This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2017/oct/27/politics-live-high-court-citizenship-joyce
The article has changed 18 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 4 | Version 5 |
|---|---|
| AFP won't hand over seized AWU documents until after December – politics live | AFP won't hand over seized AWU documents until after December – politics live |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| 2.25am BST | |
| 02:25 | |
| George Brandis confirms there have been no resignations from the prime minister’s office and no resignations from justice minister Michael Keenan’s office (since Wednesday). | |
| Updated | |
| at 2.34am BST | |
| 2.20am BST | |
| 02:20 | |
| The Nationals NSW director quits | |
| In other breaking news: | |
| #BREAKING Nationals NSW Director @Nathan_Quigley calls it quits #auspol pic.twitter.com/k7KMb6BEQR | |
| This has been announced just hours before the party learns if it is heading to a byelection. | |
| Updated | |
| at 2.33am BST | |
| 2.11am BST | |
| 02:11 | |
| Bridget Mackenzie is asking the ROC if they are aware of times union members and leaders who have been under investigation have destroyed documents. | |
| 2.09am BST | |
| 02:09 | |
| Paul Karp | |
| After attorney general, George Brandis, used an AFP investigation into the leak to claim public interest immunity to refuse most questions, the Registered Organisations Commission’s executive director Chris Enright is now also rejecting questions on the basis the Australian Workers Union has a federal court case against it. | |
| Brandis leaps to his defence, noting the matter is “sub judice” ( Latin for the fact it would be contempt of court to prejudice the court case). | |
| When Labor’s Doug Cameron asks why Enright was able to answer questions on Thursday, Enright responds: | |
| “What’s now become clear, and what is changing, is it’s become clearer to me those proceedings are challenging the legality of commencement of investigation by ROC as well as issue of search warrants.” | |
| Updated | |
| at 2.25am BST | |
| 2.08am BST | |
| 02:08 | |
| Labor establishes there have been no more resignations from Michaelia Cash’s office since Wednesday night. | |
| Doug Cameron and George Brandis then break into an argument over who is disrespecting the Australian federal police. | |
| Brandis: My view, Senator Cameron, as the attorney general, who more than any other minister in the government is responsible for the observance of the law and the rule of law, it is a matter of shame and disgrace, that you as a member of the opposition frontbench, should attack the integrity of the Australian federal police and the men and women of it. You should be ashamed of yourself senator, because you are a disgraceful person. | |
| Cameron: The senator should withdraw that remark. No comment has been made about the federal police, the opposition are not pointing fingers at the federal police, we are certainly concerned about the minister’s office, we are certainly concerned about the minister, we are certainly concerned about the prime minister and his office and other offices. | |
| Brandis: He referred to the AFP raids as a witch-hunt. If that is not an innuendo or an allegation of bad faith or improper conduct against the AFP, I don’t know what is. And I repeat Senator Cameron, for you as a member of the alternative government to show such contempt for the Australian federal police, and the men and women, the brave men and women who staff is, is contemptible. | |
| Cameron calls it “nonsense” and the committee attempts to move on. | |
| Updated | |
| at 2.13am BST | |
| 1.57am BST | 1.57am BST |
| 01:57 | 01:57 |
| Kerri Hartland from the employment department says Michaelia Cash’s staffer’s equipment had been secured. | Kerri Hartland from the employment department says Michaelia Cash’s staffer’s equipment had been secured. |
| Cameron then asks what the ROC has done. | Cameron then asks what the ROC has done. |
| “The ROC hasn’t taken steps,” Bielecki says. | “The ROC hasn’t taken steps,” Bielecki says. |
| Brandis interrupts to say accuse Cameron of “assuming that an employee of the Registered Organisations Commission is going to break the law”. | Brandis interrupts to say accuse Cameron of “assuming that an employee of the Registered Organisations Commission is going to break the law”. |
| “You are in no position to say I am assuming that,” Cameron returns. “You are coming here, saying that we can’t ask even questions on this, and yet you seem quite calm that documentation, computers, telephones are unsecured in the office of ROC.” | “You are in no position to say I am assuming that,” Cameron returns. “You are coming here, saying that we can’t ask even questions on this, and yet you seem quite calm that documentation, computers, telephones are unsecured in the office of ROC.” |
| Brandis: The point I am making to you, is to interfere with, or delete, or destroy any relevant record would itself be unlawful. Your questions assume that employees of the Australian government are people who will break the law, you have no basis for that assumption. | Brandis: The point I am making to you, is to interfere with, or delete, or destroy any relevant record would itself be unlawful. Your questions assume that employees of the Australian government are people who will break the law, you have no basis for that assumption. |
| Cameron points out that “ministerial staff have engaged in egregious breaches of the law”. | Cameron points out that “ministerial staff have engaged in egregious breaches of the law”. |
| Brandis says ROC is not a political body | Brandis says ROC is not a political body |
| “So I just make the point to you, by saying there is something untoward by saying the steps you need to be taken, not being taken, must assume there is a risk of employees of the ROC will commit a crime. You have no basis for that assumption.” | “So I just make the point to you, by saying there is something untoward by saying the steps you need to be taken, not being taken, must assume there is a risk of employees of the ROC will commit a crime. You have no basis for that assumption.” |
| Cameron asks whether Bielecki will take steps to secure the equipment and documents. He says it will co-operate with the AFP investigation. | Cameron asks whether Bielecki will take steps to secure the equipment and documents. He says it will co-operate with the AFP investigation. |
| Executive director of the ROC Mark Enright says he has taken steps “to the extent that they are possible at this stage” to ensure the “physical location of the equipment” and staff have been spoken to “set out the protocols”. | Executive director of the ROC Mark Enright says he has taken steps “to the extent that they are possible at this stage” to ensure the “physical location of the equipment” and staff have been spoken to “set out the protocols”. |
| “We are employees of the public service, we adhere to the code of conduct very stringently.” | “We are employees of the public service, we adhere to the code of conduct very stringently.” |
| “As an absolute minimum, no staff in my agency would delete an email that may even be relevant. They are staff who are committed to the code of conduct, they understand what is going on in these proceedings and I am entirely confident of that.” | “As an absolute minimum, no staff in my agency would delete an email that may even be relevant. They are staff who are committed to the code of conduct, they understand what is going on in these proceedings and I am entirely confident of that.” |
| Updated | Updated |
| at 1.59am BST | at 1.59am BST |
| 1.42am BST | 1.42am BST |
| 01:42 | 01:42 |
| Pat Dodson spoke to the ABC this morning about the government decision to reject the the proposal for a constitutionally enshrined voice in parliament for indigenous people | Pat Dodson spoke to the ABC this morning about the government decision to reject the the proposal for a constitutionally enshrined voice in parliament for indigenous people |
| It wasn’t honourable because they didn’t discuss any of this with their own advisory committee. They didn’t discuss it with any of the Indigenous leadership. | It wasn’t honourable because they didn’t discuss any of this with their own advisory committee. They didn’t discuss it with any of the Indigenous leadership. |
| They certainly didn’t discuss this with the opposition before they allowed a leak or a leak took place – and we wouldn’t even be having the discussion if the leak hadn’t taken place. | They certainly didn’t discuss this with the opposition before they allowed a leak or a leak took place – and we wouldn’t even be having the discussion if the leak hadn’t taken place. |
| So there is nothing honourable about what’s happened here. And certainly to then come back and say they made a judgement that a proposition that has been put by the First Nation’s people would not pass the referendum test: now who knows that? | So there is nothing honourable about what’s happened here. And certainly to then come back and say they made a judgement that a proposition that has been put by the First Nation’s people would not pass the referendum test: now who knows that? |
| We’ve just spent $122m surveying people on the question of same-sex marriage. Now that’s a good thing to do and it’s a necessary thing to do. | We’ve just spent $122m surveying people on the question of same-sex marriage. Now that’s a good thing to do and it’s a necessary thing to do. |
| We could have taken the same approach here. There are innovative ways to deal with the complexities surrounding the question of entrenching a voice. | We could have taken the same approach here. There are innovative ways to deal with the complexities surrounding the question of entrenching a voice. |
| And I think to foreclose on that, having spent a lot of money, a lot of time, a lot of energy gone into this and to just simply reject it because the conservative element within the party of Mr Turnbull has rejected it. | And I think to foreclose on that, having spent a lot of money, a lot of time, a lot of energy gone into this and to just simply reject it because the conservative element within the party of Mr Turnbull has rejected it. |
| Updated | Updated |
| at 1.46am BST | at 1.46am BST |
| 1.39am BST | 1.39am BST |
| 01:39 | 01:39 |
| Doug Cameron is pushing back and asking questions, again, and says: “This is a political issue, not a national security issue”. | Doug Cameron is pushing back and asking questions, again, and says: “This is a political issue, not a national security issue”. |
| Cameron: Is the government acting to stop the destruction or concealment of documents or any evidence by the minister’s office or the Fair Work Ombudsman that is relevant to this investigation? Senator Cash couldn’t assure the committee that this had occurred. If I have a reasonable belief that it could occur, presumably there will now be a bank of TV cameras out front of the minister’s office awaiting the arrival of the AFP. | Cameron: Is the government acting to stop the destruction or concealment of documents or any evidence by the minister’s office or the Fair Work Ombudsman that is relevant to this investigation? Senator Cash couldn’t assure the committee that this had occurred. If I have a reasonable belief that it could occur, presumably there will now be a bank of TV cameras out front of the minister’s office awaiting the arrival of the AFP. |
| George Brandis: Senator, this the subject as we now know of a police investigation. To destroy material relevant to a current police investigation would itself be against the law. I have absolute confidence that both the minister, her staff and her department will be obedient to the law and I should remind you Senator Cameron that the minister is herself a lawyer, so she understands these principles perfectly well. | George Brandis: Senator, this the subject as we now know of a police investigation. To destroy material relevant to a current police investigation would itself be against the law. I have absolute confidence that both the minister, her staff and her department will be obedient to the law and I should remind you Senator Cameron that the minister is herself a lawyer, so she understands these principles perfectly well. |
| Cameron: I also asked about the Fair Work Ombudsman | Cameron: I also asked about the Fair Work Ombudsman |
| Brandis: I think you may as well take it Senator Cameron that all agencies of the Commonwealth of Australia and its employees are obedient to the law. | Brandis: I think you may as well take it Senator Cameron that all agencies of the Commonwealth of Australia and its employees are obedient to the law. |
| The head of the Registered Organisations Committee, Mark Bielecki, is asked whether he has taken any steps to secure any potential evidence. He says he has not. Cameron says he can not believe it. | The head of the Registered Organisations Committee, Mark Bielecki, is asked whether he has taken any steps to secure any potential evidence. He says he has not. Cameron says he can not believe it. |
| Updated | Updated |
| at 1.45am BST | at 1.45am BST |
| 1.27am BST | 1.27am BST |
| 01:27 | 01:27 |
| Here are the letters which George Brandis have just tabled pic.twitter.com/IlqFsh0dWl | Here are the letters which George Brandis have just tabled pic.twitter.com/IlqFsh0dWl |
| 1.25am BST | 1.25am BST |
| 01:25 | 01:25 |
| The committee is back and Labor are still fighting to be able to ask questions about the leaks. | The committee is back and Labor are still fighting to be able to ask questions about the leaks. |
| This is what Brandis is relying on to say he (and the ROC) can't answer any questions on the raid. pic.twitter.com/POciqMeADe | This is what Brandis is relying on to say he (and the ROC) can't answer any questions on the raid. pic.twitter.com/POciqMeADe |
| 1.22am BST | 1.22am BST |
| 01:22 | 01:22 |
| Updated | Updated |
| at 1.27am BST | at 1.27am BST |
| 1.19am BST | 1.19am BST |
| 01:19 | 01:19 |
| Calla Wahlquist | Calla Wahlquist |
| In another estimates committee, Nigel Scullion, the Indigenous affairs minister, who was eviscerated by Patricia Karvelas on RN Drive last night for the government’s decision to categorically rule out a referendum on enshrining an Indigenous voice to parliament in the constitution, has been squaring up against senators Pat Dodson, Malarndirri McCarthy, and Rachel Siewert. | In another estimates committee, Nigel Scullion, the Indigenous affairs minister, who was eviscerated by Patricia Karvelas on RN Drive last night for the government’s decision to categorically rule out a referendum on enshrining an Indigenous voice to parliament in the constitution, has been squaring up against senators Pat Dodson, Malarndirri McCarthy, and Rachel Siewert. |
| Scullion has suggested that the Referendum Council, which was commissioned by Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten to consult on the idea of Indigenous constitutional recognition, failed by not speaking to non-Indigenous people. | Scullion has suggested that the Referendum Council, which was commissioned by Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten to consult on the idea of Indigenous constitutional recognition, failed by not speaking to non-Indigenous people. |
| He said: | He said: |
| The task for the referendum council was to talk to Australia, to consult with Australia, and I think the Referendum Council’s view was that was speaking to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Speaking to 3% of the population when you are actually trying to deal with a national issue was part of the fail. | The task for the referendum council was to talk to Australia, to consult with Australia, and I think the Referendum Council’s view was that was speaking to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Speaking to 3% of the population when you are actually trying to deal with a national issue was part of the fail. |
| There was very little work down with the mainstream, non-Indigenous part of the community. I’m not arguing whether it should or shouldn’t have been.” | There was very little work down with the mainstream, non-Indigenous part of the community. I’m not arguing whether it should or shouldn’t have been.” |
| This is the first time I have heard anyone suggest that the Referendum Council was supposed to talk to non-Indigenous people, as well as Aborigiinal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In fact it was celebrated as the first active consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples commissioned in more than 10 years of discussion of Indigenous recognition. | This is the first time I have heard anyone suggest that the Referendum Council was supposed to talk to non-Indigenous people, as well as Aborigiinal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In fact it was celebrated as the first active consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples commissioned in more than 10 years of discussion of Indigenous recognition. |
| The first term of reference for the Referendum Council states: | The first term of reference for the Referendum Council states: |
| “The Council will lead the process for national consultations and community engagement about constitutional recognition, including a concurrent series of Indigenous designed and led consultations.” | “The Council will lead the process for national consultations and community engagement about constitutional recognition, including a concurrent series of Indigenous designed and led consultations.” |
| The grilling continues. | The grilling continues. |
| Updated | Updated |
| at 1.26am BST | at 1.26am BST |
| 1.11am BST | 1.11am BST |
| 01:11 | 01:11 |
| The Australian federal police advised by email they would be carrying out an investigation into the leak of the raids at 7.05pm last night. The email was sent to Michaelia Cash’s office. It was shown to George Brandis “earlier this morning” | The Australian federal police advised by email they would be carrying out an investigation into the leak of the raids at 7.05pm last night. The email was sent to Michaelia Cash’s office. It was shown to George Brandis “earlier this morning” |
| Brandis says he was “made aware of this hearing sometime yesterday and I was told that Senator Cash had a long standing commitment in Perth ... I think about lunchtime ... and because I was in Canberra today for an unrelated reason, I volunteered [to attend in her place]. | Brandis says he was “made aware of this hearing sometime yesterday and I was told that Senator Cash had a long standing commitment in Perth ... I think about lunchtime ... and because I was in Canberra today for an unrelated reason, I volunteered [to attend in her place]. |
| Labor is attempting to ascertain when Brandis learnt about the AFP investigation, given he has just sprung the public interest immunity move on them. | Labor is attempting to ascertain when Brandis learnt about the AFP investigation, given he has just sprung the public interest immunity move on them. |
| The committee is suspended again to discuss how to move forward, now that Brandis has outlined what he will be claiming public interest immunity on. | The committee is suspended again to discuss how to move forward, now that Brandis has outlined what he will be claiming public interest immunity on. |
| We are working on getting a copy of the letter which was tabled, but remember, it is redacted. | We are working on getting a copy of the letter which was tabled, but remember, it is redacted. |
| Updated | Updated |
| at 1.25am BST | at 1.25am BST |
| 1.06am BST | 1.06am BST |
| 01:06 | 01:06 |
| The committee is now going on break to read George Brandis’s letter where he outlines what matters he believes applies to public interest immunity. | The committee is now going on break to read George Brandis’s letter where he outlines what matters he believes applies to public interest immunity. |