Viewed
TRANSCRIPT - ABC WITH GREG JENNETT
PAUL FLETCHER MP
Shadow Minister for Science and the Arts
Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy
Manager of Opposition Business in the House
INTERVIEW WITH GREG JENNETT - ABC
30 NOVEMBER 2022
E&OE
Subject/s: Former Justice Bell’s Report, Censure Motion Against the Member for Cook, NSW Liberal Party Preselections
GREG JENNETT: We did hear there towards the end from the Manager of Opposition Business, Paul Fletcher. He led off the Coalition's argument against Scott Morrison’s Parliamentary indictment and he's with us in the studio now. Welcome, Mr Fletcher. This is an ignominious stain on Scott Morrison's record that will never be removed, formalised as it is by the Parliament. Will it define the Prime Ministership?
PAUL FLETCHER: Let’s be clear Greg. This was political stunt. The House practice is very clear. A censure motion is designed to be used by the Parliament, by the legislature to hold a minister to account. It's only been used against a private member or a backbencher twice before. In both cases by agreement. There's no agreement here. This was a political stunt. And as practice itself says, it's unsurprising if it's used politically for a government to use its numbers but the point is it does not have the credibility of a genuine expression of sentiment where there's been an agreement between the parties.
JENNETT: I heard you make that argument and wondered if you were clutching at straws because you would have been party to the censure of the last individual to be so dealt with by the parliament. If you supported it then, why not now?
FLETCHER: That was done by agreement because this is a very serious sanction. This has never been done before where the Government uses its numbers against an Opposition. The Government by definition has a majority but they cannot claim this has the same legitimacy as a censure motion in the traditional form. This was really a political exercise. If you look at one of the arguments that was used that in some way there was a failure to be able to hold the then Prime Minister to account. Because it wasn't known he held particular ministries. The fact is Prime Minister is held to account every day in Question Time anyone time across everything the Government does. That happened routinely every day in Question Time, every day of the Morrison Government, as it happens now. A Prime Minister is always held to account by the House for everything the entire Government does.
JENNETT: There were a few arguments employed, particularly by the Member for Cook himself. One is that journalists, the media, should have asked. And if we had we might have got an honest answer. That's a bit disingenuous, isn't it?
FLETCHER: Only Scott can talk about what he would have done in particular circumstances. This was a very specific political exercise designed to damage the reputation of Scott Morrison as an individual and his term as Prime Minister. The fact is Scott led the Morrison government through one of the most difficult times our nation has ever faced. It's a matter of factual record the economic outcomes, the health outcomes were amongst the best in the world. What we've seen this government focusing on a particular issue from the moment the revelations emerged, the overwhelming motivation of the Albanese Government was to maximise this for political advantage. They had not just the Solicitor General's opinion, but they had it from former Justice Bell which didn't save anything additional to what had already been said by the Solicitor General, including it was not unconstitutional, despite claims repeatedly by Mr Albanese and his ministers that it was illegal. These are the facts on the face of the report.
JENNETT: It was made about extraordinary times in the pandemic and no-one would seriously argue that they weren't. Trust in democracy was embedded within the Virginia Bell report and within the wording of this motion. Just to be clear, you don't think Mr Morrison's conduct raises any questions around trust in democracy?
FLETCHER: The Opposition's been very clear that the Bell report made some sensible recommendations, particularly that when a Minister is appointed to a portfolio, that ought to be published and should be a legislative requirement. We would support that. I might say, the Government has known for over a month that would be one of the recommendations because former Justice Bell wrote to the Prime Minister to sort it out. A similar recommendation was made in the Solicitor General's advice. The Government could today have brought forward legislation to put in place that change. Instead, they chose to use the time of the Parliament and what was effectively an exercise in political retribution.
JENNETT: Any blowback for Bridget Archer in crossing the floor?
FLETCHER: Let’s be clear. It's a longstanding tradition in the Liberal Party we are a party that recognises and respects the rights of individuals and members of our party are always free to cross the floor and the Labor Party if you cross the floor, you are automatically expelled. That’s not the way that we approach the world. It’s not something done lightly, I know Bridget didn't do it lightly but the key point is in our party it's a longstanding tradition that members are free to cross the floor. Where they judge it necessary. In the exercise of their own conscience.
JENNETT: Understood. She's a strong-willed Liberal woman which brings us to something that's happening on your patch. There's been an attempt by Natalie Ward, an Upper House MP in the New South Wales Parliament to make a switch to the local seat of Davidson in your area. She was unsuccessful. We might listen very briefly to something the New South Wales Treasurer had to say about all this. Don't forget that trying to lift the number of women in the New South Wales Parliament, as in the Federal Parliament, is a stated goal for the party there. Briefly here is Matt Kean.
MATT KEAN (via clip): I'm devastated about the result. I thought that a smart, talented, senior female minister would trump a former junior staffer every day of the week but the party processes are the party processes and I'll be campaigning for the candidate.
JENNETT: So your name is mentioned in dispatches Paul Fletcher as being very influential in the success of Matt Cross, a former staffer in gaining pre-selection at the expense of Natalie Ward. How do you defend that if the goal is to increase the number of women in that parliament?
FLETCHER: There were two excellent candidates in Natalie Ward and Matt Cross. The decision was made by a panel of 180 members of the party, the Liberal Party. I didn't have vote. I'm pleased Natalie Ward will continue to serve as a senior cabinet minister in New South Wales.
JENNETT: It's career limiting for her if she can't follow her aspirations to the Lower House?
FLETCHER: She will continue to serve as a parliamentarian. I've worked closely with Natalie in her capacity as Minister for Metropolitan Roads, when I was Minister for Urban Infrastructure. We worked closely together and she's an excellent, very capable, very accomplished Parliamentarian and Minister and I'm delighted she will be continuing to do that and I'll be working as well with Matt Cross, our endorsed Liberal candidate.
JENNETT: Is it worth it if the fallout is internal warfare within the party?
FLETCHER: Again, these are matters for a pre-selection panel of 180 members of the Liberal Party. They had the chance to consider these two excellent candidates. I'm very pleased we had such excellent candidates. It was not an easy decision and it wasn't my decision. I'm not on the pre-selection panel but I do look forward to working with both Natalie and Matt in their respected capacities.
JENNETT: Thank you for putting it on the record on what's been a hectic day for you and the parliament here. So we do appreciate you joining us once again.
FLETCHER: Thank you.
Further information: Jack Abadee 0403 440 099
