Wednesday, 3 May 2023

Government integrity

John PESUTTO (Hawthorn – Leader of the Opposition) (14:38): My question is to the Premier. The Operation Daintree report outlines concerns from former minister Jenny Mikakos about the payment of funds to the Health Workers Union by the Andrews government. The report states:

She volunteered her opinion in concluding her evidence that with the benefit of hindsight, it appeared the contract had only been entered into to placate Ms Asmar during the election period, and looked like a ‘way … of injecting funds into the HWU’.

Given the HWU donated almost $100,000 to Labor in the same financial year, was the payment to the union a way of laundering taxpayer funds to the Victorian Labor Party?

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! I ask the Leader of the Opposition to rephrase his question. It was relating to party politics. Can you rephrase the question to relate it to government administration?

John PESUTTO: There are any number of ways to rephrase this.

Members interjecting.

John PESUTTO: Danny dividend. You, dividend Danny?

The SPEAKER: Order! Does the Leader of the Opposition wish to rephrase his question or will I sit him down?

John PESUTTO: Thank you, Speaker. Given the HWU, the Health Workers Union, donated almost $100,000 to the Australian Labor Party, which the Premier leads and has said he leads, in the same financial year, was the corrupt payment to the union a way of laundering taxpayer funds to the Andrews Labor government?

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! Members on my right!

Daniel ANDREWS (Mulgrave – Premier) (14:41): The question is addressed to me I think in my ministerial capacity as the Leader of the Labor Party.

John Pesutto: This is serious.

Daniel ANDREWS: Well, then you would think you would have drafted your question.

John Pesutto: On a point of order, Speaker, on the question of relevance, the Premier says he does not understand. That is because he has multiple hats and multiple faces. I am asking him –

The SPEAKER: This is not a point of order.

John Pesutto: To clarify the question, the question was –

The SPEAKER: What is your point of order?

John Pesutto: about the donation of $100,000 –

The SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, you cannot repeat the question in a point of order.

Daniel ANDREWS: I will tell you what, mate, there are few long faces behind you. They have never been more interested in their shoes, I do not think, ever.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! Members on my right! The Member for Sunbury can leave the chamber for 1 hour.

Member for Sunbury withdrew from chamber.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, on standing order 58, the question clearly related to a decision about the contractual payment of taxpayer-funded money, and the Premier should return to that question.

The SPEAKER: Order! It is not an opportunity to repeat the question. The context of the question is well understood.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, do you wish to have your question answered? Then I would ask you to cease interjecting.

Daniel ANDREWS: The real question is who drafts these questions. Seriously.

James Newbury: On a further point of order, Speaker, the Premier is now defying your ruling.

The SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

Daniel ANDREWS: To the extent that the question relates to the activities of the government, I reject all the assertions made in the Leader of the Opposition’s borderline incoherent question. As for political donations that are made, they are a matter of donation law – which you voted against, by the way.

John Pesutto interjected.

Daniel ANDREWS: You do not get a fifth go at it, John.

The SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition!

Daniel ANDREWS: We could sit here all afternoon till you get an orderly question out your gob. Honestly, this is embarrassing. Brad Battin would never do this. Michael O’Brien never did do it.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: The Premier will resume his seat. The member for Lowan will resume her seat. I ask the Premier to come back to the question.

Daniel ANDREWS: The government behaves appropriately, and I reject the assertions made by the Leader of the Opposition to the extent that any reasonable person could follow what the imputations in that absolutely muddled, confused, incoherent excuse for a question actually were.

Cindy McLeish: Crystal clear.

The SPEAKER: The member for Eildon can leave the chamber for 1 hour.

Member for Eildon withdrew from chamber.

John PESUTTO (Hawthorn – Leader of the Opposition) (14:45): With IBAC saying it has become:

… concerned that the apparent increase in the level of improper conduct in Victoria … is increasing the risk that such behaviour will lead to more serious abuses of power …

how many other payments of taxpayer funds have been made to unions by the Andrews government which subsequently benefit the Victorian Labor Party?

Daniel ANDREWS (Mulgrave – Premier) (14:46): Apparently the Leader of the Opposition is now sharing with me what he would like to hear. Honestly, you need to draft your questions a little better, I would have thought, but leave that to one side. The Leader of the Opposition is essentially alleging –

John Pesutto: No, I am alleging.

The SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition, do you want your question answered? If so, please stop interjecting.

Daniel ANDREWS: Well, it is hard to know what you are alleging, actually, because you are all over the shop.

The SPEAKER: Premier, through the Chair.

Daniel ANDREWS: The Leader of the Opposition is, for the record, all over the shop, and I reject each of his borderline incoherent, rambling assertions in each of these quite pathetic questions.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, under standing order 58 I would ask you to bring the Premier back to the question.

The SPEAKER: The Premier has concluded his answer.