[ad_1]
The coalition government has threatened retaliation against independent MP Kerryn Phelps and two Labor MPs if Parliament decides to remove Minister of the Interior Peter Dutton to the High Court to verify his eligibility to sit in Parliament.
The government leader, Christopher Pyne, launched the threat Wednesday morning, saying the government was confident that Dutton was eligible. However, if Parliament did not agree, the Coalition would "definitely" call on Phelps, Mike Freelander and Tony Zappia.
The extraordinary escalation of hostilities occurred when Julia Banks' defection at the crossbar gave rise to Labor's hope that he could win the majority of votes for a Dutton referral, though the independent Cathy McGowan rebadessed her intention to support her.
Phelps called the threat "dirty tact" and warned that she "would not be intimidated", but she has not yet decided her vote on the opportunity to ask Dutton to check whether payments to child care centers that are trusted by his family violate the constitution.
The Solicitor General indicated that Mr. Dutton was "unable" to sit in Parliament because of section 44 (v) of the Constitution, which prohibits indirect pecuniary interest in an agreement with the Commonwealth but warned that he still existed "a high court risk could find that he had a conflict of interest.
Pyne said he was not threatening the three MPs, but confirmed that the government would "definitely" return them if Dutton was sent to the High Court.
"We have a very strong legal opinion that Peter Dutton does not have a constitutional problem under section 44," Pyne told National Radio.
"But if he does, if Parliament decides it and it should go to the Supreme Court, well, it's the same problem as Mike Freelander, Kerryn Phelps and Tony Zappia, of so that it would be vested in parliament if they voted to send Peter Dutton to the High Court that these three deputies should also be sent to the High Court. "
The media have questioned the eligibility of the trio of deputies in the same section, Phelps and Freelander, because of their general practitioner profession and because Phelps is adviser to the city of Sydney and Zappia because of related issues to his interest in the fitness center of his wife.
"My initial position, of course, is that we do not have a constitutional problem, but if they decide to do it and want to send it there, they will also have to send the other three," said Pyne.
Mr. Phelps, who met with Attorney General Christian Porter and his shadow Mark Dreyfus on Tuesday to discuss the matter, said that it was "indisputable" that he was "obviously threatening" to refer to it. and two other deputies. "I will not be intimidated," she told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday.
"I find scandalous the confusion between Peter Dutton's situation, childcare and Medicare discounts for patients," she said.
"It is well established that Medicare discounts are a statutory benefit to a patient, and if I were not sure of that before I ran, I would not have nominated myself."
Phelps said it was "a very important decision" as to the desirability of dismissing Dutton, noting that the validity of his decisions as a minister of the United States. Immigration and Home Affairs could depend on his eligibility to sit in Parliament.
"I have studied the evidence very carefully … so I have looked at a whole range of legal advice about it and I will make my decision about Parliament."
Alliance Center MP Rebekha Sharkie told ABC AM that she was "quite disappointing", that the government threatened retaliation for Article 44 and that Dutton had a "case to answer" because solicitor general was "a little vague."
"The government could really take the lead on this, it could fire Peter Dutton," she said. "I do not think the government wants to make Peter Dutton believe that he is referring to a racket, which he is referring to."
Sharkie said that if Dutton were eligible, the High Court would say so and it would be the "best outcome" for Parliament to have a resolution.
Sharkie, who voted for the dismissal before the loss of Malcolm Turnbull's leadership, said she would "wait to see" if it came up again in a motion.
Source link
