cameron: The discussions you had with the prime minister this morning – was your potential resignation discussed?
Cash: AsI have stated, I will not be going into the ins and outs of the discussions I had with the prime minister. I discussed this matter with the prime minister, or I had discussions with the prime minister in relation to this matter.
Cameron: Did you offer your resignation?
Cash: I’m not going to canvass the details of the discussion. I had discussions with the prime minister in relation to this matter.
Ian Macdonald begins to interrupt. He is ignored.
Cameron: Minister, have you considered resigning, because of these terrible positions you find yourself in?
Cash: No, I have not.
Cameron: But you don’t rule out having discussed your resignation with the prime minister?
Cash: As I have stated, I’m not going to canvas the ins and outs of the discussions I’ve had with the prime minister, but I had discussions with the prime minister this morning.
Updated
James Paterson asks some questions clarifying who may have known of the raids.
The short answer is the ROC, the AFP, the ROC legal firm, most likely, Victoria and New South Wales police.
Updated
Murray Watt to Natalie James: I think the language here is important. I’m not accusing you of changing anything but earlier you said that he told you that he had no conversations outside the agency and you then said no communication outside the agency,just to be clear, has he ruled out telephone calls, verbal conversations, text messages,emails?
James: Yes, Senator.
Watt: All communications?
James: That’s right,Senator.
Watt: Did he have any contact with Minister Cash’s office abou tany issue yesterday?
James: I would need to take that on notice, Senator.
Labor to Michaelia Cash: Yesterday you repeatedly told us that, in resigning, your staff member told you that he had obtained this information from a media source, and we ask you whether that was a journalist or potentially a media adviser in an agency. Have you attempted to clarify that?
Cash:As I’ve stated, I’ve not yet spoken to the staff member and have not been able to undertake those inquiries.
Labor establishes that the Fair Work media advisor and the remaining media advisor in Michaelia Cash’s office used to work together in Denis Napthine’s office.
Natalie James, the Fair Work Ombudsman said she didn’t know
Labor: Have you taken any steps to assert whether you’re media person could have been the source of the leak?
James: Yes, Senator.
Labor: What have you done?
James: I’ve spoken to my director of media.
Labor: What was the response from your director of media?
James: My director of media was aware that warrants were being sought, as Mr Enright described just now. He was advised this by the ROC media advisor.
Labor: When?
James: At around 12:30on the day of the searches.
Labor: 12:30,yeah?
James: He was advised that warrants had been sought. He was asked,because the ROC media advisor, being relatively new, did not yet have his remote access established, so in other words, he didn’t have a computer he was able to use to access work emails out of hours. The ROC media advisor asked the director of media would you be able to assist in the event that there are inquiries from journalists when this unfolds.
(This is important. I’m pretty tired, and haven’t double checked, but I believe that during yesterday’s hearing, it as said the ROC staff weren’t briefed until later, around mid-afternoon)
Labor: I’m asking, have you sought to a ascertain whether your media advisor, director of communications,whether he was the source of the leak?
James: Yes, senator.
Labor: What did he respond when you asked him that question?
James: He had no conversations with anyone outside of the agency about these matters until he started receiving calls after the searches were being executed from journalists wanting comment. He was attending a private appointment at this time. His responses to those journalist were that he didn’t know and he would need to get back to them.
Committee members are questioning of Registered Organisations Commission and Fair Work staff because when David De Garis resigned, he said he got the information from a “media source”. It’s a strange choice of language, which is what is leading to this line of questioning – the imputation being it was potentially a media advisor from another organisation who alerted De Garis.
Cameron: Mr [Mark] Bielecki what is your understanding of this relationship.
Bielecki: Of the relationship between the ROC and the FWO. [Registered Organisations Commission/ Fair Work Ombudsman]
Cameron: Particularly around media advice.
Bielecki: Media advice is one of the corporate services like payroll and HR and accounting and so on that is provided by the FWO for the assistance of the ROC.
Labor: So how long has the FWO media advisor been doing work for ROC?
Bielecki: The media advisor of the FWO?
Labor: That’s what I said, yes.
Bielecki: That media has assisted from time to time, in particular, that media advisor has assisted us with hiring contract media advisors to work within the ROC and be embedded in the ROC.
Labor: So you use contract media advisors as well, do you?
Bielecki: We only have one and they have been contract.
Labor: So have you taken steps to confirm who knew what about the raid before 3:30pm in your office? Have you taken steps?
Bielecki: No, that wasn’t my role. That was an operational matter.
Labor: It is not your role as the commissioner to take steps when you,the ROC, is under some – there is concern that the ROC may have been the source of the leak. You have done nothing about it?
Bielecki: I have been here in estimates since this issue arose.
Murray Watt: But there are telephones?
Chris Enright: Perhaps I can assist.
Labor: Mr Enright, would you like to add to that?
Enright: I can assist the commissioner by indicating that I am taking those steps.
Labor: You are taking those steps?
Enright: Yes
Labor: Have you contacted the federal police about this matter?
Bielecki: Not since a couple of hours ago when the minister provided the letter to the commissioner, no.
Labor: But, Mr Bielecki, why haven’t you contacted the federal police to have an investigation into the role that your organisation may have had in relation to the leak?
Bielecki: Senator, I think the evidence I gave yesterday was that the first step in this was to have discussions with members of staff and armed with those make a decision as to what the next appropriate step would be.
Updated
Doug Cameron and Murray Watt now turn their attention to the Registered Organisations Commission and Fair Work staff to ask what they knew about the leak – and whether any of their staff were involved.
Updated
Back in the hearing, Cash repeats that she only assured the prime minister that she had not leaked to the media.
Cameron: You didn’t provide any assurance to him that no one in your office leaked?
Cash: I was there to provide an assurance that I had not briefed the media.
Cameron: You and only you. That was a very narrow question, wasn’t it?
Cash: That is for your interpretation. I can only tell you what occurred.
Cameron: Did you mislead the prime minister about whether your office leaked the raid to the media?
Cash: No, I did not.
Cameron: Did you deny your office had told the media?
Cash: Did I deny my office? As I stated, I provided an assurance to the prime minister that I had not. At the earliest opportunity we advised the prime minister’s office of my staff member’s resignation.
Updated
The immigration minister, Peter Dutton, has just been on Sydney’s 2GB radio, with host Ray Hadley.
They talked about Michaelia Cash’s evidence to the Senate.
Dutton said it was a serious offence if you deliberately mislead the Senate, but that’s not the allegation against Cash.
He said Labor was running a distraction because they don’t want the focus to be on Bill Shorten.
Hadley said a key takeaway from the last 12 hours was that politicians and their staffers, if they wanted to leak to the press, shouldn’t leak to the “Left of the media.”
Peter Dutton agreed that some journalists can’t be trusted: “Well look, there are a few people who are happy to take leaks because that helps them in their job as a journalist, and then they turn around and bite the hand that feeds them,” he said.
“There’s not a lot of purity in some of these journalists, but anyway, I’ll let you comment on that.”
Hadley chuckled at that, and then said: “I’m always astounded by, you know: “How dare you impugn our integrity we’ll never reveal sources’.”
“Someone beat Usain Bolt in rushing from wherever they were to [Labor senator] Doug Cameron’s office to say: ‘Uncle Doug, you need to know this before you go to question Michaelia Cash,’” he said.
“So you’ve gotta be careful about who you leak to I suppose.”
Updated
Doug Cameron and Murray Watt go over the day’s events again yesterday, particularly the afternoon tea break (which would have been another opportunity for the staffer to reveal his role).
Cameron: Who in your office did you speak with during the afternoon tea break?
Cash: I could not tell you Senator Cameron. Again, I have a number of things that I am responsible for. I answer all sorts of questions from my staff. Normally the first question is: “Would you like another coffee?” The answer to that is normally, “Yes” so there is a very, very good chance that is the question that I answered when I walked in, would I like another coffee.
Cameron: That’s unbelievable.
Watt: This point about your media advisor and their phone ... I’ve seen the mobile phone number that is on the signature block for your media advisors’ emails and it is one phone number. I understand again, Adam Gartrell, a journalist, says he spoke with your media advisor very briefly at 8:17pm using “the only mobile number I have for him, his media phone”, but you are assuring us that your advisor does not currently have possession of this phone, this work phone?
Cash: That is my understanding, yes. At 8:17pm last night, if you recall, I was actually in here.
Updated
After a thrilling discussion of the bill’s progression, Doug Cameron picks up the questioning again.
Cameron: Minister, can you confirm that your staff member, or any of your staff had no contact with any person in the PMO about what they knew including tipping off journalists?
Cash: Senator Cameron, I have been unable to obviously speak to the relevant staff member and I have been unable to undertake those inquiries but again I can only tell you what I knew at the time. I sought assurances from my staff. They provided me with those assurances.
But, chair, can I just indulge for one moment. I want to quote Senator Wong in relation to a similar issue. People can decide whether they believe me or believe the attorney general but basically she states: “I was not aware.” She then states: “I absolutely accept it was unwise for my staff member to engage in that discussion. I accept that and I have said that publicly.”
Our man in the room, Mike Bowers reports that Ian Macdonald mutters “did her staff resign?” Macdonald is now madly scribbling on paper with a pencil.
Cameron: So, minister,do you ordinarily call your staff on their personal phones?
Cash: I couldn’t tell you. I have varying numbers in there for varying people. I wouldn’t know whether it is a work phone or a personal phone.
Cameron: So have you got more than one number for all of your staff?
Cash: Not for all of them, no.
I spoke with him very briefly at 8.17pm using the only mobile phone number I have for him - his media phone. https://t.co/BVuNpK1Pyw
— Adam Gartrell (@adamgartrell) October 25, 2017
Updated
One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts takes the floor and breaks momentum, by asking ROC about how “the implementation of the bill is progressing”.
“That’s what I came here for, to find out,” the senator who represents a party that demands transparency and honesty is all things, says.
Labor senators can not contain their exasperation.
Roberts asks his questions about what the bill is for, and the committee moves on.
Updated
Hinch turns to the Registered Organisations Commission:
Hinch: So ROC didn’t tell anybody in the minister’s department that they had granted a search warrant and it was under way.
Chris Enright: Correct.
Hinch: At any stage since then,have you talked to your staff? Were they involved in any leaks at all? Surely you were concerned the finger would be pointed at your department?
Enright: These issues emerged yesterday whenI was here for Senate estimates andI haven’t been back to my office. I think, as Mr Enright said yesterday,we propose to speak to our staff when we are back in the office.
Updated
Hinch again asks if Cash still thinks her staffer was brave to come forward:
Yes, I do. He obviously realised that he needed to tell me he had misled me based on the way the events folded out through the day, and he came forward. Senator Hinch, there are plenty of people in the world, but in Australia, who don’t come forward and tell the truth. Well, that is exactly right.
I’m sure you have this line of questioning with Senator Wong when she stood by – she wanted to be very clear that she did not know about what was occurring between her staff member and the New Zealand Labour party.
I can only answer on the basis of what I knew. Hindsight, Senator Hinch, is a wonderful thing, it really is, for all of us, and you can reconstruct events and slip in certain things.
I was in Estimates for the majority of yesterday, as you are aware. I asked my staff for assurances. They were provided. At the end of yesterday, during the dinner break, a staff member came forward and advised me he had misled me.”
Updated
Hinch presses a little harder:
Hinch: So you go back to your office after Senator Watt came up with this, the Buzzfeed article was out, and did you call your staff and say, who is telling the truth here?
Cash: Basically, we had discussions. One staff member was very, very distressed. And he then came to me and advised me ...
(There is an interruption again from Ian Macdonald. Mike Bowers says it sounds like he is saying: “Labor wouldn’t care about that.”)
Hinch: Did he come back to you alone and confess?
Cash: Yes, he did.
Hinch: Did he resign or did you ask for his resignation?
Cash: He walked in and said, I’m resigning my employment.
Hinch: So you have this staff member in the office with you. As you say, all your staff listen to these Estimate hearings.
Cash: I did not lie.I provided evidence to the Senate committee, based on the knowledge I had at the time.
Updated
We hear a little more of the sandwich’s role ...
Michaelia Cash tells Doug Cameron she did not remember who told her the prime minister wanted a meeting with her ahead of question time.
Senator Cameron, there were several conversations going on yesterday in relation to numerous issues. I have limited time. I also wanted to eat my sandwich, which I did.”
We move on to Senator Derryn Hinch, who opens like he is back on the radio:
Minister, during Watergate, the big question was, what did the president know and when did he know it? In your case, it is what did you know, when did you know it? You told us you had assurances from your staff in the morning what Mr Albanese had said was not true, and what had leaked from your staff. Through the day you told the commission the same thing. What made you, during the dinner break, talk to your staff again? Did you have qualms you had been misled?”
Cash responds:
No. Senator Watt raised an article that had appeared on Buzzfeed. The article stated it was known in the press gallery that my media adviser had briefed journalists, so, once the dinner break occurred, I went down to my office to discuss the article. That is what caused me to ask further questions.”
Updated
I am watching the hearing from the office (to make it a little easier, technology-wise), while Mike Bowers is in the room. He has described the atmosphere as “pretty tense” and that Michaelia Cash, usually one of the more unflappable members of the government, is “pretty wound up”.
Groundhog Day at senate estimates Minister Cash continues this morning @GuardianAus @AmyRemeikis #polticslive pic.twitter.com/2gMg5QBVpQ
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) October 25, 2017
Updated
Michaelia Cash and the toasted sandwich
We are now entering the twilight zone. Michaelia Cash is now detailing the food she ate.
Labor: You said yesterday you spoke to the prime minister before question time. That’s during the lunch break, correct?
Cash: During the lunch break of this committee.
Labor: You took your media adviser with you?
Cash: Yes, we were in discussions and walked over together.
Labor: And that was the media adviser who misled you and subsequently resigned?
Cash: That is correct.
Labor: The prime minister asked for you to come and briefing and respond to the allegations made by Mr Albanese that your office had briefed the media about the raid, correct?
Cash: No, it was in relation to whether I had briefed the media.
Labor: When was that meeting arranged? How did you get the message?
Cash: I walked from my office.
Labor: Do you meet with him before every question time?
Cash: No, I don’t. Given I had concerns about what Mr Albanese had said, given Mr Cameron had raised the issue about Mr Albanese, I cannot recall the absolute course of events. I left here. I may have had some lunch. To be honest with you ... I had a toasted sandwich sitting on my desk. I realised that time was getting away from me, and I cannot recall who said to me that I needed to go and see the prime minister to provide an assurance that I had not briefed the media. We were all in discussions. I walked into his question time briefing. I gave him the assurance, and I left to go back to my office because we were due in estimates.
Updated
Cash says that she instructed her chief of staff, through the estimates hearing last night, and then during the break more directly, to secure her staffer’s equipment and papers after his resignation.
When asked if David De Garis “took a bullet” for other staff, Cash answers “no”.
It was this question which led to Ian Macdonald’s outburst, which Linda Reynolds had no time for. They go to meet off-camera and return. Macdonald is still in the room, but silent.
Updated
Before those interruptions, Cash said she tried once, at midnight, to contact De Garis. When asked why only once, she says “it was midnight”. Watt asks her how Fairfax journalist Adam Gartrell was able to contact him, and she says she doesn’t know.
“I’ve also tried to contact him this morning, and I’ve instructed my chief of staff to ascertain his wellbeing to insure that he is OK, and to come into the office this afternoon to speak to me,” Cash said.
Labor pushes her on whether anyone else in her office knew, and whether it was possible that other staffers overheard his phone calls.
Cash: It is a very small office. They have desks like in any open-plan situation.
Cameron: Have you got a close-knit staff?
Cash: I don’t understand the question.
Cameron: Are your staff close to each other, do they trust each other?
Cash: They work with each other. Whether they are friends outside work I don’t know.
Cameron: Because the staff member who resigned rang several media outlets, and it just beggars belief, it just defies credibility, that he did not share that information with his fellow staff.
Cash: I disagree with you, Senator Cameron. What he has advised me is that he did, without my knowledge, without my authorisation, and unfortunately resigned his employment.
Updated
The committee is now being suspended because of Ian Macdonald’s repeated interruptions.
Linda Reynolds calls a private meeting.
Labor is now attempting to ascertain whether any other staff from Cash’s office were involved in leaking the raids to the media, particularly her other media advisor. (Both senators Doug Cameron and Murray Watt are asking these questions)
Cash said she has asked, and she has been assured that they were not involved.
I asked my staff for assurances yesterday morning. They were given to me. All evidence provided to me in relation to the questions that you asked me were based on my knowledge at the time.
Following the raising of the Buzzfeed article I returned to my office, as I’m sure most of us did during the dinner break, actually to have something to eat, unsurprisingly, and it is at that time that the staff member came to me and stated he had mislead me and as I’ve provided to the Senate committee on several occasions but I will refer to it again, during the dinner break I sought further assurances from my staff and I was advised that without my knowledge one staff member in my office in the course of discussions with journalists indicated that he had received information that a raid may take place.”
Labor: So you are now confident that no other staff members were involved?
Cash: I have again sought assurances from my staff and it is this staff member who came forward.
Labor: That staff member came forward but are you now confident that no other staff member was involved?
Cash: As I’ve stated, I have asked my staff members for assurances. They have provided me with those assurances but in relation to this particular staff member, yes, he came forward during the dinner break and he advised me of what he had done and he resigned his employment as a result of it.
Labor: You have two media advisors, are you confident that your other media advisor had no involvement?
Cash: Yes, I am.
Labor: How have you come to that conclusion?
Cash: I asked him again last night to provide me with assurances and he did.
Labor: What exactly were the assurances? Again, were you aware of the raids prior to them occurring? And, did you inform any media? And he answered no to both those questions?
Cash: Correct.
Labor: You’ve said a number of times that yesterday morning you sought assurances from your staff that they had not tipped off the media about this raid before it occurred. Did you personally speak to every single one of your staff, did you personally seek those assurances?
Cash: Not every single one of my staff. As I stated, my staff are spread over varying portfolios. For example, I didn’t speak to the assistant women’s advisor. However, because they were not in the office last night, I have spoken to each individual staff member, and I asked them, were you aware of the raids prior to them occurring? And did you speak to any journalists prior to the raids? They have all responded,no.
Labor: OK. And when you obtained this assurance yesterday morning from your staff member who has resigned, you looked him in the eye, asked him those questions, and he said no?
Cash: My staff members all gave me assurances. You are now aware that one staff member came forward during the dinner break and advised me that he had misled me will stop he told me what he’d done, and he resigned his employment. As I stated, I give him credit for coming forward.
Labor: Why didn’t you ask those questions before last night?
Cash: I don’t understand the question. I’ve given evidence that I did ask those questions.
Labor: But you didn’t ask all your staff, did you?
Cash: As I stated yesterday in my evidence, I asked the relevant staff members. I didn’t, for example, ask the assistant minister advisor, I didn’t speak to the young woman who sits at my front desk, I did not speak to the young lady who takes care of my diary. However, for completeness, I have spoken to them all this morning, and the assurances they have given me in relation to my questions.
Labor: And this other media staffer - you are absolutely confident that he is telling the truth?
Cash: I can only be as confident as are the answers that are given to me. I think they understand the seriousness of what has occurred, given that my media adviser, on making his admissions, resigned his employment last night. I take the assurance is given to me as being correct. Unfortunately, as I’ve stated, a staff member came forward last night, advised me that he had misled me, and resigned his employment.
Updated
Doug Cameron continues his questioning:
So the prime minister didn’t ask questions? That’s a surprise. So you said just before 12 noon that he had been advised that when the media became aware of the raid before 3:30, and asked whether you were absolutely certain that no one in your office contacted the media, that’s correct, isn’t it?”
Cash answers:
Senator Cameron, as I stated, until the dinner break last night when I returned to my office and the Buzzfeed article had come to light, I had been given assurances by my staff that they were not aware of the raids prior to them occurring and that they had not spoken to any journalists.
As you are aware, and as I have stated on the record, during the dinner break I sought further assurances from my staff and I was advised that without my knowledge one staff member in my office in the course of discussions with journalists indicated that he had received information that a raid may take place.
As I stated yesterday in the Senate, I was not aware of this. This took place without my knowledge and it was not authorised by me. That staff member has now resigned his employment.”
Updated
Ian Macdonald continues to attempt to interrupt the proceedings.
“Up to your old tricks,” Murray Watt quips.
Linda Reynolds tells him to stop interrupting, unless he has a point of order.
Macdonald again attempts to shut down the questioning:
It is not constant interjection madam chair, asking what conversations happened between the prime minister and a minister is the first time I’ve ever heard this to be allowed in Senate estimates committee.” he says.
Reynolds responds:
That is not a point of order. It is up to the minister to answer it in whatever way she chooses.”
The committee has come back today specifically to deal with this issue.
Updated
Michaelia Cash then makes a point of defending David De Garis:
Can I also just say, chair, in relation to this particular staff member, [whose name she said has been made unfortunately public] it is actually very brave of him to also come forward and to admit his mistake and lose his employment as a result of what he did. Unlike many others who lie every single day of the week, I will not get into that now but this staff member came forward and admitted to me he had mislead me.”
Updated
Senator Ian Macdonald attempts to shut down the line of questioning:
How can you possibly allow a question that has nothing to do with the estimates before us where this person is asking what conversations they had with staff and with the prime minister. That is simply not allowable and you might ask the clerk for some advice.”
Linda Reynolds shuts him down immediately and returns to Labor’s questioning.
That is editorial, that is not a point of order.”
Updated
Cash said it did not occur to her there had been a leak when she saw the AWU raids on television, as “you often turn on the TV at night and see a police or journalistic presence at something”.
She brings up Penny Wong’s staffer Marcus Ganley and his actions during the New Zealand/Barnaby Joyce citizenship saga:
My staff member mislead me. I am incredibly disappointed. I am assuming as Senator Wong was when she found out about her staff member and the fact that they had had discussions with the Labour Party in New Zealand. As Senator Wong also stated in all of the evidence she gave, she was not aware. I gave evidence yesterday. I was not aware. I am very, very disappointed now in my staff member and as a result he has resigned his employment.”
Updated
Doug Cameron is now questioning Cash over what she knew and when:
Around 11:00am I asked you when you or your office or the department were advised about the warrant and you indicated that: ‘I’d need to go and check with my office but I would assume 4:30, 4:45, whenever, I was in a meeting and came back.’ I asked again whether you of your office advised any other person about the raid and you answered: ‘No.’
I asked whether you were confident that no one in your office knew about this and you indicated: ‘I’d have to go and check with my office.’ I asked again, ‘Did you advise any journalist about any issue arising from this last night?’ You said, ‘I’d need to speak with my office but I don’t believe so, no.’
I then asked: ‘So did any ministerial office staff know about the raid and tell anyone about the raid before it commenced?’ And after being pressed you said: ‘I have full faith in my staff, senator Cameron.’ Do you still have full faith in your staff?”
Cash responded:
I stand by the evidence that I gave at the time. The evidence that I gave was based on the knowledge that I possessed at the time. As I advised you yesterday, during the dinner break yesterday I sought further assurances from my staff and I was advised, as it is now public knowledge, that without my knowledge one staff member in my office, in the course of discussions with journalists indicated that he had received information that a raid may take place.
As I said yesterday, he conveyed that to journalists. I was not aware of it at the time and I was not aware of it when I gave those answers yesterday in estimates. All answers that I gave were based on the knowledge that I had at the time. At the earliest opportunity I came to this committee and I advised that I had been made aware that a staff member had unfortunately mislead me.”
Michaelia Cash says she was unable to get on to the staffer who resigned last night. Funny, I got through to him pretty easily.
— Adam Gartrell (@adamgartrell) October 25, 2017
Updated
Michaelia Cash said she was unable to get in contact with her staffer when the hearing adjourned last night. She said it was “always sad when a staff member has to leave”.
Tanya Plibersek has joined the chorus calling for Michaelia Cash to resign:
Explosive revelations in the Senate last night show the employment minister, Michaelia Cash, misled the parliament on five occasions. It is extraordinary to have a minister repeatedly mislead in the way that she did, and it is inconceivable that the minister did not know that her office was involved in tipping off journalists about a police raid. Of course, ministers have resigned for much less than this. Ministers have resigned for misleading once. It is absolutely inconceivable that the minister didn’t know about the involvement of her office. She should resign. And I expect that she will have resigned by the end of the day. But if she hasn’t, the prime minister should sack her. He should show some leadership, show that he demands high standards of his ministers, and take action himself.”
Updated
Minister recommends matter is referred to the AFP
Michaelia Cash has written to the Registered Organisations Commission suggesting the matter be referred to the Australian federal police.
Updated
At the conclusion of Wednesday’s hearing a lot of Labor’s questioning was directed at what Fair Work Ombudsman media adviser Mark Lee knew about the AFP raid.
Lee worked with the new Registered Organisations Commission’s media adviser, who has only been in the role two weeks. ROC executive director, Chris Enright, told estimates Lee’s role was to help the new adviser and it was “reasonable” to conclude that if something big like a raid were in the offing they would have collaborated.
Enright said that the ROC media adviser knew about the raid at 4pm, but said he was “confident” that is not the source of the leak.
Questioning from Senator Kimberley Kitching noted that Lee worked with one of Michaelia Cash’s media advisers (the one who hasn’t resigned, by the way) in former Victorian premier Dennis Napthine’s office.
Doug Cameron flagged a desire to recall the FWO, so expect Lee to be a person of interest in today’s questioning.
Guardian Australia has contacted Lee for comment.
Updated
The committee has returned
Chair Linda Reynolds (Lib) is opening proceedings.
Tony Burke disagreed, telling Sky her position was untenable:
Here is what we are meant to believe, that Michaelia Cash misled the Senate five times on what she herself said was a very serious allegation that she was offended to hear. We are meant to believe her office watched her do that and didn’t tell her what had happened. What was revealed last night ... was before question time, Michaelia Cash went specifically to the prime minister and the person from her staff who has now left her office, who advised the media, was with her at the meeting with the prime minister and she went to the prime minister to respond to allegations that had been made yesterday morning by Anthony Albanese ... it was the allegation that her office had been calling the media about the raid.
We are meant to believe that with the member of staff who made those calls there with her, Michaelia Cash told the prime minister, ‘oh, with the Anthony Albanese allegation, I never made any calls’, and we are meant to believe that Malcolm Turnbull as a trained cross-examiner, never said ‘no, no, the allegation is about your office and your officer is there with you’. Either Malcolm Turnbull did ask and we’re not being told, or he knew to not ask. It defies belief that an allegation about her office, when she’s misled the Senate five times, that her office don’t tell her ‘hang on, this is what has happened’, that they then go with her to the prime minister of Australia and he as a trained cross-examiner doesn’t go ‘oh hang on the allegation is about your office, not about you.’ This defies belief.”
Updated
Darren Chester has also been out on Sky News defending Cash.
There is no question it is a bad result for us when you have a senior member of staff resigning, making an error of judgment, that as I described at the very start of our conversation, it is not the first time it has occurred, the former prime minister’s media advisor unfortunately tipped off protesters at Australia Day 2012 (to Tony Abbott’s location) and resigned at the time and the prime minister continued in the role. I think it is over reach by Labor to say minister Cash has done anything wrong.
Updated
But someone may have failed to advise Christopher Pyne of Mark Bielecki’s correction. Here is some of what he had to say at a brief press conference this morning, where he repeated the incorrect information (as corrected by Bielecki) that the AWU did not cooperate when first asked:
This is not a Joh Bjelke-Petersen moment on the 7.30 Report. I’m not going to let this cloud the issue here. I’m sure the Labor party would vastly prefer us to be talking about the Westminster system of government – not one with which they’ve had a close attachment, by the way, over the last few decades – but nevertheless the issue here is that the AWU didn’t pass over the documents that were required to the Registered Organisations Commission to prove that the law had not been breached. Bill Shorten has never cooperated, not with you in the fourth estate and not with the Registered Organisations Commission in handing over these documents from the very beginning. Now, many of you may have been at press conferences with Bill Shorten where you’ve asked him time and again about these payments and how they were approved and why they were made and how he was on the board of GetUp as well as being the national secretary of the AWU and the conflicts of interest involved and he never answered your questions. So you have just as much of an interest in the Registered Organisations Commission and theAustralian public in getting to the bottom of this matter.
Updated
Updated
ROC forced to correct the record
The head of the Registered Organisations Commission, Mark Bielecki, also fronted the estimates hearing overnight.
He gave a brief rundown of the investigation into the AWU, and in answer to a question from Labor senator Kimberly Kitching, said the organisation had asked the union for the documents in question but received a letter from their lawyers declining to pass them on.
But later, he corrected the record.
Bielecki: Senator Kitching can I just go back to an answer I gave you previously when I said that not all notices to produce had been fulfilled by the AWU? That’s not correct. I got them confused with a different registered organisation. So, I withdraw that answer.
Kitching: : So, just to be clear, you’ve withdrawn that answer, so there is full compliance, why did you not use an Notice to produce when the AWU has always complied with every notice to produce that has always been served, why did you decide on a raid?
Bielecki: As Mr Enright has said, we are not discuss that further.
The reason for the raid, the committee was told later, was because the ROC had received a phone call to a ROC staffer, who advised them there was a risk documents may be destroyed.
There were no details given on the identity of the caller, or the ROC staffer who took the call.
Updated
How we got here
Last night, employment Michaelia Cash defended the (five) times she denied that either she or her office had anything to do with the leak as saying she was unaware of her senior advisor, David De Garis’s actions. Despite spending a large portion of the day refuting her office had anything to do with the leak.
“Quite frankly, I am offended on behalf of my staff as to those allegations. They are very serious allegations,” Cash said at one point.
Then Buzzfeed published this story.
Cash was still in front of the estimates committee, as the government members were filibustering the hearing, to push back when the Registered Organisations Commission was due to appear. Labor senator Doug Cameron began questioning Cash over the story. She said she had not read it, but stood by her earlier denials. The committee went on break.
Cash returned from the break and made a statement that her staffer, De Garis, had resigned after telling her he had passed on details of the raid to journalists, after learning of the event from “a media source”.
This was after Buzzfeed had called for comment. And after Cash advised the prime minister that her office was not responsible, a declaration Malcolm Turnbull repeated during question time.
Labor senator Murray Watt found it almost impossible to believe that her staff let her make the denials without coming forward.
Over the course of today, since you have begun making these denials, there has been a morning tea break, a lunch break, an afternoon tea break, You are sitting there with an iPad, a laptop and a mobile phone and not at any point did your staff bring this to your attention, until the dinner break.”
“That is correct,” Cash said.
Updated
The Greens are joining Labor in calling for Michaelia Cash to go:
Here is what Adam Bandt had to say this morning:
Well, Michaelia Cash’s position is untenable. Here’s what we now know: on Tuesday, Minister Cash’s senior staffer tipped off media about raids that were about to occur. On Wednesday morning, minister Cash spent some time with that senior staffer and then fronted up to the Senate and said, not once, but five times, that neither she nor her staff had anything to do with it. It turns out that was completely untrue. So there’s really only three options – either minister Cash is incompetent at running an office, in which case she should resign as minister. Secondly, she either doesn’t care whether she tells the truth to the Senate, in which case she should resign at minister. Or, thirdly, she deliberately lied to the Senate, in which case, she should resign as minister.
These were highly politicised raids, which we said so – we said that from the start. This has been, there’s been raids orchestrated by someone who is not a watchdog, but is an attack dog. And it turns out that the minister and her office were up to their neck in it and then were quite happy to go and mislead the Senate about what they knew. Her position is completely untenable.
As for the convention, Bandt had this to say:
At some point, the Westminster system has to kick in and ministers have to take responsibility for the departments that they’re running and the staff who are underneath them and it’s not good enough to try and find scapegoats. If you’re prepared to walk into the Senate and tell them, five times, that you or your staff had nothing to do with it and then, um, after having spent the day with the staffer in question, then you either are incompetent or you’re prepared to, um, mislead the Senate. Either way, the minister has got to go. What we also need to now get to the bottom of is another very, very serious question – who told the minister’s office that the raids were about to occur? Because there’s potentially – it’s potentially a criminal offence to do that. We need to get a straight answer to that. The fact that the minister is not interested in finding out the answer to that question speaks volumes about this. And we hope to find out, very, very soon, the full story behind this, because potentially there’s been a criminal – been criminal offences committed. But there’s certainly, certainly been misconduct that demands that the minister must go.
Updated
Christopher Pyne says Cash has 'done the right thing'
Christopher Pyne has defended Michaelia Cash this morning.
He said Cash’s staffer who tipped off the media to the AWU raid, David De Garis, is a great guy and a long-term Liberal staffer, who had a lapse of judgment.
He said Cash did not mislead the Senate.
He said she told the truth, but as soon as she found out she’d been misled by her staffer she corrected the record.
“Now that’s all you can ask her to do in the circumstances and I think she’s done the right thing.”
When asked about Labor’s point that under the Westminster system of government Cash should be responsible for the behaviour of her staff, Pyne said he would not be lectured by the Labor party about the Westminster system.
“We just recently saw a Penny Wong staffer being at the centre of a campaign to try to remove the deputy prime minister of Australia,” he said.
“That staffer wasn’t required to resign and is still working in the building.”
Nick Xenophon has already questioned that comparison of Pyne’s.
“In Penny Wong’s office that was quite contentious, but that’s quite different from leaking information to the media about a police raid where arguably that could prejudice the operation,” Xenophon said.
“It could have all sorts of implications that I think could be adverse, both to the organisations involved and to the party being investigated.”
However, Xenophon said has always found Cash to be an honest person. He said she has always been very honest in her dealings with him and he believes she didn’t know that her staffer had tipped off the media.
Updated
Good morning
What a night that was.
Michaelia Cash admitted her office was responsible for leaking the details of the AWU raids to the media, setting off a series of events that continue today.
It came after the minister denied, five times, either she or her staff had anything to do with the information reaching the media.
She says she was unaware of her senior media advisor, David De Garis’s, actions until he told her during the dinner break of last night’s estimates hearing. He resigned, but Cash faced hours of questioning over what she knew, when and why she denied something she says she never asked.
Labor is demanding she resign. Senators Murray Watt, Don Farrell and Doug Cameron pushed Cash for hours, invoking the Westminster convention that a minister takes responsibility for the actions of their office.
Government ministers have been out since dawn defending Cash. Christian Porter said “Michaelia Cash simply did not know”, while Christopher Pyne said the minister had been “misled” and did all she could to correct the record when she knew.
But the staffer involved is not a random departmental member. De Garis is one of her senior advisors, who was with her when she advised the prime minister that the leak did not come from her office. It is hard to see how she makes it through this still in the ministry.
The hearing, which is being in the same room as “Utegate” was revealed, resumes at 9am.
But the government enters the day facing the loss of Cash from the ministry, a day before it potentially loses Barnaby Joyce, Fiona Nash and Matt Canavan. If that occurs, that’s about 20% of the cabinet in one week.
Let’s get right to it. Comments are open and you can reach Mike Bowers at @mpbowers and me at @amyremeikis.
It is going to be a long day. Hope you’re ready.
Updated
