Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Ten Breakfast -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) Coalition in Canberra. I would

expect that to continue.

Did it continue? Are we sure? Julie

Bishop is the Deputy Opposition

Leader. Good morning to you. Thank

you for your time. How can the

Opposition now, how can the

Coalition, how can you say that

Peter Slipper should not be in the

job, when for so long he was

supported by the Coalition? Paul t

difference now is that claims have

been made in formal documents in

Federal Court proceedings,

detailing allegations of seex ule

harassment and co- ergs by Peter

Slipper against a young employee

and all of these matters are

alleged to have occurred since

Julia Gillard appointed Peter

Slipper at the Speaker. What I find

disturbing is that Julia Gillard is seeking to play down the

seriousness of the allegations and

playing down the importance of the

role of the Speaker at the upholder

of standards in the Parliament. If

this were in any other workplace,

if these allegations had been made

against the boss in any other

workplace, surely Julia Gillard's

not suggesting that the boss should remain there while these allegations are being resolved?

That is what she's suggesting. I

find that... It is abhorpbt, and aI

agree she is handling this very

bandly. She would not have been in

the position to nominate him for

Speakership, she wouldn't be in the

position she's in now, were it not

for your government, your party,

continuing to support him. He was

selected nine times by your party,

even after you knew that there was

going on. some potentially shady behaviour

But Paul, nothing had been

formalised. There had never been a

court proceedings undertaken...

That is not good enough Julie.

There was some... Serious

allegations against him... You

continued to select him. There were

serious allegations about his abuse

of entitlements and they were the

subject of an investigation by the

Department of Finance when Julia

Gillard appointed him Speaker or

manoeuvreed to have him appointed

Speaker. There were also questions

surrounding the way he was behaving

with staff members. And yet you

continued to select him.

I didn't know about those until

more recently. We were trying to

get him out of the Parliament. He

was heading for the exist door and

Julia Gillard headed him off and

manoeuvreed him intoo the most

important role in the Parliament,

with more entitlement, not less. I

mean, you really care about these

things and you are interested in

tidying up Parliament. If you are

entirely honest, did you operate

quickly enough to be Coalition, did

the Coalition do the right thing at

the right time with regard to Peter

Slipper or did you wait too long?

It's all very well to be wise in

hindsight, but nobody had ever come

forward and made a claim, even the

allegations of something that

occurred in 2003, even the claimant

in this case, says that the

questionable relationship was

apparently consensual between Peter

Slipper and the staffer. But highly questionable and John Howard knew

about snit There is little you can

do with a consensual relationship.

Put knit the context of any other

workplace, if two people have a

consensual relationship, it may be

questionable, can cause you

concerns, but do you sack them for it?

I want to move on slightly, but you

are sounding like a mild version of

Julia Gillard when you say that.

Hang on, Paul. What are you

suggesting we should do without

court documents or without

anything? I suggest you call the

man in, and say, "We're worried

about this, Peter, we may not

select you, because it's our right

to choose not to select you. That

is what was happening. He was being

manoeuvreed out. Even Julia Gillard

has to admit that Rob Oakshott

raised his concerns about this man

being appointed Speaker. We tried

to get any other person in the

Parliament appointed, but Peter

Slipper and Julia Gillard's

judgement was he was the best man

for the job. I think it reflects

badly on Julia Gillard's judgement.

Let's talk about Rob Oakshott and

Tony Windsor, the two Independents.

Tony Abbott made it clear to both

that perhaps they should reconsider

their support of Labor as a result

of the Peter Slipper affair. In

what way are those two things linked?

Well, given that Julia Gillard

manoeuvreed Peter Slipper into the

Speaker's role and got rid of an

extremely competent Speaker in

Harry Jenkins, so she could get an

extra vote on the floor of the

House, so she could break a written

agreement with another Member of

Parliament, Andrew Wilkie, eever

the pokeys reforms, that's why,

remember, that's why she got Peter

into that job to break her written

agreement with Andrew Wilkie. On

that basis and the fact she is now

reliant on the votes of Peter

Slipper and Craig Thompson to stay

in Government, clearly this is a

volatile situation and not good for

the standing of the Parliament. We

believe there should be an election.

We're suggesting that they should

rethink their support for this

incompetent and quite frankly, tawdry Government.

Any idea where that may go? I've

not been involved in discussions.

If the Speaker wants to come back,

we know he wants to, if he intends

to come back, if he is cleared of

fraud, but civil charges are

pending, what will the Coalition do

to prevent him coming back at

Speaker? In the interest of dignity

and reputation of the Parliament,

he should remain standing aside

until all the allegations against

him are resolved. These are formal

allegations in a court document,

they should be resolved in the

interests of the standing of the

Parliament. It is our contention he

should remain standing aside, as

would happen in other work places

across Australia. If he refuses to,

and if the Government supports him

coming back, we would have to see

what success we would have in

moving a motion of no confidence. I

would have to wait until we get

back to Parliament to see how the

numbers lay, but that's why Mr

Wilkie and Oakshott and Windsor are

so important, they would have to

review their position as to

whrorpblt they would support this

government, someone reHaining in

the job as speaker while these

allegations are being put forward.

I think that would be entirely out

of order if he were to return as