Doorstop Interview
Electorate Office
20 June 2009
SUBJECTS: OzCar
TREASURER:
It's fairly obvious that yesterday News Limited was provided with a fake email about alleged representations made by the Prime Minister's office to the Treasury. Now, I think the Opposition has a responsibility to come out today and to rule out any role in the creation, distribution or promotion of that fake email. Now, there have been reports today that the Opposition has sighted this fake email. So, I think Opposition Leader Mr Turnbull should provide a full detailing of when they saw it, and who gave it to them. This is absolutely essential to know, because we have this smear campaign against the Prime Minister, which has been mounted on the basis of a false email which has been sighted by the Opposition. And I think today Mr Turnbull has a responsibility to outline how he saw it, where he saw it, and who provided that to the Opposition.
Also, I welcome the opportunity today to clear up a few things that have been written and alleged about my participation and my statements to Parliament. I want to make this point really clear: I stand by the comments I made to Parliament, and nothing that has been raised in the last 24 hours contradicts what I said to the Parliament. Now, I told the Parliament I was unaware of the outcome of any of the discussions between Mr Grant and the Treasury, and I stand behind that statement 100 per cent. Nothing that was said yesterday, nothing that was in the emails, nothing in the testimony, contradicts that statement at all. And if Mr Turnbull has any evidence to the contrary, he should provide it. And the reality is this: that there was no outcome for Mr Grant out of the discussions that he had with OzCar and Ford Credit – no outcome whatsoever.
I've met Mr Grant three of four times over the years. He's a reasonably prominent Brisbane businessman, but he's not a friend of mine. He's certainly somebody who is respected in the business community. A few years ago I did buy a used car from him, but I have not had any extensive contact with Mr Grant.
Now, I'd like to make the point that Mr Grant was not referred to me by the Prime Minister, not referred to me by the Prime Minister's office. Mr Grant was referred to me by Mr Bernie Ripoll, the member for Oxley, and that is the way it should be. Mr Ripoll represents that area in Parliament where the car dealership is. So, Bernie was doing what local MPs always do. And as the correspondence before the committee yesterday shows, Mr Ripoll emailed my office. Many other MPs did. Kay Hull, Mr Ramsey, Mr Billson all emailed my office, made contact, and their contact was dealt with promptly by my office. Now, when I was called by Mr Grant, I did with him as I do with anyone else. I spoke to him for a few minutes, and I then referred him to the DLO in my office. That is the sequence of events. Now, it's been suggested that I spent an extensive amount of time on this case. I did not spend an extensive amount of time on this case, but I did do what I always do, which is to attend to representations that are made to me. And that correspondence is there for all to see, as it is with the other MPs – Mrs Hull, Mr Ramsey and Mr Billson.
Now, there's been some absolutely absurd commentary in the papers today that some of the emails were sent to my home fax machine. Now, all sorts of things come to my home fax machine. And sometimes, if I'm spending a night in Brisbane - and that is rare - there can be hundreds of pages of material on my fax. So, to suggest that because something went to my home fax, it was something that I was attending to immediately then, is just simply inaccurate. On a rare night or day in Brisbane, the fact is that fax is clogged, and on some occasions – this is a matter of some contention in my house – it's out of paper, and I have to go through the routine of sorting all that out. But I receive an extensive amount of material on my home fax. And in the case of some of the emails, they were not emails that were requested by me or my office to be sent to my home fax. That is simply the situation.
So, I do really welcome the opportunity to clear up some of the misrepresentations that have been put into the press over the last couple of days. And over to you.
JOURNALIST:
You've seen a few beat-ups in your time. How would you rate this one?
TREASURER:
This is a smear campaign being run by the Opposition against both the Prime Minister and myself. They are so bereft of any alternative ideas about the economy that this is what they are doing. I just might remind you that in this instance, what we're dealing with here is a really serious issue that I was dealing with as Treasurer and that the Cabinet was dealing with, caused by the global financial crisis. So, there's the withdrawal of financiers from financing car dealerships. The livelihoods of thousands of people and businesses were on the line, and car dealerships were contacting MPs, who were contacting me. Their industry organisation was talking extensively to the Government about what sort of response the Government should be engaged in, and the Government responded promptly, because what we were dealing with was the livelihoods and employment of thousands of people, particularly I might add across regional and rural Australia. So, there were many representations being made. Mr Grant made representations. Many others did. But he was dealt with appropriately by my office and by the department.
JOURNALIST:
Were the names of other car dealers included in faxes sent to your home, or was he the only one?
TREASURER:
I'd have to check, but the reason that that fax went to my home was that Mr Grech hit 'reply all' in response to an email that had gone from my office. It was not requested by me or my office that it go to my home fax. But could I just deal with one representation, and this comes from Mrs Hull who was the member for Riverina. And this makes a very important point, and it goes to the core of what MPs and Ministers do representing their communities. At 12.17 pm on Friday 20 March, Mrs Hull contacted my office and she dealt with an officer. And the subject was 'car dealer crisis – please help'. There's then a long discussion about problems in her Riverina electorate. What occurred in this case, this is Mrs Hull, was a few minutes later – she was faxed by Mrs Hull on 12.17 pm – my office replied at 12.30 pm to Mrs Hull. This demonstrates that my office was taking seriously representations being made by other members of Parliament, but also by car dealers at the time, some of whom were going directly to the Treasury. There was a lot of activity in this area. So, I don't want people to think that somehow there was one representation from one person, and there wasn't other activity going on. There was a lot of other activity going on, because in this industry at that time, there was a real problem. And the Government and I particularly always take seriously the importance of receiving representations from people. And I hope that a hallmark of my treasurership is that I do keep listening to people when there's a problem in the community. And I'll just never stop doing that. And I make no apologies for doing that, because that's what the people of Australia pay me to do. And they expect me to be available, and I think many people who know me know that I am available. I'm generally available 24 hours a day.
JOURNALIST:
Were you available for any of those other car dealers to talk personally to them?
TREASURER:
Well, should they have wanted to talk personally to me, I could well have been available for them if that was possible. On this occasion, Mr Grant came through to me because the local MP, Mr Bernie Ripoll, put him in contact with me. I was contacted by Mr Ripoll. I said fine. Get him to give me a call. I spent a couple of minutes on the phone with him and referred him to a DLO.
That is not uncommon in terms of dealing with a whole host of representations that I receive. Each week in this country I would speak to a significant number of business people about issues in the economy as they impact the economy overall or as they impact their particular business. And I'll tell you this: if you go and talk to the industry associations, they do appreciate the fact that the Government is responsive, because we do take these issues very seriously.
JOURNALIST:
Is Mr Grech a liar?
TREASURER:
Mr Grech has given evidence to the committee yesterday and that is appropriate for him to do that. He will have maybe a different view of some of the discussions that he has had than others will have. You see I wasn't present for the discussions that he had with the car dealers or necessarily overseeing the discussions that he was having with my office. And all of those things are on the public record. The emails are there for all to see.
JOURNALIST:
He says he was left in no doubt that this was no ordinary constituent. Why would that be the case?
TREASURER:
Well, he dealt with Mr Thomas in my office. That is not Mr Thomas' recollection of events. But he also went on in his evidence yesterday to make the point that he felt that there were reasons why he was speaking more extensively to Mr Grant which went to the core of Mr Grant's concerns which were different than concerns that were raised by other car dealers. And he specifically cited the case of the car dealer in Riverina who had been referred through to him via Mrs Hull, via my office. So, it is entirely appropriate that he gives his evidence, but I think the emails demonstrate absolutely that we handled matters appropriately.
I make this point: these emails conclude on 27 February. The argument being put against myself is that there was some special treatment given. Well, given that there is no further email traffic between the end of February and now, and given that there was no outcome for Mr Grant, how does that stack up? It simply doesn't stack up. What you see from the email trail is that when the initial representation was made, there was a prompt reaction from my office. That representation went through the DLO into the Treasury, further contact about that over the next week, and no further contact about it from then right through to now. Which is where I began this press conference making the point that I didn't know until I read it in the newspapers what the outcome had been. And the outcome had been that Mr Grant I think has stayed with his existing financier.
JOURNALIST:
So, how many other different individual cases are faxed to your home?
TREASURER:
Well, it wasn't faxed specifically to my home at my request. It happened because the responsible official hit 'Reply All'. It was not requested by either myself or my office that it go to my home. But can I make this point, and it goes to having some understanding about how a Minister operates and how he communicates with his office. I will receive many things from my office handed to me when I'm in Canberra. So, many responses to representations that have been made will come through to me because I'm actually in the office. But it may be that if I'm home on the rare night, and that has been until relatively recently pretty rare, they may come through on the fax because I'm actually in Brisbane for a night. There's nothing unusual about something coming to my home fax. Many things that come to my home fax are things that I've not requested. But had I been in Canberra and not in Brisbane, it probably would have been handed to me along with a lot of other material, as is the usual practice.
JOURNALIST:
What do you remember of that brief conversation you had with Mr Grant?
TREASURER:
He indicated to me his concern about the lack of finance for the industry as a whole. He was worried about what that meant for him. He was making inquiries about what the Government's announcement of the creation of OzCar would mean for him. I told him that that would be a commercial matter, it was a commercial operation, he should deal with the DLO from my office and discuss it with the Department, which is what he did.
JOURNALIST:
(Inaudible) lived around the corner from the PM and was an old friend?
TREASURER:
Well, I was unaware that he lived around the corner from the PM. So, I wasn't aware that he lived up the road. I've been aware of Mr Grant as anyone who's been in South East Queensland has been would have been for the last 20 or 30 years, but in my case I've probably met him only three or four times over an extensive period.
JOURNALIST:
Have you attended a Club 51 function?
TREASURER:
No. Never.
JOURNALIST:
Are you a member?
TREASURER:
I'm a bit old for it. I'm heading up to 55!
JOURNALIST:
Were Treasury officials…
TREASURER:
… a bit younger.
JOURNALIST:
…ever asked to make sure Mr Grant was included in any financial assistance?
TREASURER:
They had no power to do that. This is why some of this discussion is not accurate. Because OzCar had not been set up, what was being done by Treasury officials was simply referring on car dealers to finance companies. You see, what happened was that there was a real problem in the industry. It has been indicated to us that a couple of very significant financiers were going to withdraw and to withdraw rapidly. GE Finance was one of those, and I think it may have been the financier for Mr Grant. I'd have to double check that. The truth was that after we announced the creation of OzCar, it turned out that the financiers weren't going to withdraw as quickly, and therefore we didn't necessarily need as big a vehicle to cope with the car dealers as we thought. And many of them remained financed by their existing financiers, contrary to what had seemed to be the case earlier on. That is, from a public policy point of view, the announcement by us that we would provide a vehicle was the encouragement or the spur for existing financiers who were in the field and not withdrawing to go out and get new customers. And that's precisely what happened. So, it was our announcement which actually prompted greater financial stability in the industry, and meant that many financiers who thought they were going to be without finance, maintained finance or found a new one, because existing companies were expanding their book, rather than contracting their book. And that was a great outcome. That was a terrific outcome for Australia, because what it meant was that what could have been quite catastrophic in the case of many rural and regional dealers, that that catastrophic outcome was avoided – avoided by the very fact that we announced that we were putting a vehicle into the field. People like to look back at these things and not understand just how difficult a situation car dealerships were actually facing back in February.
JOURNALIST:
So, what are your thoughts on this email that's cropped up that the Liberals claim proves the connection?
TREASURER:
Well, there's clearly a fake email, because as the Prime Minister indicated last night, there has been a comprehensive search for this email. Mr Turnbull says he has sighted this email. Well, where did he sight it? Who showed it to him? Where did it come from? If he's sighted it, his responsibility is to explain how he did that.
JOURNALIST:
Are you suggesting that they were at all behind the manufacture of this email?
TREASURER:
Well, senior journalists today have written that Mr Turnbull has sighted this fake email, so Mr Turnbull ought to explain where, how and why.
JOURNALIST:
Regardless of the outcome of Mr Grant, at any time had Treasury officials asked to seek finance for him at a meeting with a major finance company?
TREASURER:
Treasury would have taken any decisions they took in discussions with major finance companies on the merit of the case they discussed with Mr Grant. There was never from my point of view any indication of how they should proceed. They were handling the matter. It's a commercial matter, and the Treasury was handling difficult commercial circumstances involving car dealers right throughout the country. And the fact is that Mr Grant didn't secure finance – that's made clear in the emails – and he apparently is still with an existing financier. But these matters were handled by the department as they should be. Entirely appropriate.
JOURNALIST:
Why did Treasury admit Mr Grant wasn't your average constituent?
TREASURER:
Well, you'd have to ask Mr Grech that. Mr Grant, I think, from the emails, appears to be a particularly persistent sort of person.
JOURNALIST:
So, you've said that you weren't aware of the outcome, but will you admit that you were kept up to date personally with the fact that…
TREASURER:
…can I just go back to the emails. The emails that are there span a week basically, through to the end of February. The fact that there is no more email traffic actually indicates what I've just indicated to you today. I handled the matter correctly. I put it in the hands of my department. It was acted on, but handled appropriately by the department in the departmental framework. And as people are alleging that there was some sort of special relationship and so on, where's the rest of the email traffic? Thank you.
