Senator HUME (Victoria) (15:08): It must be close to Christmas, because there is pantomime being performed by those opposite. And as with all Christmas pantomimes, there are colourful characters—like Senator Sterle—cringe-worthy overacting, finger-pointing, confected outrage and audience attention seeking, and no more so than today. Today the opposition has once again, in a week in which important business of government is actually being done, staged a second-rate sideshow on an issue that is as irrelevant as it is opportunistic. The issue of this imagined arrangement between the Commonwealth and the Western Australian government in the Bell Group liquidation is just that: it is a sideshow, it is a witch-hunt and it is aimed squarely at a senator who clearly gets under the skin of the opposition. The Attorney-General, Senator Brandis, made a comprehensive statement on the Bell Group issue yesterday, and Senator Wong promised that the ALP would carefully consider the Attorney-General's statement. Well, it is painfully apparent that they have not done so. Senator Brandis told this chamber yesterday that there was never an arrangement between the federal government and Western Australia over how to bring the long-running legal dispute to a close or how to carve up $1.8 billion in disputed proceeds. The Bell Group litigation is infamous for its length and its costs. It is the most complex and costly corporate winding up in Australian history. So far it has involved some 30 separate legal proceedings in four countries as well as proceedings in Australia, in the High Court, the Federal Court and the Supreme Court of Western Australia. As he unambiguously explained to this chamber, the Attorney-General accepted the legal advice of former Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson that the Commonwealth should challenge the Western Australian government over its wind-up of the Bell Group. Every decision that the Attorney-General made on the matter did protect the interests of the Commonwealth, by supporting the decision of the ATO to intervene in the matter and deciding to accept Mr Gleeson's advice that the Commonwealth of Australia should also intervene in the matter. There was never an agreement between the Attorney-General and his WA Counterpart, Mr Mischin, which was acknowledged. Senator Jacinta Collins: How do you know? Senator HUME: I had a look at the correspondence, Senator. That is how I know. The correspondence between former Treasurer Joe Hockey and his WA counterpart, Dr Nahan, clearly does not constitute that an agreement or understanding was arrived at between the Commonwealth and the Western Australian government. Indeed, despite Labor finger-pointing, Dr Nahan has not in fact cited any specific agreement. The Labor Party speak of an arrangement, but where is this arrangement supposed to be recorded? Is there a written agreement between the Commonwealth and Western Australia? No, there is not. Are there perhaps public statements by Mr Hockey or any other Commonwealth minister? No, not that the Labor Party can point to. And what about in the correspondence? No, there is nothing there either. There was no deal. There was no arrangement. There was no understanding. The Attorney-General said in his statement that he took countercompeting arguments, that he listened to and tested settlement proposals and then approved or instructed the lodgement of the appropriate documents within the deadline and approved the making of submissions completely in accordance with the legal advice he had received. It is clear from the Attorney-General's statement that he acted properly at all times. Everything was done when it needed to be done and in accordance with advice as well as established legal processes. The claim that there was an agreement between the Commonwealth and WA is wrong. The claim that the Attorney-General ignored the Constitution and instructed the Solicitor-General to do so is wrong. In short, just about everything the Labor Party and the Greens have said on this issue is wrong. What skulduggery by the opposition. Mark Dreyfus and Bill Shorten have significantly overreached and acted recklessly in their assertions and accusations, and in this chamber Labor have picked up their union issued and approved pitchforks and continued this witch-hunt. Opportunism abounds here. Accuracy is forsaken for headlines. This is an opposition that would rather be quotable than be credible. Protocol is subordinated to steal headlines in a week that is not going your way. This government is delivering. (Time expired) The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Hume, may I remind you, when you refer to members of the other place, to use their correct titles.