6PR Mornings with Paul Murray

SUBJECTS: Craig Thomson saga

E&OE…………

Paul Murray: Are there any possibilities that Craig Thomson was set up by enemies in the union movement and he is completely innocent?

Christopher Pyne: Well unfortunately the Member for Dobell, Craig Thomson’s alibi yesterday appears to be a recent invention.  I don’t believe that he was set up by enemies in the union movement for this very simple reason.  If he was aware that he was being set up and if he thought he was threatened to be setup like he thought he had, then why did he pay off the credit card bills when they arrived? If it says “Misbehaving Escort Agency” on the bill like it did, why did he authorise the payment?

Murray: That is a good question.  How do you explain his strong emotions he exhibited during his speech?

Pyne: Well look I think that like all humans feel some compassion for the enormous pressure that Craig Thomson must be under.  He is a family man like many of us and I am sure he feels very deeply about the manner of this debate.  Obviously the Parliament cannot be influenced by that but we have to be adults how we handle these very serious issues and that’s the reason why we need to have a debate about these issues.  The allegations and the findings from Fair Work Australia are very serious ones and they hurt the integrity of the Parliament and we are entitled to debate them.  But we have to do it in a way that recognises Craig Thomson as a human being like any other.

Murray: There seems to be two processes running here – there is the judicial process off the back of the Fair Work Australia report but there is also the manner what he told the Parliament and the examination of that.  Quite a lot of what he said yesterday seems to be at odd with the facts, at odds with what he earlier told Fair Work Australia and with what others say about the same incidents?  Does this need to now be tested in the political process as well as the judicial process?

Pyne: There are two things we need to do.  One – Craig Thomson did not address many of the key issues that surround him in his statement yesterday.  As you said in his introduction he did a square off against a number of the members of the Health Services Union using parliament privilege to do so.  He didn’t answer questions to do with things for example about like how he received a credit card from a business that was a Health Services Union printing business for his own personal use.  He didn’t address the FWA finding that he gave false and misleading evidence to their inquiry.  So we are entitled to ask Craig Thomson to address those issues after one hour they still remain unanswered.  Secondly of course if he did mislead the Parliament and as you do point out there is a certain lack of believability of his story and then its open to the Parliament to refer him to the Privileges Committee and the Privileges Committee to conduct a throughout investigation whether his statement matches his statement he has given before; Mike Smith for example, Laurie Oakes or the Today Show or indeed to the Fair Work Australia inquiry. 

Murray: I would have thought his truthfulness to the Parliament yesterday would be a matter that would weight on all members of Parliament and if you just look at what he said to the Parliament yesterday and then earlier to FWA about how the defamation action ended that he brought against Fairfax over the very first story that raised these issues that are central to the issues before the Parliament.  He has told two completely different stories about that, one of those different stories was yesterday in the Parliament.  Surely the Parliament has to make itself satisfied that what he said yesterday is the truth. 

Pyne: No doubt about that Paul.  Yesterday the Opposition moved four times that we be able to consider Craig Thomson’s statement and on every time the Government gagged debate and blocked the Opposition from moving its motions to consider his stamen.  So the protection racket that the Government has been running around Craig Thomson continues a pace.

Murray: Rob Oakeshott, the NSW Independent is saying against today that he does believe the truthfulness issue needs to be aired in the Parliament.  He has told the ABC Lateline program last night that he says there is likely to be debates about this in the floor of Parliament today. How is that going to come out?

Pyne: Well it is open to the crossbenches to move any motion that they wish to do so and for the Opposition to do the same.  Now we might well do that but the problem is to suspend standing orders of the Parliaments to get that motion debated and voted on we need 76 votes and the Government isn’t going to allow for that to happen.

Murray: So you don’t think that even with some of the crossbenches wavering like Mr Oakeshott for example and Andrew Wilkie you don’t think you could get the numbers to suspend standing orders?

Pyne: We can’t get them today because Julia Gillard is overseas, Steve Smith is overseas, Craig Emerson is overseas and Michelle Rowland is on maternity leave.

Murray: And they are all paired?

Pyne: They are all paired. There is no possibility that we could get to 76 votes and if the Government sees reason and recognises that the Parliament should be debating this statement.  Let’s not forget that the only reason this debate is not happening is because the government keeps voting to stop it.  They have excluded him from the caucus, they have said the allegations around the Health Services Union are disgusting but they are vote every day in the Parliament to stop it.

Murray: Were you surprised about the number of government members that were in the House to hear him yesterday?

Pyne: I was surprised there were so few. I was very surprised.  I think what it points to is a very deep anxiety in the Labor caucus about how much Julia Gillard has allowed for this debate, this issue to damage the government’s standing and the integrity of the Parliament.  If this government didn’t cling to power by one vote, this wouldn’t be happening.

Murray: Normally as leader of opposition business you would be in negotiations with Anthony Albanese to debate this issue, have those talks taken place outside of Parliament, private talks?

Pyne: Anthony and I talk often and we talked yesterday about the prospects of what could be done but Anthony Albanese as we know moved the motion shutting down Julie Bishop and myself.

Murray: Yes.  That’s not the question I asked – are they prepared at some stage to make an opportunity available for this matter to be debated?

Pyne: They haven’t indicated that, no. Not on any occasion.  We have moved many suspension motions since last September requiring the Member for Dobell to make a statement and the government has voted against every one of them.

Murray: Well how these matters that you have indicated to me this morning that you do believe as part of the political process, how do they come about?

Pyne: Well they can be aired in the Privileges Committee and that might be a cause of action.

Murray: You haven’t got the numbers to get it to the Privileges Committee either?

Pyne: We have the numbers to get it to the Privileges Committee as we don’t need 76 votes for that.  It will then be a question whether the government continues to protect Craig Thomson through the Privileges Committee process.

Murray: So when is that likely to take place?

Pyne: Well we are sitting this week and next week so you would have to expect it to happen quite soon.  But I am not going to flag my tactics.  As much as I love your program I am not going to flag my tactics on your program this morning.

Murray: I understand that.  Okay, thank you Christopher.

Pyne: Thank you.

Murray: Christopher Pyne, leader of Opposition Business in the House of Representatives.

ENDS.