There's another critical issues facing Parliament next week and this is
the Senate must decide whether to give police access to documents that could
shed light on who allegedly leaked information from NBN Co to Labor and the media.
Federal police officers executed a search warrant at Parliament House
yesterday combing through thousands of emails held on the building server.
Now Labor is claiming parliamentary privilege over the files and it looks
like they might get crossbench support to keep them from the police.
I'm always cautious about predicting numbers but what I do know is that we've got the
right argument. I do know that the principal is right and I've also got to
say to the media this is about your ability to get information sometimes and whistleblowers.
It goes to the heart of what privilege should be in terms of the
Senate being able to do its job to keep the executive arm of government accountable.
Privilege is a very important principle. It should be used sparingly and cautiously.
It is not there to simply cover up illegal activities. It is not there to
cover up basic leaks of information. For more on this were joined from Melbourne by
greens co-Deputy Leader Scott Ludlam. Welcome to the Drum.
Hey, good afternoon. Senator Ludlam we understand you held a party meeting this
afternoon to discuss whether to support the Labor Party and live in a bid for
protection. Can you tell us what you decided and why?
Yeah well we've decided to support it and I didn't think that there was any
serious doubt to be honest. As some of the folks you heard from
just now have said parliamentary privilege is a really important body of custom and
practice. It's old. It's a 100 years old in Australia but it goes back further and
it really goes to the ability of MPs, staff, researchers in the Parliament
itself to be able to do its job. Most of us I suspect would
have found ourselves in possession of documents from public interest
whistleblowers from time to time. I know I certainly have.
And part of the purpose of the body of parliamentary privilege custom is to
protect that work and to protect the ability of the Parliament to do its job.
So we will be supporting that motion when it comes to the floor next week.
And then surely the question of privilege is important in the sense
that it should also be used sparingly or called upon sparingly. Why do you think
in this particular interest, when it comes to the NBN, it should be used?
Sparingly yes but not selectively. I would ask coalition Mps, National
Party and Liberal party MPs, who are weighing this up over the weekend to consider
that one day, sooner the better, you'll be in opposition too and this body of
conduct and practice that's prevailed for decades will protect your work too.
I would still be sitting here and have taken this interview and the
Greens would have come to the same position if it was a coalition office that had been
raided in search of documents that I would argue, on the basis of what we know
about what's unfolding inside NBN, are in the public interest, that it's disclosed
and the parliament gets to consider that stuff. And so are you anticipating
in light of your support a victory for the ALP on this question given they
also have the Nick Xenophon team and possibly Jacqui Lambie. Well it's a two-step
process and I wouldn't consider it a victory for the ALP. I'll consider it a
victory for the Parliament. i think Senator Conroy is absolutely right to
bring this matter to the Parliament. But keep in mind i guess it's a two-step
process. One is whether the Senate agrees that it's a matter that should be
referred to the Privileges Committee which I've served on for a couple years
and then if the Parliament does send it there then it's a matter that gets
deliberated on and weighed up within that committee. But to my mind, and my
colleagues agreed, it's a pretty straight up-and-down case. These
documents were held by parliamentary researchers, they were held by political
staffers and they're on the Parliament House's mail server. As far as I'm
concerned that accords them parliamentary privilege. That's what
that system is for. But, Senator Ludlam, isn't the suggestion
that some illegal activity has gone on so therefore the AFP are
there trying to uncover what has gone on at that level. I mean it isn't this
using parliamentary privilege to stop a legitimate inquiry into interactivity
that that is illegal. No look I don't blame the NBN at
all for investigating
what's going on internally, to try and find out who's talking, if that's their
priority. To try and find out what documents have walked and what might be
in them. I think it's entirely up to them to take care of their document security
in trying to work out what went on internally.The point being that when
that material makes its way into the hands of parliamentarians who've got a
job to do,
opposition or government MPs have got a job to do, that's when parliamentary
privilege applies. Having dealt myself, the example that comes to
mind for me was dealing with whistleblowers disclosing really
extraordinarily dangerous conduct inside ANSTO that operates a nuclear reactor
in a radioisotope plant and we use that we use that material in our work to
disclose substantial wrongdoing. What we know of, that's occurring inside NBN is
that it's one of the largest capital works programs underway in Australia at
the moment. It's tremendously important for the future of the country and its
gone completely off the rails. I'm interested to know what NBN's got to hide.
This is all true but at one level a leak does not a whistleblower make so,
you know, that there's an exercise of judgment that the AFP is kind of
they're trying to seek to know whether this is actually illegal activity that's
gone on and and it's been protected by the Parliament. I don't see the
justification frankly. I get that and that's something that's going to get
debated next week and I think it is a proper matter for the Privileges
Committee. If it's communications between parliamentary
advisors, researchers, staffers and others who they've got contact with or if its
documents that have come out of NBN Co. or any other area,
I i think there is an argument to be made that it's the public interest. Once
it's in the hands of parliamentarians, for the legitimate conduct of their work,
that's precisely what the body of parliamentary privileges is meant to
cover. Do you support Nick Xenephon and his call
for greater protections forwhistleblowers more generally. There have been a number of bodies, including the
Law Reform Commission, that have questioned the scope of section 70 and 79 of
the Crimes Act. Do you think this needs re-examination and would there be,
will from the Labor Party, who you've offered support to in this particular
instance, for that as well.
Yeah I think it does widen that argument I suppose to what happens
to whistleblowers
and not talking about saboteurs but whistleblowers and people like Alan
Kessing who Nick has been working with for years and and others, the folk that I
was working with who were working at ANSTO, often their lives are ruined.
You know if the avenues within the entity, whether it be NBN Co or whoever,
if those avenues are closed off, if they believe that there is misconduct, if
the Parliament or the public are being misled, often the avenues for those
people before they go to the media or the parliament are severely curtailed
and people had their lives ruined. There are people that find themselves out of work,
that find themselves stigmatized, and in the instance of pretty high-profile
instances here in Australia of people who put information into the public
domain that desperately belongs there and
needs to be there and pay huge personal cost.
So there are good examples of whistleblower protections from overseas
that I think we could take a good look at here in Australia.