Mr S HORTEN (Maribyrnong—Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Minister for Government Services) (14:58): So far, with the royal commission into robodebt, we've seen a perp walk of former coalition ministers who were, at different times, responsible for the design, the implementation and the administration of this unlawful scheme. Last week we heard from the former human services minister, the member for Aston. During his evidence to the commission, the member for Aston— The SPEAKER: The minister will resume his seat. I call the Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. Mr Dutton: In light of your earlier words, I just don't know how the minister's response, particularly in his opening remarks, is consistent with your advice to the chamber. The SPEAKER: The minister has the call. Mr SHORTEN: The royal commission into robodebt has seen a conga line of coalition ministers, not a perp walk. The SPEAKER: I'll just ask the minister to get to the substance of the question he has been asked. Mr SHORTEN: During his evidence to the commission, the member for Aston acknowledged that (1) he was responsible for the administration of the robodebt scheme between February 2016 and December 2017, (2) he knew that robodebt produced inaccurate debt notices, (3) he did not think to raise questions about the legality of the scheme for the duration of his time as the minister, (4) he requested the personal files of 52 Centrelink recipients who had complained in the media in the period between Christmas 2016 and January 2017, and (5) he did think, however, to get legal advice about accessing the personal files of the 52 public complainants, as opposed to seeking advice as to the lawfulness of the whole scheme. The member for Aston did pay forensic attention to people complaining about the scheme but never the complaints. He investigated the messengers but never the message. Furthermore, when the minister was asked about his responsibility, he shifted responsibility for the scheme to the former Prime Minister, former Treasurer and former finance minister for prioritising and finding savings. He also shifted responsibility for not understanding the illegality of the scheme to senior public servants, one of whom is now deceased. Further, he said that he had no visibility of the scheme— The SPEAKER: The Manager of Opposition Business, on a further point of order? Mr Fletcher: Mr Speaker, the standing orders are very clear. Standing order 90 states: 'All imputations of improper motives to a Member … shall be considered highly disorderly.' We've just had a series of character assessments from the minister. This is a clear breach of the standing orders. The SPEAKER: I understand the minister was reading reports from the royal commission. Under the standing orders, he is entitled to refer to reports, media reports and the actual royal commission itself about what was said. I'm listening to the minister carefully. If he strays from that point, he will be pulled into order. I give him the call. Mr SHORTEN: The minister, when he was asked about responsibility, made it clear that he blamed the ERC. He made it clear that he blamed the senior public servants. It wasn't his fault that he didn't know about the illegality. Instead, he said senior public servants should have told him, including one who is now deceased. He said that he had no visibility of the scheme when it was brought to cabinet. He said that the issues of current policy responsibility were a matter for the former social services minister. At different times, not only did he blame most of his current cabinet colleagues; he then blamed the left-wing media, and he then blamed previous Labor governments. The human blame factory here also blamed the complainants of the scheme. However, I thank the last word about the evidence that we heard from that particular minister concerning the unlawful robodebt scheme should be left to his former media adviser, who put it better than most: 'The minister requested the file of every person who appeared in the media in order to make other victims think twice before coming forward.' What a fine specimen of coalition ministerial responsibility.