The Senate has imposed a penalty on the Government for refusing to be transparent. The Prime Minister is threatening a House response to preserve secrecy. Former senator Rex Patrick reports.
Two lousy days; that’s the length of time Minister Penny Wong has left Minister Katy Gallagher in charge of the Senate while attending to business overseas. Wong returns to the Senate on Monday to a question time that is 50% longer than it was when she left.
You could see the anger in Gallagher’s face as she stood at the table of the Senate to respond to independent Senator David Pocock’s motion to take the number of questions asked at question-time from 10 to 15 (30 to 45 if supplementary questions are counted).
On July 23, Pocock had convinced the Senate to issue an order for the production of Lynelle Briggs’ review report into government board appointments. His interest in the report centres around stopping ‘jobs-for-mates’; appointments of former Federal and State politicians to Government boards.
Gallagher, in her role as the Minister for the Public Service, had refused to table the document on public interest immunity grounds. On August 25, the Senate rejected Gallagher’s claims and again insisted she table the review.
Yesterday, the Senate put its foot down and imposed the extra question-time penalty until the document is handed over.
The Senate is clearly frustrated with the Govt’s failure to respond to orders for production of documents, extending Senate question time from 1 hour to 1.5 hours until the final report on the Review of Public Sector Board Appointments Processes is tabled.💪#transparency #auspol pic.twitter.com/7yJvN5zJdj
— Rex Patrick (@MrRexPatrick) October 29, 2025
Tit for tat
MWM understands that the Acting Prime Minister, Richard Marles, called the Prime Minister yesterday to discuss Pocock’s motion, and by evening, the AFR was reporting that the Prime Minister was threatening to demote some Coalition MPs from senior (additional pay) positions on House committees.
The Prime Minister’s focus is on the House because he has no control over the Senate. The Senate is constitutionally separate from the House and controls its own affairs.
The threat is both childish and improper.
The Briggs Review
The ‘Review into Public Sector Board Appointments Processes’ was commissioned in January 2023 to examine ways to identify and recruit board members, to look at how ministers are advised on the selection of board members and to consider options for improving board membership diversity.
Briggs, a former public service commissioner, was appointed to conduct the review.
On 4 August 2023, she handed the final report to the Government.
Order for production of documents
An order for production of documents is not the Senate asking for a favour to hand over information.
It’s a lawful direction of a House of Parliament.
The power to order the production of documents comes from Section 49 of the Constitution.
In 1998, the High Court examined the power of a House of Parliament to order the production of documents after NSW Treasurer Michael Egan was, on 2 May 1996, turfed out of the NSW Legislative Council onto the footpath on Macquarie Street for not complying with an order to production.
Egan sought relief from the NSW Supreme Court. The matter was removed to the Court of Appeal and ultimately ended up in the High Court, which affirmed the right of a House to demand documents.
Whilst a House of Parliament can order the production of documents, the Government is entitled to advise that House that it is not in the public interest to do so. But the Government cannot be the judge in its own cause – it is the House that decides whether to accept the claim.
Gallagher, in this instance, claimed the review should not be handed over because “is still being considered by the Government.”
Of course, that’s not a proper excuse. One of the constitutional roles of the Senate is to watch over the government and throw the light of publicity on its acts – not just on what it has done, but also what it is doing now.
Gallagher also advanced the idea that the document was “prepared for Cabinet”.
However, the Cabinet Handbook, signed by the Prime Minister and Cabinet Secretary, states it is inappropriate to provide copies of, or access to, final or draft Cabinet documents to sources external to government. Briggs was an external contractor.
The Government knows they’re on very shaky ground. The FOI Amendment Bill is seeking to change the law to expand the scope of cabinet secrecy to a document that “has been prepared by a Minister, on a Minister’s behalf or by an agency”.
The explanatory memorandum to the Bill states the purpose of this change is so that ”a Minister or their department may engage an expert to prepare advice or a report, the substantial purpose of which is submission for consideration by the Cabinet”. That has not been passed into law yet.
The Government’s case is not helped by the fact that the terms of reference for the review stated that “the Final Report to the Minister for the Public Service will be published on the APS Reform Website”.
A silly war
No good can come from the Prime Minister’s threat. Albanese does not control the Senate. Going to war with it is madness, churlish and foolish; ultimately, the Senate can win by enforcing its own powers or simply slowing down and stopping the passage of legislation.
All his dummy spit would do is highlight his addiction to secrecy and his arrogance in the face of clear constitutional authority for the Senate to bring the review into the public domain.
The Government paid Briggs $176,000 to conduct the review. Public money for a public purpose, and yet the Prime Minister wants to keep that work from the public until after the Government has presented it with a fait accompli.
That’s not democracy at work.
The people don’t just have a right to know, they have a right to say.
Rex Patrick is a former Senator for South Australia and, earlier, a submariner in the armed forces. Best known as an anti-corruption and transparency crusader, Rex is also known as the "Transparency Warrior."