PM: Allegations have been made by a public servant concerning my integrity and that of the Treasurer. Firstly let me remind you what I said in Parliament on this matter on the 4th of June 2009, that one, “I have been advised that neither I nor my office have ever spoken with Mr Grant in relation to OzCar; two, neither I nor my office have ever been made, have ever made any representations on his behalf; and three, I have not been aware of any representations on his behalf made by anyone in the Government, including the referral referred to before by the Treasurer's office.”
As of now, I have no basis before me which changes that position. The public servant in question has said this afternoon that he believes he had an email communication from Dr Andrew Charlton of my office, making representations on behalf of Mr Grant.
I also note what the public servant went on to say -
He said, ‘my recollection may well be totally false, faulty. But my recollection, and that is a big qualification, but my recollection is that there was a short email from the PMO to me which very simply alerted me to the case of John Grant. But my, I don't have the email.'
To this I would say the following, that there have been exhaustive searches conducted of Dr Charlton's computer and email systems, and no such correspondence can be found. My office has conducted extensive searches on Dr Charlton's emails and computer system and it has found nothing.
Furthermore following today's senate committee hearing and following allegations this evening by Steve Lewis, who I am advised claims he is in possession of an email from Dr Charlton to the public servant dated 19 February, which makes a representation for Mr John Grant. We requested both the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, and the Department of treasury to search both Dr Charlton's computer system and a computer system of the public servant.
The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet's IT department has advised us tonight that no such correspondence can be found on Dr Charlton's computer system either for that date or the date preceding or following.
Let me quote from PM&C's advice on this matter. This is a communication to my office this evening, part of the reason I am a bit late with you.
‘As advised, the Department has this evening undertaken a search of all of the emails in the Prime Minister and Cabinet's email system for the period 16 February 2009 to 22 February 2009. This search includes all emails from and to Mr Charlton. The search would include any material deleted from the system. PM and C captures a copy of all emails in and out of the Department's system.
The Department has not found any record of an email from Mr Charlton to Treasury which relates to motor vehicle dealerships or any related matters.'
That is what PM&C have said to us tonight.
Furthermore, the Department of Treasury's IT unit has advised us that they also can find no correspondence between Dr Charlton or anyone in my office, and the public servant on that date. Treasury's advice will be circulated later on.
Furthermore, could I emphasise to all of you, that as a senior Treasury official made it clear in the Senate Inquiry today, the Treasury last night, conducted an extensive search of its computer systems to locate any such correspondence, from my office, or generally, or Dr Charlton in particular, to Treasury on the John Grant matter, and it has found none.
To this I would also add that Dr Andrew Charlton has confirmed repeatedly to me that he did not send any such email. And Dr Charlton has told me that prior to this having been raised in parliament, he had never heard of Mr Grant.
Second, in relation to the matters which have been raised in relation to the Treasurer. The Treasurer said when this matter was first raised in Parliament on 4 June 2009 that he had made representations on behalf of Mr Grant, and on behalf of others, including a car dealership in the electorate of the National Party's Kay Hull.
The public servant this afternoon said he believed the representations he had received from the Treasurer's office were stronger than others. I have no basis whatsoever to believe that the representations made in relation to Mr Grant or others were anything other than appropriate.
Nonetheless, given that these matters go to questions of integrity, I have decided to request that the Auditor-General conduct an inquiry on this matter. Based on advice from the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minster and Cabinet, I have now written to the Auditor General, and the following terms of reference, as recommended by PM&C.
I will read you that -
‘Please investigate and report on, one, whether any representations in relation to John Grant Motors were made by the Prime Minister's office to the Treasurer's office, or the Treasury, after the announcement of the OzCar program. Two, the nature of any such representations, if any, and three, the manner in which such representations if any, were handled in relation to applicable standards and procedures. I ask that you report on these matters by 31 July 2009, if possible, and if you form the view that a full investigation report would require a more extended period, that you provide an initial report by that date.
I am further advised by PM&C that the Auditor General is agreeable to conducting such an inquiry. And that is it, over to you folks.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) discrepancy between Mr Swan telling Parliament that this was just another case that Mr Grant wasn't (inaudible) and what we can see in the email trail of faxes going to Mr Swan's home, emails being cc'd to the head of Treasury, large (inaudible)
PM: What I am saying to you, as I indicated in my remarks before, that I have nothing before me which indicates that representations in relation to this matter, or the dealership in Kay Hull's electorate or elsewhere were anything other than appropriate.
Can I say more broadly as well, that the specific allegation which has been put by the Leader of the Opposition about communication between my own office or myself and the Treasury on this matter, we simply have found no documentary evidence whatsoever, to underpin that.
And can I just add to this, if there was any doubt on this question, I mean we would have simply come out and told you all. We have actually -
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Just wait a sec, and therefore, on the day one in parliament, went and did a search quickly, as you saw, my response in Parliament, subsequent to that, the office again, PM&C, sorry the office again has searched Dr Charlton's email system. On top of that, given the particular points raised by Steve Lewis this evening concerning an email which he says he has in his possession of 19 February, we asked specifically, PM&C's IT unit, and Treasury unit, to go through everything, including deleted items, and we can't find a thing. If there was something there folks, I would be the first one out to tell you.
So I am just saying to you that I am somewhat surprised by that. And I draw your attention also to, I am somewhat surprised, I draw your attention also to the statement by the public servant himself, today, where he said, ‘My recollection may well be totally false, or faulty'.
So I just say, that is where we got to, that is what we have looked at. And the advice that I have got from my own department, which has gone through everything on the dates which Steve has raised, came up with nothing. And that is the written advice I just read to you.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, can we just refer to the Treasurer for a moment, I asked both the Treasurer's office and you office this afternoon whether there were any other examples of information about these sorts of things going direct to the Treasurer's home fax number, or to the Treasurer directly, they must have conveyed that to you by now.
Are you aware of any other instances where that (inaudible)
PM: Chris, how each Minister deals with their fax systems and email systems, I would not have a clue. Wayne comes from Brisbane and I assume he has a whole lot of stuff which gets streamed to his home fax, I assume that is how it works.
And I assume each Minister has their own arrangements on that score, and I assume there is a pile of stuff that goes through.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd this is the man who is guiding Australia through the global recession. What is he doing, repeatedly reading emails on the apparent application by one car dealer in Queensland for help, when his attention is supposed to be presumably on far bigger matters.
PM: I know for a fact, Tim that the amount of work that the Treasurer puts in on the broad matters of economic management that you describe, is huge. Equally -
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Well can I just say, having worked with Wayne, from the onset of the global economic recession, I don't think anyone would challenge the Treasurer's work ethic and secondly, the level of attention he has addressed to all these matters that we have been talking about and debating about economic policy responses to the global recession.
Secondly, on matters which are put to him, I assume, from businesses right around the country, he will pay appropriate attention to those as they are put to him. There are people from the business community regularly coming into the office of the Treasurer, be it in this Government or previous Governments, asking whether particular representations could be made. I would assume that is completely normal. Over to you Steve.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd the head of Ford Credit Greg Cohen today told a Senate hearing (inaudible) During the emails that were released today involving Mr Swan, and there is one email there is constant reference to one of Mr Swan's senior advisers, to Mr Grant by his Christian name John, John, John, are you seriously telling the Australian people that Mr Grant was treated the same as every other of those dealers who approached the Government?
PM: Can I just say to you Steve, that on the question of Ford Credit, and its communications with whomever, I am not familiar with those details at all. That is the first point. Secondly, I assume there are multiple communications with multiple finance companies and banks -
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: You asked a question, I am about to respond to it and then I will go back to the specific matter that you put to my office this evening. And secondly, that the communications concerning various individuals who may have applications, or interest in this particular special purpose vehicle, which I remind you all, doesn't exist at this stage.
That is why I gather, a scheduled Senate Inquiry was held today, so let's all put this into context, it doesn't exist, no monies have been paid to anybody. But it legitimately goes to questions of integrity of process, I accept that.
So, just to go back to the other part of what Steve has raised, or what he has raised separately with my office. What Steve has said in his communication to my office, and I will just quote it,
“News Limited plans to publish the following email, sent by Andrew Charlton from the Prime Minister's office to Treasury official Godwin Grech. The email was sent on the 19th of February.
‘Hi Godwin, the PM has asked if the car dealer financing vehicle is available to assist a Queensland dealership, John Grant Motors, who seems to be having trouble getting finance. If you can follow up on this asap that would be very useful. Happy to discuss. A'”
All I am saying to you Steve is, we cannot find, anywhere in the system any such email. We have searched the, in our own office, and we have had other officers apart from Andrew Charlton go through his own system.
Secondly, he has assured me personally, along the lines I referred to in my remarks before, but thirdly, out of a complete abundance of caution, to then ask Prime Minister and Cabinet, who control the PMO's communications system, to go specifically to the date where you claim you have an email which says that.
They cannot find anything or anything that has been deleted there, and that is from our end. And finally, on the question of Treasury, that is a communication from one person to another, the recipient is alleged to be Treasury, that is, the public servant concerned, Treasury's IT unit have advised us this evening, they can't find anything either.
And I go back to my earlier remark, that were this sort of communication in existence, did I have information to that effect or the office had information to that effect, I would have informed you all at the earliest opportunity and informed the parliament.
JOURNALIST: And you are convinced this email doesn't exist, never existed? Senator Abetz seemed to be quoting an email in the committee this afternoon. DO you then believe you are being set up by people, a person or people?
PM: Based on the evidence that we have, Mark, all I conclude is the email referred to by Steve is false. Now if anything else is produced in the system which has been, which has escaped multiple searches by various parties, our own office, a generic search by Treasury's IT system last night, a specific search on the dates raised by Steve, through the PM&C IT unit this evening following the evidence given today, and by Treasury's IT unit, all I can say is, I can only confirm to you what information we have in our possession.
And I confirm specifically, with PM&C, that they had searched for deleted items as well, and they had.
JOURNALIST: One thing that doesn't seem to be in doubt though is that Treasury, met with the head of Ford Credit and said, can you help this mate of the Prime Minister, pointing out that he was a friend and acquaintance of yours, gave his number, John Grant's number to the head of Ford Credit. Is that appropriate?
PM: Whatever discussions occurred between Ford Credit and I think you just said the Treasury, is that correct? I am not familiar with the content of that.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: I am just not familiar with the content of that. The primary question here, as far as the attack on my own credibility is concerned, my own integrity is, have I made any such representations, or has my office?
And I am saying to you, and I think some of you were in parliament the day when this question was first raised, I was genuinely puzzled by it. I didn't know what on earth the Leader of the Opposition was referring to. Did not - no let me just go to this question - it goes to the whole point of any knowledge on my part, and I certainly have no recollection of any such conversation with Mr Grant and certainly no receipt of representation from him. Then, out of abundance of caution, you check in terms of the multiple staff you have working with you, in terms of what's in their recollection first up, and secondly, what's in the documentary record, and we can't find anything.
So on that score, I've just got to say, this has come to me as a complete surprise and I go back to what I said before in relation to Steve and the particular allegation being put in his email to our office this evening concerning what he says News Limited are planning to publish tomorrow. All that I can say is based on all of this, Steve, and I cannot go further than look at the systems that I have, which at this stage involve most of the machinery of government, to establish whether this exists or not, and nothing has been found.
JOURNALIST: Why does the public servant thinks he can recall the thing? I mean, does that worry you? Does that bring up to you that perhaps for him to think that he can recall this email, it perhaps existed at one point?
PM: Patricia, that's a great question. What's in the mind of a whole range of -
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: - well hang on, hang on, hang on.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) having this email -
PM: I can also draw to your attention - Can I just draw to your attention what the public servant said, and I quote to you. “My recollection may well be totally false, faulty” he says. And then he goes on to say is “I don't have the email”. That's what he says. Now I would say that if this was a particularly remarkable matter, which obviously, you know, jolted the public servant in question, I would have thought it would have probably been retained, but then the public servant in question has said explicitly in evidence today “my recollection may well be totally false, faulty”. Do you see what I'm -
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) Mr Rudd. Is he not credible -
PM: All I can say Tim is that had I believed or known that there was any communication from myself making representations on this matter or on behalf of my staff, that I would have immediately come out and told you all. That's just actually how I operate. I mean, mistakes happen in government, you know how big it is, but -
JOURNALIST: Well given the proposition, Mr Rudd (inaudible) you mention the date the 16th to the 22nd that the IT department in PM&C (inaudible)
PM: In going to your question Glenn, in anticipation, is that it's only a few hours since this thing was conducted. Those were the dates that explicitly contained in Steve's communication to us and given, there's always a volume of stuff to look at, that's where they've gone first. I'm sure they'll now look more broadly in terms of any other communication -
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Absolutely. Absolutely.
JOURNALIST: The other thing I'd like to ask you is the Auditor-General's inquiry - will it be public, will it have the power to compel witnesses and will you appear if required?
JOURNALIST: And when will it report?
PM: You obviously went to sleep before Lenore, because I told you. The letter requests him to report by 31 July, he says, searching for the letter, and says that if he requires any further extension of time, to advise us but that he should provide an additional report by that time. In terms of the conduct of the audit, that would be entirely within the discretion, independently of the Auditor-General.
JOURNALIST: All these IT experts that you've talked to today, your office has talked to today, Mr Rudd, have they told you that it's impossible for an email to be erased from these systems without leaving some evidence that it existed at some time.
PM: Mark, I've been accused of many things over this time, being an IT geek is not one of them. No, no - hang on, hang on. The question I've asked is about deleted items and what the advice from the PM&C people is that they have no record of this communication and they have searched deleted items, and I think you're familiar with systems to the extent that there are capacities to track whether a matter has been deleted or not.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd, can you ensure that there will be no repercussions against Godwin Grech for the evidence that -
PM: Absolutely. I mean, you know, if I've tried to establish a core principle since we've come to government it is the independence of the public service. We respect that. Remember when we took office? We kept every head of department. When our predecessors took office, they bulleted at least half a dozen of them. What we have sought to do, and I mean this, because I'm a former public servant myself, is to restore the integrity, the independence of the Australian public service and so they can provide advice fearlessly and without favour. Obviously, obviously, well I have never been able to answer for the Senate, can I just say -
JOURNALIST: Well why did (inaudible)
PM: I'd like to finish answering the question. I'd like to finish answering the question, and therefore, from time to time, to answer your question, public servants are always going to say, you know, what they think, and it may cause problems for the government of the day, well, that's just stuff, you've got to deal with that, okay? You understand that. That's just as it should be. The key thing is how you respond to it. These matters have been raised and to be fair to the public servant in question, he's actually cast doubt about the possible accuracy of his testimony in that question and as I said, had we any other advice in our possession, we would have put it out to you, it's as simple as that.
JOURNALIST: Mr Rudd, why did the government (inaudible).
PM: I'm sorry, I didn't actually watch it. I wasn't here and I can't actually respond to the actual nature of the testimony or the examination.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) behaviour (inaudible)
PM: I'm unaware of the details of the conduct of it. I was actually off at the quack, so there you go.
JOURNALIST: Why did Wayne Swan say to Parliament that he wasn't aware of the outcome of the, this process when the emails went to his house.
PM: Say it again - how did he?
JOURNALIST: How can Mr Swan tell Parliament that he wasn't aware of the outcomes of this process when the emails went to his -
PM: Well, I'll just go back to the foundational point, which is that the special purpose vehicle does not exist as of now. Secondly, no decisions vis a vis outcome in terms of you know, which particular financial allocation will be made to which particular car company, by definition therefore have not been made. I presume that's what the Treasurer was referring to.
JOURNALIST: Will the Auditor-General also look at whether the Treasurer's office gave favourable treatment -
PM: Sorry -
QUESTION: Will the Auditor-General also -
PM: Look, let me read it to you again mate. What he said, what the terms of reference are which have been the subject of recommendation to me from the Secretary of PM&C and as I said the Auditor-General has indicated that he's agreeable to conduct such an investigation, that is the manner in which such representations, if any, were handled in relation to applicable standards and procedures. That goes to that very question.
JOURNALIST: On that point, Mr Rudd, will you offer to appear before the Auditor-General's inquiry?
PM: You know something - the Auditor-General is an independent office, as you well know Glenn, and under those circumstances, whatever the Auditor-General requests, in terms of the proper conduct of inquiry, the government, in the spirit of transparency, will comply. That's as it should be.
As I said before, we believe in the independence of these public institutions as it should be. And I'll just conclude by saying this - to all of you, who I've known for a period of time, if something like this had been drawn to our attention as being a problem, that is that something like this had been done, let me tell you the first instinct of me, as Prime Minister of the country, but also who I am as a person, is go out and tell you all, and say ‘oh, by the way we stuffed up'.
We'll just let you know. But you know something? I can't stand in front of you and say we haven't actually tried on this to actually pull out every search system in the system to make sure that we have gone back to the core allegation here which is what Steve's on about tonight, to establish its veracity and thus far, as I said using those systems, we have achieved no results.
PM: Can I add one more thing on a different matter, by the way, which is in relation to the, what I'm advised tonight is the first death from Swine Flu, and can I simply say that any person's death is terrible and our thoughts go out to this man's family and of course to his friends and to his community.
We said from the start that H1N1 influenza 09 would spread through the community as is the experience in other countries. It was unfortunately inevitable that some cases would experience more severe outcomes and that deaths would occur. While tragic that this death has occurred it's important to remember that this influenza remains mild in the vast majority of cases. Most people make a rapid and full recovery. We will continue as a government to act on the advice of medical experts and I would urge the community to do the same.
JOURNALIST: Malcolm Turnbull today said that you must explain or resign - what's your demand of him now?
PM: Well, if the Opposition is the source of the email which Steve's referring to, then I would simply ask him to reconcile his claim, if that is his claim with the advice we have from two professional, independent public service agencies, and I would just say it's time to confirm the facts here, and if he's got the facts wrong, to accept that and to amend his own comments on the public record accordingly.
JOURNALIST: What's your reaction to him talking to your staff?
PM: You know something, I'm employed as Prime Minister to go out there and get knocked around the head by folks like you all the time, that's good. That's as it should be. That's part of our system of government, including the hurly-burly in there. We should draw a line, a very fundamental line at someone threatening a member of staff, let alone a member of staff from the opposing political party.
And that is how Dr Charlton felt - he was shaken by it and you, I think, understand what then transpired and the subsequent conversation. I think you've got to be very careful in this place about drawing lines about those that stick their hand up to go into the front line and take the biff and give a bit back but I don't believe that our staff should be subjected to that particularly what I take to be the implied threat concerning Mr Charlton's future out there in the commercial world.
Mr Charlton came to this position as a person with first class academic qualifications, an author and also with commercial experience. He's a young man, he's just turned 30, he has a life ahead of him and frankly, I reckon it's a bit off, doing that sort of thing, and having said all of that, I've got to zip.
JOURNALIST: You said you'd been to the quack - are you okay?
PM: Here we go. In the spirit of full disclosure, I went to the quack this afternoon - I've had a cyst removed from my back. It'll be subject to biopsy, I'm told it's just a lump of fatty tissue, but it'll be known in a few days. I'm also on pain killers from having this thing taken out of my back, but yeah, off you go.
JOURNALIST: Swine flu in a remote indigenous community has the government -
PM: It's about this big apparently.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: This is a disturbing development. I think the health Minister has been completely upfront with the Australian people about what we face here, upfront about the fact also, as the CMO, about the challenges of influenza in a normal season, where regrettably, a number of people lose their lives.
This is a much more virulent strain of influenza, each day that we receive new or further or additional advice from the CMO, we will take it, in response to it. I believe it is really important when you are dealing with public health matters like this, to be completely open with the public, about the risks, about what has been done, and the practical measures to be taken.
But as you could see from the data emerging in various counties around the world, there is a long way to go with this and the precautionary statements and the personal advisory's which have been issued both by the CMO and by the Health Minister, should be properly adhered to.