Senator CORMANN (2:00 PM) —My question is to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Senator Wong. Why has the minister commissioned an independent review of NBN Co.’s business case and 2010-11 corporate plan?

Senator WONG (Minister for Finance and Deregulation) —I thank the good senator for his question. Given this was on the front page of the Australian, the government effectively had notice of this question. It is not unusual for the opposition to simply go through one broadsheet and then ask the questions accordingly. It is normal practice for governments, when considering these sorts of complex policy transactions—as the opposition keeps reminding us—to seek external expert advice. It is precisely what you would expect from a government that is taking a detailed, methodical and responsible approach to a project of the importance of the National Broadband Network.

It is somewhat amazing that there has been criticism, including from the shadow minister, about this issue. You would think that the opposition, who have been allegedly clamouring for more due diligence, more information, more consideration, would actually welcome the fact that the government is ensuring it has the proper expert and technical advice, as is normal practice, in relation to this issue. It really demonstrates yet again the hypocrisy of the opposition, because on the one hand they say, ‘We want more time, we want more information, we want more delay, we want more inquiry,’ and then they have the hide to criticise the government for doing what we ought to do, which is to ensure that we consider this issue methodically, closely and responsibly.

The only explanation for the hypocrisy of the opposition is Senator Joyce’s own explanation, and that is: this is not about policy, this is not about transparency; this is about the opposition’s political agenda. They will wreck and oppose everything. (Time expired)

Senator CORMANN —Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. When and by whom was the decision made to commission an independent review of NBN Co.’s business case and 2010-11 corporate plan this late in the process?

Senator Conroy —We only got it two weeks ago, clown!

Senator WONG (Minister for Finance and Deregulation) —I will take Senator Conroy’s interjection, when he reminded the good senator asking the question of the answer yesterday, in response to Senator Brandis, about the date on which the business case was received. This is normal practice; this is appropriate practice. Similar arrangements were entered into by past governments when commercial or business advisers were commissioned. They included Telstra 1, which was ABN AMRO Rothschild; Telstra 2, Goldman Sachs; Telstra 3, Caliburn—

Senator Brandis —Mr President, I raise a point of order. The question was: when and by whom was the document commissioned? Nothing else; just a date and a name.

Senator Ludwig —Mr President, on the point of order: the minister is answering the question. She is being directly relevant. What we now have is the opposition taking the opportunity to take a point of order—not stating what the point of order is about but jumping up and restating the question. That is what we are now having.

The PRESIDENT —Senator Ludwig, I believe the minister is answering the question. I would refer people to the Hansard. I heard the first part of the answer very clearly. If you want to check, go and look at the Hansard. I refer you to that. The minister still has 23 seconds remaining to answer the question.

Senator WONG —Thank you, Mr President. As I was reminding the opposition, seeking independent advice frequently has occurred under governments of both persuasions. It is normal practice; it is standard practice. I was reminding the opposition of the various independent sources of advice they commissioned, and it is normal for this to occur in relation to policy transactions.

Senator CORMANN —Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Will the minister publicly release the Greenhill Caliburn review? If the Minister for Finance and Deregulation is having second thoughts about the lack of rigour in the National Broadband Network process so far, why should the parliament not have second thoughts as well? Given the minister’s obvious second thoughts, why should the parliament not insist on the opportunity to consider the independent review she commissioned as well as the business case before being asked to vote on NBN related legislation?

Senator WONG (Minister for Finance and Deregulation) —I am asked about second thoughts. It would be interesting, Senator, if I had the opportunity in the 60 seconds remaining to go through the various statements made by the opposition on telecommunications policy. They have not had just second thoughts; they have had third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh—all the way up to 18 plans on broadband. They have had 18 plans in the telecommunications sector.

Honourable senators interjecting—

The PRESIDENT —It will assist question time if both sides desist interjecting. It makes it very hard to hear the answers on some occasions.

Senator WONG —As I said, the opposition have had some 18 or 19 plans in this policy area, none of which have delivered. If you want to talk about second thoughts, let me remind some people in this chamber of people like Senator Joyce, who once argued that structural separation of Telstra was a good idea, and other intelligent people in the opposition—yes, there are some—who have argued for structural separation and who are now silent in the—

Senator Cormann —Mr President, I rise on a point of order: relevance. I asked the minister a specific question: will she publicly release the report? She is not being directly relevant to that question and I ask that—

Honourable senators interjecting—

The PRESIDENT —Senator Cormann, I am going to invite—

Senator Conroy interjecting—

The PRESIDENT —Senator Conroy, I do not need your comments. I need to listen to the point of order.

Senator Cormann —Thank you. My point of order was that the minister is not being directly relevant to the question. Will she release her independent review publicly: yes or no?

Senator Conroy —Mr President, I suspect that, if you were to review Hansard on the question that was asked, you would find that it contained at least 20 seconds of abuse that was totally broad-ranging. I put to you that, if those opposite want to include 20 seconds of abuse in their question, then there is no point of order.

The PRESIDENT —Senator Conroy, resume your seat.

Senator Cormann —You cannot handle being checked up on, can you? She is checking up on you and you can’t handle it.

Senator Brandis —He has never got over being outsmarted.

The PRESIDENT —We will wait until silence resumes. Senator Wong, there are nine seconds remaining for you to address the question that has been asked.

Senator WONG —In relation to the release of the business case, the Prime Minister has made clear that the government does intend to release it after proper consideration.