Senator STERLE (Western Australia) (15:13): I am a bit nervous to get up after that blast. Anyway, I will help you out, Senator Duniam. I know how it works, mate—you get the call; you got a take note. Congratulations, you had a good crack! Senator Duniam and I probably have a lot in common, because I think the standard of political representation in this nation is a disgrace, and a lot of it starts with those who have come straight out of school into a senator's or member's office as a staffer. They have never got dirt under their fingernails. They would not know what it is like to talk to a man in his mid-50s at five o'clock on a Friday afternoon who, through no fault of his own, has lost his job because of some restructure. Anyway, maybe I am getting a bit cynical and a bit old. Thank you for the advice, Senator Duniam. The independence of the position of the Solicitor-General and the nature of the relationship between him or her and the Attorney-General of the day has been spoken about before in this chamber. What we have seen here, unfortunately, with the abuse of power, or what could be the abuse of power, at the hands of Senator Brandis with respect to his dealings with the current Solicitor-General, is nothing but appalling. Just for a little bit of history, I am going to refer to my notes here. The office of the independent Commonwealth Solicitor-General was created in 1916 with the appointment of Sir Robert Garran. Prior to this, from 1903 to 1913, Sir Charles Powers had served as the first Commonwealth Crown Solicitor. For more than 110 years, Australia has seen independent solicitors-general give frank— Senator Brandis: No—100 years; it is the centenary this year. Senator STERLE: And he is at work again—100? Okay, let us go for 100. Whether it is for 100 or 110 years, Australia has seen independent solicitors-general giving frank and independent—there is that word again, independent—legal advice to the government of the day, who have respected their advice and the independence of the office. Unfortunately, this appears to have all gone out the window since Senator Brandis has become the Attorney-General. I wish I could say this behaviour is unprecedented. However, Senator Brandis has a track record of bringing his role into some disrepute, as a member of parliament and as the nation's highest legal officer. As we have seen, a number of Senator Brandis's colleagues have come out to defend him. I do not get a giggle too often from Senator Reynolds, because there is nothing to giggle about, but I have to admit I had one yesterday when she referred to the Senate inquiry into Senator Brandis's handlings on this issue as—I quote her words not mine, through you, Madam Deputy President—a 'witch-hunt'. Senator Reynolds may see it that way, just as many of her colleagues, unfortunately, are burying their heads in the sand on this issue. But the truth of the matter is that this whole scenario is far from being a witch-hunt. If this had been the first time Senator Brandis had slipped up with his responsibilities as a senator or as the Attorney-General then fair enough—apologise, move on, correct the record. It is not a jailable offence in Australia to make a mistake and own up to it. However, Senator Brandis's petulant attitude and ignorant reluctance to accept that he has not only— Senator Brandis: You didn't write that, Senator Sterle— Senator STERLE: I was thinking this aloud, Senator Brandis—misled the parliament but also damaged the reputation of the independence of the office of the Solicitor-General can be added to the long list of transgressions unfortunately perpetrated by the Attorney-General. Let us go over a few of them, shall we? Senator Brandis claimed to have consulted—and this came out yesterday in question time—the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Mr Mick Gooda, before establishing the Don Dale royal commission, when no such consultation occurred. Senator Brandis gave incorrect information to parliament about the letter to him from Lindt cafe gunman Man Haron Monis and, when made aware of this fact, delayed correcting the record for no less than three days. Senator Brandis failed to defend another independent statutory office holder, the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, from political attacks and, unfortunately, bullying. The Attorney-General subsequently offered an inducement to the President of the Human Rights Commission to quit her position after the commission issued a report— Senator Brandis: Madam Deputy President, on a point of order: I know Senator Sterle has been instructed to read out this rubbish, but the last point is a reflection on me. I point out that a complaint was actually made to the Australian Federal Police by the Labor Party in relation to that allegation and, having examined the matter, the Australian Federal Police concluded that there was absolutely no basis for that assertion. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Brandis. We will check the record and report back. Senator Wong: If I may, Madam Deputy President, in considering that, I would ask that your attention be drawn to the very clear evidence from Professor Triggs before the committee that the Attorney-General did indeed, via Mr Moraitis, arrange for an inducement to be offered for her resignation, and that evidence stands. Senator Brandis: Madam Deputy President, Senator Wong is now reflecting. The matter was investigated, and it was found to be absolutely without substance by the proper authority. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Brandis. I have undertaken to have a look at the record and report back. Senator STERLE: Thank you, Madam Deputy President. Senator Brandis breached cabinet rules by disclosing publicly the contents of a confidential cabinet debate on national security legislation. Senator Brandis interjecting— Senator STERLE: I cannot believe we were such good friends 15 minutes ago, Senator Brandis, and now you are attacking me. That is very fickle. Senator Brandis famously sought to remove the Racial Discrimination Act's protection against speech that offends, insults or humiliates people on the basis of race. (Time expired)