Mr BRERETON —My question is directed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I remind the minister of his statement in this House on 29 May that the DFAT paedophile inquiry would be headed by someone of `absolute integrity, with the capacity to sift through the evidence, uncover the truth and deal with these serious issues in a rigorous and independent manner'. Minister, do you recall describing Mr Hunt as an excellent appointment and someone you held in high regard for his objectivity and scrupulous pursuit of the truth? Would you now concede that this is another instance of your abysmal personal judgment? What is the total cost of the now extended inquiry, and what has been the cost of Mr Hunt's salary, legal costs and overseas travel?

Mr DOWNER —I will have to get back to the honourable member with the details of costs that he raises. But, Mr Speaker, let me say it really does surprise me that the member for Kingsford-Smith seems to think that this issue is appropriate for party politicking. It really comes as an extraordinary surprise. I can well understand the Labor Party trying to make party political points about a whole raft of issues, but to think that an issue such as an investigation into allegations of paedophilia in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade should be a matter for party politicking is frankly, I think, rather beyond the pale.

Mr Beazley —I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. It goes to relevance. It was a very specific question asked of the Minister for Foreign Affairs. This is the place where ministers are accountable for the conduct of their portfolios, and we on this side are entitled to ask specific questions and get specific answers.

Mr SPEAKER —The question was precise.

Mr DOWNER —I am quite happy to acknowledge what I said at the time that the inquiry was established. I regret that Mr Hunt chose to make the remarks he did make to a journalist which subsequently led to a Federal Court action and to him ultimately having to step down from the position. But the point I would make is that the Public Service Commissioner immediately appointed a replacement, and that is simply an illustration of his determination—and, of course, that reflects the government's determination—to make sure that all allegations are properly investigated.

Behind the question is presumably some implication that the government does not want to have these matters thoroughly, properly and effectively investigated. We do. Of course we do. We very much want that, Mr Speaker, and that is why the Public Service Commissioner himself appointed Ms Pam O'Neil to carry on the inquiry. Obviously he has had to extend the life of the inquiry, but that is in order to ensure that the inquiry is a proper, full and effective inquiry.

As I said earlier, the Labor Party seems to think at the moment this is such an amusing matter and one for cheap party politicking, apparently driven by the member for Kingsford-Smith. I think it is quite extraordinary. On 25 April, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that allegations `have been rigorously pursued with no ifs, buts or maybes by an independent Federal Police investigation'. He went on to say that `there was an absolute full-on effort' by the then department secretary, Mr Costello, to unearth all available evidence. That is fair enough. This was adequate, according to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, but the member for Kingsford-Smith says, `No, actually, during the life of the Labor government'—because these allegations are about things that happened during the life of the Labor government—`I am afraid that that type of investigation was inadequate'; that the former Minister for Foreign Affairs did not in fact investigate these matters fully, despite the fact that he claimed he did, and that apparently an independent Public Service inquiry is not adequate either.

Frankly, Mr Speaker, I find the attitude of the opposition most surprising, quite bizarre and, let me say, counterproductive. It is almost as though the opposition wishes to sabotage this inquiry, and you would have to ask yourself why you would want to do that. You would have to ask why.