Wednesday, 25 May 2022

Grievance debate

Government performance

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (16:01): Victorians deserve to know and trust that their government has integrity. But I grieve that in Victoria we have a Premier who amended the Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Act 2011 to make it weaker, who has refused to give IBAC and the Ombudsman the financial resources they require and who has personally appeared before IBAC in secret sessions, definitely twice and probably three times. Integrity in government matters. As Shannon Deery said in the Herald Sun on 16 May:

Is something rotten in the state of Victoria?

With our Premier involved in at least two corruption probes, it’s a fair question …

because

… so often where there is smoke, there is fire.

And the smoke clouding the Andrews government is becoming thicker and thicker.

If we think about all the ways in which this government’s integrity can be legitimately called into question, we can think about the red shirts affair, where almost two dozen MPs, including several ministers, were embroiled in a scandal that misused taxpayer dollars to pay for political campaigning. I note that the red shirts inquiry has not gone away and that in fact the Ombudsman has been asked to have another look. That of course was the scheme that the Ombudsman described as an artifice, and I will have more to say about that. Former Labor MP Adem Somyurek of the other place summarised that red shirts affair, and he said:

… (Labor MPs collectively) acted corruptly, and then we—

that is, Labor MPs—

did not co-operate with the Ombudsman’s inquiry and the various police investigations because the Labor Party lawyers told us not to …

There is a reason—

he said—

why red shirts does not go away and that is because it was wrong, and we knew it.

By contrast, the Liberal-Nationals have already released significant policy in relation to what we would do differently in government, particularly in relation to funding IBAC and restoring its powers, and I will have more to say about that as we go.

Moving first to the red shirts inquiry—and I note, by the way, that there remains a motion on the notice paper in the other place in the name of Mr Davis that specifically goes to the issue of Mr Lee Tarlamis of the other place and notes that he was implicated directly in the Ombudsman’s report into the red shirts rort scandal. It notes that he was a member of Parliament nominating field organisers for employment as casual electorate officers in 2014, and it goes through a series of adverse findings against Mr Tarlamis. In fact it offers him a half-hour opportunity to explain to the Council what he did, but Mr Tarlamis has not taken up that opportunity.

A member: What a surprise!

Ms STALEY: Yes, indeed. If we go to the Ombudsman’s report on the red shirts, we can note that there were a number of MPs—many were not named—but most of them are no longer in the Parliament; they have retired. However, there remain a few who are here. We have Gayle Tierney of the other place, who spent $20 559 of her electorate office budget—taxpayers money—improperly; Lee Tarlamis, who spent $19 931; the now minister Anthony Carbines, who spent $8823; ongoing minister Lily D’Ambrosio, who spent $5364; a former Attorney-General and continuing minister, Martin Pakula, $5354; Cesar Melhem, $3538; John Eren, $2358; and Shaun Leane of the other place, $2358.

I note specifically that the Ombudsman goes through the ways in which Labor MPs breached the guidelines. She says:

Clause 9 of the Members’ Guide prohibits the use of Electorate Officers for the Member’s ‘political or party duties’ …

And she concludes:

Nineteen ALP Members of the 57th Parliament breached this provision …

She says:

Clause 8 of the Members’ Guide prohibits transfers of the Electorate Office and Communication Budget …

between electorates. She found that this was breached by the following members, who are continuing members: the member for Mill Park, the minister; John Eren; and Nazih Elasmar of the other place.

I now turn to who the workers were—who the actual red shirts were—and of the list of names that the Ombudsman so helpfully provides us on page 63 only the member for Buninyong went from being a red shirts worker to being a member of Parliament. She was of course paid by a former member for Ripon, Mr Helper, to work not in Ripon but in Buninyong, and she then became the member for Buninyong. She did 70 hours work illegally. I well remember that it was reported in the Ballarat Courier:

Buninyong Labor candidate Michaela Settle is believed to have been one of 17 people spoken to this morning by police in regards to an ongoing investigation.

While it would be wrong of me to use a prop, there is a photo very available on the internet that shows Ms Settle going into the police station that day. She was clearly interviewed by police in relation to the red shirts rorts. But then of course all of the Labor MPs refused—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Ripon, I would ask, if you are not quoting from a document, that you refer to members by their correct titles.

Ms STALEY: Sorry, the member for Buninyong was clearly photographed. She was at that point the candidate, but she then became the member. She was interviewed but then—of the members who said that they would cooperate, none of them did. They still to this day refuse to cooperate.

I will move on because I have quite a lot to cover in my remaining time. I now move on to Operation Richmond, because of course this government does not have integrity.

Ms Green interjected.

Ms STALEY: To be honest, member for Yan Yean, if you must come to Ripon—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Ripon, through the Chair.

Ms STALEY: Sorry, Chair. If the member for Yan Yean must continue to come to Ripon, could she at least behave with some decorum? We are all getting a bit sick of it. If we now move to Operation Richmond, this is the first—

Ms Green: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, the member for Ripon has made a comment that I have been to her electorate and misbehaved. I take offence at that because I have not misbehaved in her electorate. I have not drink driven or been pulled over by police or anything like that. So I ask her to withdraw that comment.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is a matter for debate, member for Yan Yean, on that point of order.

Ms STALEY: Thank you. So we move to Operation Richmond, which is the first of three IBAC investigations that involve members of the Labor Party. Operation Richmond’s original focus was into the dealings between the United Firefighters Union and its state secretary Peter Marshall and Labor, but apparently the terms have widened. This one, of the three, has been the most secret. In fact we only found out about it because of another court action that meant that IBAC wrote to the witnesses and said that they were no longer bound by confidentiality agreements. We then found out that the Premier was among those understood to have been interviewed, and he is the one who has repeatedly said that the secrecy provisions mean he cannot say anything about it. The IBAC Commissioner has said he can say something about it, and he could certainly say something in this place if he chose. But he is hiding behind a made-up process, because it is one of three. That is the one we are not sure he has appeared at. That is the one we are not entirely sure about. And of course the reason we have not seen that report yet is that the people involved in it keep taking IBAC to court to try to suppress it. Eventually it will see the light of day.

Then we move to Operation Sandon. Sandon is about Mr Woodman and corruption in relation to a planning scheme amendment. Many, many Labor MPs, including the member for Cranbourne, including the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events and including, could I say, the Deputy Premier, have been involved in and named by either Mr Woodman or Mr Staindl, who is known to be a long-time Labor Party supporter. The Premier has appeared at this one too about corrupt dealings. This is about corrupt and improper attempts to change a planning amendment. The Premier has appeared there.

Then we come to Operation Watts. Operation Watts is about branch stacking in the Labor Party. As the Age reports:

Premier Daniel Andrews has been secretly grilled by Victoria’s anti-corruption watchdog as part of an investigation that has found the Labor Party’s culture is rotten and encouraged the serious misuse of public resources.

The anti-corruption agency:

… interviewed 26 witnesses, including the premier, in private and seven witnesses in public hearings.

A draft has been leaked:

“The evidence adduced enables the conclusion that these practices—

that is, branch stacking—

have been approved or condoned by party leadership for decades,” IBAC concludes.

Who would be the party leadership in this state? That would be the Premier, who on more than one occasion has told us he takes responsibility for everything that happens under his government. IBAC’s report went on to say:

… Labor’s “organisational and leadership culture” must undergo further change if necessary reforms to stamp out corruption are to be effective.

So, having dealt with three IBAC investigations that all go to Labor Party sitting MPs, including ministers, plus the red shirts inquiry, the only thing that we can conclude is that this party, Victoria’s government, is lacking integrity. There are deep, deep questions of corruption at every point.

And what do we find when in fact people try to question that in parliamentary committees? We have a protection racket run by Ms Shing of the other place. In two cases Ms Shing has refused to allow questioning to continue. I particularly want to mention the one in which the member for Rowville attempted to ask Commissioner Redlich a question and that was shut down. That question went to the Premier’s office. Now, Ms Shing’s spouse is the Premier’s chief of staff. There is a clear conflict of interest—an absolute conflict of interest—and Ms Shing should have excused herself. Here we go, shutting it down.

Mr Dimopoulos: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, the member does not have the privilege to malign people who are not here to defend themselves. It is a disgraceful comment that she just made.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

Ms STALEY: Thank you, Deputy Speaker, and thank you for ruling that there is no point of order. He is just trying to shut me down. And that is the problem with this government: they lack integrity, they will not answer for their failings—

A member interjected.

Ms STALEY: That is true. But their tone and their approach are arrogant. They have been in power too long, and it is time they went. (Time expired)