Senator URQUHART (Tasmania—Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate) (15:27): I also rise to take note of the answers given by Senator Abetz and Senator Brandis to questions asked by Senator Conroy and Senator Cameron. The Abbott government's royal commission into trade unions has never been about weeding out corruption and it has never been about improving unions. What it was and what it continues to be— Senator McKenzie: Have you seen the list? The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senator URQUHART: is a direct attempt to attack political rivals and increase Mr Abbott's electoral prospects in the next election. Since the day it gained the keys to the ministerial wing, the Abbott government has waged a concerted and vicious campaign against Australian workers and the organisations that support them, including the Australian Labor Party— Senator McKenzie: Why are you sticking up for them? The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senator URQUHART: The Abbott government has tried to smear its way into another term of government by using $80 million of taxpayers' money on a thoroughly compromised royal commission. Failing on fundamental tests of competence and economic management, Tony Abbott launched a politically motivated witch hunt to impugn the reputation of the unions and of the Labor Party. Knowing that he would not be able to win the argument on substantive issues of policy and the future direction of this country, Mr Abbott decided to play dirty instead. Last month we saw evidence of just how conflicted this royal commission is—when we heard that the Royal Commissioner himself, Dyson Heydon, agreed to be the star speaker at a Liberal party function. The invitation clearly showed that funds from the event would be funnelled into the Liberals' election campaigning. Clearly, any reasonable person would have difficulty believing that a man who has agreed to be a star speaker at a party political event does not have an affinity with that party. Then we had the absurd situation of Mr Heydon ruling on whether Mr Heydon could be perceived by a reasonable person to be biased. Sadly, in his ruling, Mr Heydon ignored the advice— Senator Brandis: Have you read it? The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senator URQUHART: that Mr Heydon himself had provided not too long ago in a similar situation. In the case of British American Tobacco Australia Services Limited v Laurie, Mr Heydon wrote: It is fundamental to the administration of justice that the judge be neutral. It is for this reason that the appearance of departure from neutrality is a ground of disqualification, because the rule is concerned with the appearance of bias and not the actuality. It is the perception of the hypothetical observer that provides the yardstick. This was great advice from Mr Heydon, but it is a shame that he did not take heed of that advice. Senator Brandis: Have you read his decision? Senator URQUHART: But it gets worse. Not only is there a pall over the motivations and political affinities of the royal commissioner himself, but today we have heard a very concerning report about the special treatment given to Prime Minister Abbott's star witness, Kathy Jackson. Let's not forget some of the comments of senior Liberal members about Ms Jackson—Prime Minister Tony Abbott himself said: Kathy Jackson is speaking up for the right and she deserves a bit of support from the leader of our country. Christopher Pyne said that Ms Jackson 'will be remembered as a transforming union leader'. Senator Abetz said: 'She did have the courage to blow the whistle and in those circumstances she is to be applauded'. Let's not forget that this is the same Kathy Jackson that the Federal Court has found to have defrauded HSU members of $1.4 billion. Senator Abetz: Billion? Senator URQUHART: Million dollars. Last week we knew that Ms Jackson was treated with kid gloves by the commission—a very different experience from that which other unionists received. But today we have heard the appalling extent of her special treatment. Not only did the commission give Ms Jackson an easy ride; she was actually given an extensive briefing on the issues that were to be raised in the hearings. The royal commission's lawyers gave advance warning of its strategies and the issues that would be canvassed. She knew what she would be asked; she knew what she would not be asked; she even received advice that she should use her time on the stand to respond to her critics. These are absolutely damning revelations that go to the very heart of the integrity of the commission. Labor has been very clear from the outset that we want to see an end to corruption and we want to see strong action on illegal activity. But a politically motivated, morally compromised and mortally tainted royal commission is not the way to do it. Clearly there could be no doubt in the eyes of any reasonable person that Mr Heydon's position is now untenable and the royal commission is nothing but an expensive, taxpayer-funded witch-hunt to the tune of $80 million of taxpayer money. (Time expired) Question agreed to.