SENATE

Monday, 27 February 2017 Senate Page 17
Senator BERNARDI: If I was to hazard a guess and say it was in September, would that seem reasonable?
Mr Cooper: My guess is that it was in September, then, Senator.
Senator BERNARDI: Good guess. When did you respond and get back to the officer?
Mr Cooper: That was probably the most significant delay. Part of that delay was a misunderstanding on my
part as to who would respond to the person. When it was brought to my attention that the onus was on me to
respond, I apologised for the delay in responding.
Senator BERNARDI: While I am fascinated about where this is going, I am mindful of time.
Mr Cooper: It was too long, Senator.
Senator BERNARDI: I could go for days, I tell you.
Mr Cooper: It was too long and we need to do better.
Senator BERNARDI: I am in your hands, Chair. Literally I could be here for hours, not on this but on a range
of other issues.
CHAIR: Maybe just one or two more questions on this issue and then any others you want to raise quickly.
Senator BERNARDI: I might put some more questions on notice with regard to this.
CHAIR: Of course.
Senator BERNARDI: If you want to come back to me at any time, I am happy—
CHAIR: We will come back to you on the matters, perhaps.
Mr Cooper: I am advised there were three official statements made—one by the supervisor, one by the person
making the complaint and one by the witness.
Senator BERNARDI: Okay. I am interested in knowing the time lines regarding when those reports were
made, when those statements were taken, when the two people involved—the supervisor, the employee and a
witness—were asked to give evidence.
CHAIR: You will take that on notice, Mr Cooper?
Mr Cooper: Yes.
Senator ABETZ: Who can help me with the arrangements that are currently being entered into with Aussies,
the coffee shop?
Mr Stefanic: Perhaps I might start and Ms Croke may be able to fill in the gaps. The Aussies licence had
expired in 2014. I understand that since that time there has been a process to establish a renewed licence
arrangement. I would have to start off by saying, I guess, that in relation to that I recognise the value of Aussies as
an institution at Parliament House and I am aware of recent—
Senator ABETZ: I am sure that is reassuring when they are facing a 70 per cent rent hike.
Mr Stefanic: Yes.
Senator ABETZ: And have been told that they cannot use their name.
Mr Stefanic: Yes. What I want to do is preface, I guess, to indicate that I understand that is an institution and
I am happy to answer any amount of questions. I actually welcome the question because a lot of misinformation
has been put into the public domain. I welcome the opportunity here today to put it all on record because I do not
think we have been fairly represented in the public domain.
Senator ABETZ: All right. If I may, let us go through it. Are they allowed to continue to use the name
Aussies?
Mr Stefanic: Yes, they are.
Senator ABETZ: So that was never part of the discussion or negotiation that there was concern by the
department with the use of the name Aussies?
Mr Stefanic: No. There is a clause in the draft contract which exists to avoid there being an inappropriate use
of a business name. If, for example, the Aussies name were to be changed to something that would be deemed
inappropriate for the environment, it will provide the department and the Presiding Officers the opportunity to
stop that from occurring. There has been absolutely no intent by the department at any time to stop the name use
or for some sort of change in its name.
In terms of the agreement itself—
FINANCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION LEGISLATION COMMITTEE