Penny drops on Barry O attack - 
Have been monitoring the recent Labor Party assault on Barry O in regards to his legitimacy to be a Senator (under section 44 of the constitution), due to his alleged business interests in a company that has been awarded a QLD government tender with commonwealth government funding.
Quotes via the SMH article - Government senator Barry O'Sullivan under a cloud over business interests:
Obviously this is part of the BS political citizenship bun fight surrounding the National's Leader DPM Barnaby and deputy leader Senator Nash...
I think it extremely tedious and a distraction from bigger issues but I can understand the attacks on BJ & FN, with a government one seat majority in the HoR and with both being ministers in the Turnbull cabinet...
However in terms of Barry O I was struggling to fathom why it was Labor was going so hard after a backbencher Senator, who if rolled by s44 would simply be replaced by another QLD LNP nominee??
Then perusing Hansard on this full frontal assault, led by Senator (Just wrong) Wong and declared Commie Senator Dougy (RED) Cameron, the Penny dropped (so to speak -
)
Reference Senate Hansard: 14/09/2017 - QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Passing Strange -
So it would appear that the Labor attack is designed to try and force the Turnbull government to unseat Senator Barry O as Chair of what would have to be (historically) one of the most effective and non-partisan Senate Standing Legislative Committees in the history of the Federal parliament - I wonder why?
Right then back to my internet trolling -
MTF...P2
Ps For the record here is Barry O's speech in response to the Wrong Wong led Labor attack:
Have been monitoring the recent Labor Party assault on Barry O in regards to his legitimacy to be a Senator (under section 44 of the constitution), due to his alleged business interests in a company that has been awarded a QLD government tender with commonwealth government funding.
Quotes via the SMH article - Government senator Barry O'Sullivan under a cloud over business interests:
Quote:Turnbull government backbencher Barry O'Sullivan has rejected suggestions he is in breach of the constitution, after questions were raised over his eligibility to sit in the Senate – not because of his citizenship status but his business interests...
...On Thursday, it emerged Senator O'Sullivan had a stake in a family construction company, the Newlands Group, which has been awarded $25 million worth of contracts for a Queensland infrastructure project that is 80 per cent funded by the Commonwealth government.
...Infrastructure Minister Darren Chester said he did not believe Senator O'Sullivan was in a "great deal of trouble", but there was an "issue that he needs to explain in terms of section 44."
"I'm sure he has fulfilled his requirements there as he is expected to do," he told Sky News...
Obviously this is part of the BS political citizenship bun fight surrounding the National's Leader DPM Barnaby and deputy leader Senator Nash...
I think it extremely tedious and a distraction from bigger issues but I can understand the attacks on BJ & FN, with a government one seat majority in the HoR and with both being ministers in the Turnbull cabinet...
However in terms of Barry O I was struggling to fathom why it was Labor was going so hard after a backbencher Senator, who if rolled by s44 would simply be replaced by another QLD LNP nominee??
Then perusing Hansard on this full frontal assault, led by Senator (Just wrong) Wong and declared Commie Senator Dougy (RED) Cameron, the Penny dropped (so to speak -
)Reference Senate Hansard: 14/09/2017 - QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Quote:The PRESIDENT: Point of order, Senator Wong.
Senator Wong: Direct relevance—the question is this: is it appropriate for the chair of a committee to interject and offer comment on a project in which they have a commercial interest?
The PRESIDENT: On the point of order, Senator O'Sullivan?.
Senator O'Sullivan: Mr President, I seek leave to make a personal statement now.
The PRESIDENT: Is leave granted?
Senator Wong: We will give him leave after question time.
Leave not granted.
Senator O'Sullivan: I seek leave now to table a transcript of the speech I'm going to give and the accompanying evidentiary document that will put this to bed.
The PRESIDENT: Is leave granted?
Senator Wong: Mr President, I haven't seen the documents.
Honourable senators interjecting—
Senator Wong: If he provides them, we'll consider it, and he may well get leave when he stands up after question time.
Leave not granted.
The PRESIDENT: Senator O'Sullivan, leave has not been granted. Is this a further point of order?
Senator O'Sullivan: Yes, it is; in response. At four minutes past 12 today, nearly three hours ago, the Chief Government Whip formally went to the opposition to hand them the document, and they rejected them.
The PRESIDENT: That is not a point of order.
Honourable senators interjecting—
Senator O'Sullivan: They've seen the documents.
The PRESIDENT: On the point of order, Senator Brandis?
Senator Wong interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, I give you a lot of latitude about points of order, and I'll give the same courtesy to the Leader of the Government.
Senator Wong: What's the point of order?
The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, you get a lot of latitude on points of order, and I'm extending the same courtesy to the other leader.
Senator BRANDIS: Thank you very much, Mr President. Senator O'Sullivan has taken a point of order on which you are yet to rule. I wish to speak to that point of order. What has been disclosed to the Senate by Senator O'Sullivan is that, although Senator Wong asserted a few moments ago that the opposition had not had the opportunity to consider the documents which will show that there is absolutely no substance in allegations against Senator O'Sullivan, it is now apparent that these documents were offered to the opposition for inspection by them some three hours ago. The Leader of the Opposition should apologise to the Senate for seriously misleading the chamber.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Cameron, do you wish to contribute?
Senator Cameron: Yes, on the point of order. I happened to be on frontbench duty when the documents were handed to me—a bunch of documents without—
Honourable senators interjecting—
Senator Cameron: Senator O'Sullivan was seeking to immediately table the documents and speak on them. I had not seen the documents; I had not had time to look at the documents. Then, after consideration, I said the documents could be tabled and we would give Senator O'Sullivan an opportunity to speak. That was not accepted.
Senator Wong: Leave is granted. Table them now and, as I said, we will give you leave after question time to make a personal explanation.
The PRESIDENT: You're directing your comments to me, Senator Wong. Leave has been sought. The Labor Party is not objecting to leave. Senator Di Natale, are you objecting to leave being granted?
Senator Di Natale interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: I need your position. I'm going to put the question. Leave has been sought. Is leave granted?
Senator Di Natale: No, leave is not granted.
The PRESIDENT: Leave is not granted. We will now proceed with question time.
Senator BRANDIS: Going back to Senator Chisholm's question, Senator Chisholm suggests that there is something inappropriate about a senator who lives in Toowoomba, whose electorate office is in Toowoomba, making on observation during the hearings of a Senate committee about the progress—
Senator Wong interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong! Is there a point of order, Senator Williams?
Senator Williams: Mr President, I ask you to ask Senator Wong to be quiet while we listen to the answer instead of screaming across the chamber at Senator O'Sullivan, please.
The PRESIDENT: I remind all senators not to interject while other senators are speaking.
Senator BRANDIS: Again, this is the absurdity of Senator Chisholm's question: he suggests that Senator O'Sullivan, who lives in Toowoomba, whose electorate office is in Toowoomba, has done something inappropriate by making a remark during the course of the hearings of a Senate committee about the progression of the largest capital works project in the history of Toowoomba. According to Senator Chisholm, by his own benighted lights, there is something unusual or inappropriate about that.
The fact is that this government is extremely proud to have funded the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing. We are very proud of the fact that, going back to the days when Mr Ian Macfarlane was the member for Groom, Mr Ian Macfarlane and many other coalition members and senators from Queensland have urged the government to fund the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing. We are very proud of the fact that we are the government who are delivering on the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing. If Senator Chisholm had the slightest interest in or knowledge about the interests of the people of Toowoomba, which obviously he doesn't, rather than take cheap political points, he'd be applauding it.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Chisholm, a supplementary question.
Senator CHISHOLM (Queensland) (14:58): I look forward to being in Toowoomba on Sunday with the Premier. Senate standing order 27(5) states:
A senator shall not sit on a committee if the senator has a conflict of interest in relation to the inquiry of the committee.
What action will the government take to ensure Senator O'Sullivan has not breached that standing order?
Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:59): I have seen no evidence whatsoever that Senator O'Sullivan did have a conflict of interest, and I don't believe that Senator O'Sullivan does have a conflict of interest. If the Labor Party hadn't denied him leave to make a statement, we wouldn't even have this question because Senator O'Sullivan would have been given the opportunity to clarify the matter and demonstrate, before now, why the innuendos and insinuations against him coming from this man on the other side of the chamber are utterly false and unworthy.
Senator Cash interjecting—
Senator Brandis: Yes.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Chisholm, a final supplementary.
Senator CHISHOLM (Queensland) (15:01): Given the department responsible for the Commonwealth's involvement in the project reports to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, can the minister explain to the Senate why it is appropriate that Senator O'Sullivan continues as chair of the committee despite his commercial interests?
Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (15:01): It's because he's a fantastic advocate for regional Australia. That's why. He's a better advocate than you are, Senator Chisholm. It's not a secret, Senator Chisholm. It is not a coincidence, Senator Chisholm, that the Australian Labor Party does not hold a seat, federal or state, west of Brisbane. Do you know why? It's because the people who live in Toowoomba, like Senator O'Sullivan, know that people like you, Senator Chisholm—creatures of the Labor Party machine—haven't the slightest interest in them. You don't have the slightest interest in them; you don't have the slightest interest in their wellbeing. You couldn't care less about representing them. You come into this chamber to mock the greatest capital works project in the history of Toowoomba which every man, woman and child in Toowoomba would be glad of, but not you, Senator Chisholm, because you don't deserve to represent the people of Queensland. I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper
Passing Strange -
So it would appear that the Labor attack is designed to try and force the Turnbull government to unseat Senator Barry O as Chair of what would have to be (historically) one of the most effective and non-partisan Senate Standing Legislative Committees in the history of the Federal parliament - I wonder why?
Right then back to my internet trolling -
MTF...P2
Ps For the record here is Barry O's speech in response to the Wrong Wong led Labor attack:
Quote:PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS
Senator O'SULLIVAN (Queensland) (15:07): I seek leave to make a personal statement.
Leave granted.
These assertions are designed to make the argument that I am somehow in breach of section 44 of the Constitution of Australia and therefore assert, by their inference, that I am ineligible to sit in the Senate, representing my state of Queensland.
I have decided to make this personal statement to respond to those assertions, notwithstanding that I have released a number of statements indicating my position previously. In this chamber on 11 September, an assertion was made, and I quote the Hansard:
Newlands Civil Construction, a company in which Senator O'Sullivan has an interest …
That statement was and remains materially incorrect. At the end of my statement I will seek leave to table extracts of publicly available records from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission confirming and negating that assertion.
On the same date in this chamber, when referring to the aforementioned company Newlands Civil Constructions Pty Ltd, a statement was made, and I quote from the Hansard:
Senator O'Sullivan has, as part of the O'Sullivan family, controlling interests—
of Newlands Civil Constructions Pty Ltd. That statement is false. I have not now nor have I never had, either in my own capacity or in concert with anybody else, an interest in or control of the corporation Newlands Civil Construction Pty Ltd.
At the same time, a question was presented to the Senate that said:
We need to ensure that Senator O'Sullivan is not using his privileged position as a senator to influence contracts and that he is not benefitting from these contracts ...
I can only assume that the burden of that question was directed to contracts with the Public Service of the Commonwealth of Australia. In response, I can say that I have not now, nor have I ever, used my position to influence any contract establishment or negotiation with the Public Service of the Commonwealth of Australia. Again, to avoid any confusion in my answer, I can inform the Senate that I have not now, nor have I ever had, a contract or an interest in a contract with the Public Service of the Commonwealth of Australia in any capacity, either directly or indirectly. Additionally, I have not now, nor have I ever had, shares in a company that has shares in other companies, even through multiple structural relationships where those other companies have had a contract with the Public Service of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Further, and notwithstanding the strength of the aforementioned declarations and in the interests of absolute completeness, I state, in order to bring clarity to deal with the commercial or corporate illiteracy of those challenging these facts, that I have never had a conversation with any person, partnership, trust or entity or their representatives, legal officers, administrative officers, contract officers, engineers, agents or persons of extended interest, or their next-door neighbours, about any agreement between any person, corporation or entity who, in turn, has had an agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth of Australia.
The next assertion was a reference to the company named Newlands Civil Construction Pty Ltd. That was—and it was made by Senator Cameron—that this is a company whose managing director between 1991 and 2013 was Senator O'Sullivan. Inconveniently, that company wasn't registered until the year 2008, some 17 years after the date stated in Senator Cameron's assertions. I want to repeat for effect that I have never been the managing director of Newlands Civil Construction Pty Ltd nor its predecessor company, Town and Country Industries Pty Ltd, nor have I ever been a member of either of their boards. Accordingly, when it is asserted that I have been a shareholder or a director in these companies, or indeed the managing director, as was the burden of the statement, those claims are absolutely false.
I will quote further from Hansard. The government was asked to state the contracts that Senator O'Sullivan's company has benefited from. For the benefit of those making those statements, I can categorically state that it is not my company and it has never been my company, and the extracts that I will table here today from the Australian Securities and Investment Commission will verify that fact beyond any doubt.
This, of course, now puts those making the statements in a rather serious and invidious position. This is their challenge. If they have contracts, a piece of paper, an affidavit or something on the back of a napkin that says that I have a direct or indirect interest in anything to do with contracts with the Commonwealth of Australia, I call on them to table those documents or supporting evidence in this place. I can say that it would not make sense for anybody to have made these allegations, as they have, without having seen some supporting evidence themselves. So now is the time for them to share it with the Senate, as I am with all of the documents that I have at my disposal. I make the call with the confidence of knowing that they do not exist. It will then follow that, if such a document is tabled, the person tabling it should also present the publicly available transcripts from ASIC showing the relevant shareholdings, either directly or indirectly, with the corporation concerned.
The primary focus of these people is the corporation named Newlands Civil Construction Pty Ltd. To put matters beyond any reach, I corresponded with the Minister for Finance, the Hon. Senator Mathias Cormann, and the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, the Hon. Darren Chester, to ask them to search all Commonwealth records and confirm to me what I personally know to be true: that this company has not currently or historically had any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth of Australia. Both ministers have confirmed that position in writing. I will, with other documents, seek leave to table that correspondence to the Senate.
In closing, I can't be any clearer. Every document and record that I can access, records that have been publicly available, that anybody could have searched at any time, would have determined that the assertions being made were false. I can do no more than make this statement. I do not intend to respond anymore to any allegation made by the opposition or anyone else in this place. This has had a serious effect on my family. It's had a serious effect on the reputation of a company that employs well over 120 people—something that many of the people over there have never done.
I seek leave to table documents that include—inconveniently for some—the ASIC company extract of Newlands Civil Construction Pty Ltd, a letter to the Minister for Finance and to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, a letter from the Minister for Finance, a letter from the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, questions to answers on notice from Minister Nash, a Hansard of questions without notice from Senator Watt, a Hansard of questions without notice from Senator Chisholm, a Hansard of take note of answers contributions from Senator Cameron, a Hansard of take note of answers contributions from Senator Watt, and a Hansard of take note of answers contributions from Senator Chisholm.
Leave granted.
Senator Cameron interjecting—
Senator Ian Macdonald: Apologise, you grub.
Honourable senators interjecting—
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order!