Senate Economics Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 1:29:51 to 1:36:06
Examination of allegations that false or misleading information was provided in response to parliamentary questions on notice regarding the TPB.
Topics: Integrity, Parliamentary privilege, Orders for documents
Speakers: Senator Barbara Pocock, Speaker 4, Senator Tim Ayres, Rob Heferen, Senator Lisa Darmanin
must under strict strict requirements in fact uh Mr. de Cure having a a copy of it uh unfortunately could be in the position of actually being in breach of of the of
the requirements. Well, if Mr. Mr. de Cure wishes to surrender the document, please feel free, but I'm exercising my rights and responsibilities as a senator to pursue an element of this complaint. So, one of Mr. O'Neil's allegations,
>> Senator, if I might interrupt just very very briefly, um I can see that the um the position that Mr. Hefron's been advised to take in relation to these issues not just here but in the broad um conflicts um with the you know you're you asking him questions which you're entitled to >> um and and I can see just from watching that you're trying to ask questions that you know uh he is able to answer um at least that's what I thought I observed It may be that pretty soon we're in a position where Mr. Hefron has to take these questions on notice in order to
>> Absolutely. My question is not to Mr. Hefron.
>> Um but anyway, I'm I'm just watching. We'll we'll see how we go.
>> Thank you. One of Mr. Mr. O'Neil's allegations is about false and misleading information being provided uh at parliamentary hearings and responses to one of my questions on notice Quan A31 which uh was made at estimates in February 2024. I um I I want to go to the uh the Quan. It's obviously in the public realm and I quote, "On notice I asked the ATO Treasury and and it's on page 21 of the document in front of you, page 20, I think. Uh I on notice I asked that the ATO treasury and specifically Mr. O'Neil as CEO of the TPB, not the board and not the board chair because there are diverse opinions in that board. So I'm asking you, Mr. O'Neil to provide not only all documents, records and notes related to the contract change which was announced by Mr. Sukar in March 2022 but any documents, records or notes related to the other four processes that I have just referred to. So that is a quote of my quan and there are four processes that are implicitly spoken of in there. I'm going to come to you Mr. de Cure and ask you in a moment whether you think my request was clear. the four processes. In fact, there were five and they were all processes which had the effect and it's been widely canvased uh in reports before the Senate and so on. Allegations that Mr. O'Neil had bullied ATO staff. These were all allegations made as Mr. O'Neil was the was the investigator on this key case of the PWC event. And excuse me for going through it in detail, but I think people need to understand why I am paying attention to this. It is not an individual matter uh where I'm protective of Mr. O'Neil. It goes to the functioning and regulation of our system of uh tax and uh tax advice, but it also goes to the question of how we treat public servants when they are regulating. Uh so >> I just >> Yeah. So allegations that Mr. O'Neil had bullied atto staff, they weren't substantiated. an inquiry into m the way the TPAB officer Mr. Annaniel had conducted the PWC inquiry clean bill of health a workplace assessment so-called Oliver review these were very extensive processes a lot of public service time spent on them once again clear clean bill of health a fraud investigation into Mr. O'Neil clean bill of health finally an attempt to change Mr. annual's contract of employment which also failed. So the five pressured events which are documented uh in documents of the Senate as processes that occurred. So I want to come to you Mr. de Cure. Do you think my request was >> Why did you take over the processes of preparing the response to the question on notice and not allow Mr. O'Neil to complete that response as I was so clear
I don't believe I did take over the process, Senator, but I I mean whatever is in this document, I have not seen before today. I haven't had and and I think the commissioner has explained that I probably shouldn't see this and I haven't asked to see it. I was informed that the complaint existed yesterday, so I'm not aware of the detailed contents of this document. The
My question is not about the document. My question is do you have you you're clear what was requested?
>> I well yes I believe so. Yes.
>> Did you do you have a recollection of seeing Mr. O'Neil's response to my question on notice Mr. DQ? And I just remind you of the words that are read out of the beginning of every one of these estimates committee about being very clear and truthful.
I don't have a specific recollection, Senator, but it it's very normal practice for the chair of the TPB and the secretary of the TPB and the senior officers to prepare these responses together. Um the it it I don't believe it is an unusual practice that the chair of the TPB wouldn't be involved in responding to these questions.
>> My question my my question on notice was very explicit, Mr. to cure because of the political complexities that lay behind it. On notice, could you provide Mr. O'Neil's original response to my question on notice number AET31 from February 2024 estimates unchanged from the way he wrote it? On notice, please.
>> Uh, I believe yes, we can take that on notice, Senator. I don't have that available tonight.
>> Of course, go now?
>> Yeah, sure. I'm going to bring back the call and we'll come back. Um I have now Senator Namin Price.