Wilkie throws Dutton an eligibility-test lifeline

Andrew Wilkie has confirmed he would not support a hostile referral of Peter Dutton to the High Court.

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton in Sydney. Picture: Getty Images

Peter Dutton may have won a last-minute reprieve after key crossbencher Andrew Wilkie confirmed he would not support a hostile referral of the Home Affairs Minister to the High Court, instead insisting all in-doubt MPs must have their eligibility tested together.

Mr Wilkie’s opposition to an individual referral of Mr Dutton under section 44 of the Constitution gives the government enough votes to defeat any motion put by Labor on the floor of the parliament.

Maverick independent Bob Katter is also against sending Mr Dutton to the High Court, meaning the 73 Coalition members could combine with those two crossbenchers to achieve a simple majority of 75 votes needed to block the referral.

“It’s not my intention to support individual referrals because that will just start a series of tit-for-tats that will be overly political in nature and which will consume the parliament in its remaining sitting time,” Mr Wilkie told The Australian. “I remain firmly of the view that it’s the High Court’s role to decide guilt or innocence and not the parliament’s.

“Hence any referral from here must be a job lot that includes all members about whom there are reasonable doubts, and in particular financial doubts including Peter Dutton, (Liberal MP) Chris Crewther, (Nationals MP) David Gillespie and (Labor MP) Tony Zappia. I might insist on others when the government and the opposition have had a chance to make the case for more.”

Scott Morrison yesterday threatened that his government would attempt to send three Labor members — Mr Zappia, Anne Aly and Michael Freelander — to the High Court if parliament referred Mr Dutton, but appeared to back away from moves to also try to refer independent MP Kerryn Phelps.

A Dutton referral was shaping up to be the toughest challenge for the government in the final parliamentary sitting week of the year, after it was thrown deeper into minority status with the defection of Liberal MP Julia Banks to the crossbench.

Dr Phelps is seriously considering the Dutton case but it is understood she remains undecided on whether to refer him or support a bundling of referrals.

The government could attempt to amend a Dutton referral motion to also include the three Labor MPs but it is unclear if that amendment would receive enough support to succeed.

“There are three other House members that have the same issues that have been suggested about Peter Dutton, so any principled position, any consistent position, anyone seeking to be truly fair about these things would apply the same rule to all those members, but the government isn’t seeking to refer any of those members,” Mr Morrison said.

Leader of the House Christopher Pyne last week singled out Dr Phelps and Mr Freelander, who are GPs, and Mr Zappia, who was a partner of a fitness centre that offered services through Medicare, the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

He also questioned the eligibility of Dr Aly, who was the chief investigator for two Australian Research Council grants paid to Edith Cowan University. The ECU told The Australian the grants were allocated to the university, not Dr Aly, and were relinquished when she resigned from the university on May 8, 2016.

Mr Dutton is facing questions over an arrangement between the commonwealth and his family trust, the trustee of which operates a childcare centre that receives a government-funded subsidy and was paid $15,640 in federal funds for a special-needs teacher.

Under section 44, a politician is disqualified if they have a direct or indirect pecuniary interest through an agreement with the commonwealth.

Manager of opposition business Tony Burke refused to say if Labor would attempt to refer Mr Dutton this week, insisting the government should make the referral.

He noted it was “too late” to hold by-elections in lower house seats but declared “the best thing for national security” would be a High Court case to consider Mr Dutton’s eligibility because there were important decisions he had made as Home Affairs Minister that might be in doubt.

“If he does (have a problem) the government can then take remedial action,” Mr Burke said.