- Green senator asks tricky questions
- This is not the first time Senator Pocock has made a mistake.
- Using parliamentary privilege to defame needs reform
It’s a tactic used by politicians of all political stripes, but it has to stop: asking inflammatory questions that are actually wrong to attract media attention.
The Greens are now using it to inaccurately smear Australian businesses and individuals.
Just a week after Greens Senator Barbara Pocock made an embarrassing mistake in Parliament, she is at it again, this time misleading Parliament with an inaccurate and leading question.
Daily Mail Australia recently revealed Senator Pocock’s $99.9 million gaffe when she questioned government officials about a $100 million “missing” payment that didn’t actually exist.
The payment she erroneously referred to was actually $100,000, not $100 million, and although the senator claimed that “key milestones had not been adequately met,” both the government department and the service provider (the four large consulting firms (KPMG) denied it.
Greens senator Barbara Pocock (left) asked questions attacking KPMG and ASIC based on incorrect information.
The Greens senator eventually deleted her tweet, but only after questions from Daily Mail Australia.
However, Senator Pocock is at it again and uses questions at another committee hearing to smear the consulting firm once again. This time he also attacks another government body: regulator ASIC.
The problem with the attacks is that they include more careless errors on the senator’s part.
In February, Senator Pocock grilled ASIC officials in Senate Estimates, asking: “Has it come to your attention at ASIC that KPMG has carried out bogus audits for two companies, Paladin and Canstruct, which subsequently received more than 2,000 millions of dollars of taxpayer money to manage immigration?” Detention centers for the Department of the Interior?
It was a serious accusation of improper actions. He went on to ask: “Is ASIC currently investigating KPMG for breaching auditing standards in relation to those audits?”
ASIC took the questions unannounced and was understandably unable to provide a response during the hearing. As a result, the allegation was treated as fact, reported in the media at the time based simply on the question asked.
Daily Mail Australia can now reveal that ASIC, which recently provided a written response to Senator Pocock, clarified that the question was based on a completely false premise.
KPMG was not even the designated auditor of any of the companies mentioned. Naturally, therefore, she is also not being investigated by ASIC for breaching auditing standards in relation to work she did not perform.
Greens senator Barbara Pocock (above) has a way of making inaccurate comments under privilege
The error was designed to get the correct headline before the facts finally came to light, and Senator Pocock has yet to correct the record.
The senator, a former South Australian economics professor, also used an ABC radio interview in July last year to claim that companies such as large consulting firms do not pay payroll taxes in Australia. However, this is not true either.
Parliamentary privilege allows MPs and senators to defame and demean anyone they name – people or organisations. They can do so without legal consequences as long as they limit their comments to parliament and do not repeat the accusation outside of it.
Parliamentary privilege also applies during committee hearings. There are currently more than 100 parliamentary committees in operation, and witnesses called to testify are also protected by privileges.
At a time when political parties are demanding all kinds of reforms in media regulations, in all legal institutions and within the business community, it is time for them to take a closer look. By his own conduct, abusing the once important concept of parliamentary privilege for ideological purposes.
