Thursday, 10 February 2022

Member conduct

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (14:39): I appreciate the opportunity to be the final speaker in question time. My question is to the Premier. Documents obtained by the opposition under FOI reveal that in relation to the red shirts scandal Victoria Police recorded that they received a call from the general counsel at the Department of Premier and Cabinet, who represents the Premier, Deputy Premier and the Minister for Water. It goes on to say:

I am advised they appreciate the offer to provide a statement but decline to do so for these matters.

Will the Premier give a guarantee that he and all Labor members of Parliament will this time cooperate with any investigative body that seeks evidence from them?

Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:40): I do feel obliged to point out that the only people being investigated as we speak by Victoria Police are those opposite, who think that if you do not like the rules you can just do a morning radio blitz and somehow change them. No, no, you need to get elected to change the rules. You need to, well, ignore advice to change the rules. So they have got half that equation right—always happy to ignore advice. The laws of this state apply to every Victorian—

Ms Staley: On a point of order, Speaker, the Premier is debating the question. He is not answering it. It is a serious question about corruption in this state, and I would appreciate a serious answer.

The SPEAKER: Order! I understand the point of order. The Premier is coming back to answering the question.

Mr ANDREWS: As I was just saying, the laws of this state apply to all Victorians equally, and it would be my expectation and my practice to comply with those laws. If you find yourself having made an error, even if it might be an innocent error—perhaps not wearing a mask a couple of times out in the back car park—then you fess up and you pay the fine the day it is issued. You do not go and try and change the rules because you do not like the rules by doing a morning radio blitz. That is not how it works. I just say respectfully to the member for Ripon: do not hold your breath waiting for me to—

Ms Staley: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, I note in Rulings from the Chair:

When responding to a question a minister must address the question rather than responding generally.

I specifically asked about the red shirts rorts scandal, which I have not yet heard the Premier address in any way, a serious matter of corruption. I ask you to ask him to answer the question.

The SPEAKER: Order! I thank the member for her point of order. The Premier has been relevant to the question and has concluded his answer.

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (14:42): Premier, during the Ombudsman’s previous investigation into the red shirts rorts, your government fought all the way to the High Court to prevent the Ombudsman’s inquiry proceeding, squandering over $1 million in taxpayers funds in the process. Will you assure the house today that there will be no further legal challenges to the Ombudsman’s power and the conduct of any further inquiries?

Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:43): I am not sure that there is a link between the supplementary question and the principal question—

A member interjected.

Mr ANDREWS: Are we taking lectures from this one about corruption? How is that office of living it up going—the office of living it up? If you want to talk about Ombudsman’s reports, mate, there was one written about you, and it is a doozy, and you never paid back any of the money.

Ms Staley: On a point of order, Speaker, I appreciate the Premier has not had a good week, but question time is not an opportunity to attack the opposition.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Bentleigh can leave the chamber for the period of 1 hour.

Member for Bentleigh withdrew from chamber.

The SPEAKER: I remind the Manager of Opposition Business if she wishes to raise a point of order to do so in the correct form.

Ms Staley: Indeed. The Premier should well know that question time is not an opportunity to attack the opposition. That is all he has done so far in his response to this supplementary, and I ask you to—

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! I uphold the point of order. I also ask members to cease shouting across the chamber.

Mr ANDREWS: Thanks very much, Speaker. They are doing a fantastic job of that themselves, I think, really. There has been a referral made to the Ombudsman by a chamber of this Parliament. Whether there is an investigation by the Ombudsman is entirely a matter for her. So the question asked by the shadow minister, who could not even stand up at the right time—

Members interjecting.

Mr ANDREWS: Well, what a week you have had: basic facts all in error, trying to dodge your responsibilities and now asking questions that are at best hypothetical or inviting me to intrude upon what is properly the province of the Ombudsman. That is a matter for her. That is the thing: when you refer things, they are then referred.

Mr Wells: On a point of order, Speaker, in regard to unanswered questions, I have a number of unanswered questions. 5885 to the Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers—can you believe it?—was due on 7 July last year. Other questions unanswered by the Minister for Health: 5945, 5971, 6000 and 6100. And there are a further two: 6144, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, and 6174, Minister for Child Protection. I would ask for you to follow up those unanswered questions, please.

The SPEAKER: Thank you. I will follow those matters up.