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/2018/sep/05/peter-dutton-au-pair-visa-inquiry-afl-boss-to-give-evidence-to-senate-committee-live
The article has changed 12 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 5 | Version 6 |
|---|---|
| Peter Dutton au pair visa inquiry: leak referred to federal police – live | Peter Dutton au pair visa inquiry: leak referred to federal police – live |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| In other Peter Dutton related news - after the flurry of legal advice released in spill week academic Anne Twomey has weighed the arguments on both sides regarding Dutton’s eligibility to sit in parliament. | |
| The issue is whether Dutton breaches section 44(v) of the constitution - which bans “direct or indirect pecuniary interests in an agreement with the commonwealth” - because of his business interests in childcare centres. | |
| The solicitor general Stephen Donaghue said the better view is “no”, Labor’s advice from Bret Walker said the better view is “yes”. The short version of Twomey’s advice is: this is a genuine legal issue and only the high court can decide. | |
| The long version: | |
| Twomey notes that although there may be no capacity for public servants to influence Dutton because they are obliged to pay subsidies to all childcare centres, that is only one rationale for section 44(v). Another is “prevention of financial gain which may give rise to a conflict of duty and interest”. | |
| Twomey argues just because subsidies are paid under a statutory scheme, that does not necessarily mean there is no “agreement with the commonwealth”. She also suggests there may be an agreement because childcare centres get extra payments if they agree to take part in the Inclusion Support Programme. | |
| Donaghue agreed that was likely to be an agreement with the commonwealth, but Dutton may not have an interest in it because the funding was given for specific purposes (rather than provide a surplus that could go to Dutton’s family trust).Twomey concludes: | |
| “there is a genuine legal issue about Mr Dutton’s possible disqualification from Parliament. It is an issue about which reasonable minds may differ. When it comes to the child care subsidies, it may well be the case that the statutory regime precludes the arrangement from being regarded as the type of agreement to which s 44 is directed. | |
| “But this is by no means certain. It may depend upon how strictly the Court of Disputed Returns, if the matter was referred to it, was prepared to enforce the provision and whether its focus was on the protection of parliamentarians or the system of representative government ...These issues will not be resolved and the uncertainty will remain unless they are dealt with by the Court of Disputed Returns.” | |
| Right, we’re done with home affairs. Besides the news that the leaked interdepartmental emails have been referred to the AFP, it’s hard to argue we’ve learned much more this morning. | |
| We’ll be back after lunch, when the AFL chief executive, Gillon McLachlan, is expected to give evidence. | |
| Louise Pratt notes Home Affairs didn't bring a number of witnesses who could've answered questions. Pezzullo counters they could've come and refused to answer for other reasons. Excellent. #aupair #auspol https://t.co/U6cXFMfBCn | Louise Pratt notes Home Affairs didn't bring a number of witnesses who could've answered questions. Pezzullo counters they could've come and refused to answer for other reasons. Excellent. #aupair #auspol https://t.co/U6cXFMfBCn |
| Here’s the full quote from Eric Abetz just now. Someone should make this into a T-shirt. | Here’s the full quote from Eric Abetz just now. Someone should make this into a T-shirt. |
| There has been some bizarre criticisms about the quickness that one of these cases was determined by the minister. I would have thought we should all be celebrating that the department and the minister can make quick decisions rather than keeping someone in detention unnecessarily. | There has been some bizarre criticisms about the quickness that one of these cases was determined by the minister. I would have thought we should all be celebrating that the department and the minister can make quick decisions rather than keeping someone in detention unnecessarily. |
| I have nothing further to add ... | |
| Eric Abetz: "I think we should be celebrating the fact the dept can make quick decisions rather than keeping people in unnecessary detention." #auspol #aupair | Eric Abetz: "I think we should be celebrating the fact the dept can make quick decisions rather than keeping people in unnecessary detention." #auspol #aupair |
| Going back to the referral of the leaked emails to the Australian federal police, Murray Watt is pointing out that the minister who oversees the AFP is Peter Dutton. | Going back to the referral of the leaked emails to the Australian federal police, Murray Watt is pointing out that the minister who oversees the AFP is Peter Dutton. |
| McKim suggests that’s what happens when the oversight of security agencies is concentrated under one home affairs umbrella. | McKim suggests that’s what happens when the oversight of security agencies is concentrated under one home affairs umbrella. |
| This is curious ... | |
| Senator Kitching is asking whether the immigration department or Australian Border Force has ever been contacted by the Queensland police service regarding disciplinary proceedings against the police officer who contacted Peter Dutton about the Brisbane au pair case. | Senator Kitching is asking whether the immigration department or Australian Border Force has ever been contacted by the Queensland police service regarding disciplinary proceedings against the police officer who contacted Peter Dutton about the Brisbane au pair case. |
| Pezzullo and Outram both say they have no knowledge of such an approach. | Pezzullo and Outram both say they have no knowledge of such an approach. |
| Watt wants to know whether the department incurred as a result of the intervention. Essentially because airlines have to be notified when a deportation is due to occur, but in these two cases it didn’t go ahead. | Watt wants to know whether the department incurred as a result of the intervention. Essentially because airlines have to be notified when a deportation is due to occur, but in these two cases it didn’t go ahead. |
| The officials say they don’t think so, but take it on notice. | The officials say they don’t think so, but take it on notice. |
| We’re told that in both the Brisbane and Adelaide cases the request for an intervention briefing came from the department liaison officer placed in the minister’s office. | We’re told that in both the Brisbane and Adelaide cases the request for an intervention briefing came from the department liaison officer placed in the minister’s office. |
| Pezzullo says a request from the department liaison officer is “always taken to be a request from the minister”. | Pezzullo says a request from the department liaison officer is “always taken to be a request from the minister”. |
| Watt is getting increasingly frustrated with Pezzullo. | Watt is getting increasingly frustrated with Pezzullo. |
| He accuses him of “coaching witnesses” after Pezzullo steps in before another officer asks a question and suggests he asks it in the general rather than the specific. | He accuses him of “coaching witnesses” after Pezzullo steps in before another officer asks a question and suggests he asks it in the general rather than the specific. |
| Watt wants to know what it was that the au pair at the centre of the Brisbane case said that made ABF officers believe she intended to work illegally. | Watt wants to know what it was that the au pair at the centre of the Brisbane case said that made ABF officers believe she intended to work illegally. |
| Watt withdraws the remark. | Watt withdraws the remark. |
| The committee chair Louise Pratt has just sent a not-too-subtle message about the immigration department’s referral of the leaked emails to the AFP. | The committee chair Louise Pratt has just sent a not-too-subtle message about the immigration department’s referral of the leaked emails to the AFP. |
| She asks Pezzullo whether he’s aware of the AFP’s investigation into leaked material from NBN Co. | She asks Pezzullo whether he’s aware of the AFP’s investigation into leaked material from NBN Co. |
| That didn’t go well for the AFP. | That didn’t go well for the AFP. |
| “I know the providence of those documents, I’m chair of this committee [and] I need to ensure witnesses to this committee have protections and have to make sure Mr Pezzullo is aware of that,” Pratt says. | “I know the providence of those documents, I’m chair of this committee [and] I need to ensure witnesses to this committee have protections and have to make sure Mr Pezzullo is aware of that,” Pratt says. |
| So, we know those emails were submitted to the Senate inquiry. | So, we know those emails were submitted to the Senate inquiry. |
| McKim asks Border Force head Michael Outram whether the ABF has policies to deal with potential conflicts of interest between officers and the people they deal with. He suggests generally yes, but takes the question on notice. | McKim asks Border Force head Michael Outram whether the ABF has policies to deal with potential conflicts of interest between officers and the people they deal with. He suggests generally yes, but takes the question on notice. |
| Nick McKim from the Greens is here. We’re going over ministerial intervention numbers again. He wants to know how many ministerial interventions occurred contrary to departmental advice. | Nick McKim from the Greens is here. We’re going over ministerial intervention numbers again. He wants to know how many ministerial interventions occurred contrary to departmental advice. |
| Pezzullo says the department’s advice is more about identifying “risk factors” to intervention, rather than suggesting whether or not to intervene. | Pezzullo says the department’s advice is more about identifying “risk factors” to intervention, rather than suggesting whether or not to intervene. |
| It gives the minister the options that he has and a description of what some of the risk factors are including the fact [in the Adelaide case] that there was a very high risk of the person intending to work so in that circumstance it would be important to apply stipulations. | It gives the minister the options that he has and a description of what some of the risk factors are including the fact [in the Adelaide case] that there was a very high risk of the person intending to work so in that circumstance it would be important to apply stipulations. |
| Oh now we’re on to secrecy laws! | Oh now we’re on to secrecy laws! |
| O’Sullivan wants to know whether the recipient of a leaked document – ie a journalist or politician – is committing a crime. Pezzullo is hesitant to offer an opinion, but gently reminds the senator that his government is currently seeking to pass just a law. | O’Sullivan wants to know whether the recipient of a leaked document – ie a journalist or politician – is committing a crime. Pezzullo is hesitant to offer an opinion, but gently reminds the senator that his government is currently seeking to pass just a law. |
| O’Sullivan then asks whether Pezzullo would be concerned if he was told the person who leaked the emails – whether real or hypothetical – was “sitting at this table”. | O’Sullivan then asks whether Pezzullo would be concerned if he was told the person who leaked the emails – whether real or hypothetical – was “sitting at this table”. |
| Pezzullo offers no comment. | Pezzullo offers no comment. |