Senate president said the interim ban was influenced by two pieces of advice – but officials contradict his account • Backdown on ‘burqa ban’ – Monday’s political developments

The Speaker, Bronwyn Bishop, and the president of the Senate, Stephen Parry, personally added the controversial “burqa ban” in parliament house to official security advice because they feared a group was intending to disrupt parliament.

And the two presiding officers deny they have now reversed this “interim” decision at the request of the prime minister, although Tony Abbott clearly stated he had asked them to rethink it.

On 3 October Abbott said “I asked the Speaker to rethink that decision.”

Asked after question time “Did you Madam Speaker receive a receive a request from the prime minister to reconsider the policy?” Bishop replied: “In a word, no.”

Parry also told Senate estimates he had not spoken to the prime minister’s office about the ban.

A statement from the prime minister’s office suggests the difference might come down to what constitutes a “formal request”.

“The prime minister spoke to the speaker the day the revised security arrangements were announced. He made clear his views on the changed arrangements. No formal request was made to change the arrangements as they are a matter for the presiding officers,” a spokeswoman said.

Bishop said the decision had been based on advice of “an action planned that would disrupt the business of the house” but would not say where that advice had come from.

Parry said he had based his decision to add the “interim” ban on two pieces of advice, but one of the officials he cited as giving him that advice said she had not been told of any intended “disruption”, but only that a group wearing facial coverings intended to “enter” parliament house.



Parry also conceded that “Asio and the AFP were not involved” in the decision.

The Senate official, the usher of the black rod, Rachel Callinan, told a Senate estimates hearing on Monday that she had received a call mid-morning on 2 October – the date of the controversial “interim” decision – from the parliamentary security operations manager who “said he had become aware that a film crew was on the forecourt (of parliament house) because they believed a group of people were planning to enter question time wearing burqas”. Callinan said she had passed this information to Parry.

Bishop said the decision had been based on advice of “an action planned that would disrupt the business of the house” but would not say where that advice had come from.

Despite having now reversed the interim decision, Parry said it had been “prudent” because of advice that a group of perhaps 10 people, some of whom might be male, intended to disrupt parliament.

He said that before the permanent ruling, issued on Monday, it was possible for people with facial coverings to enter parliament without ever being identified. Facial identification will now take place when people enter and therefore normal movement can be allowed after that.

He said he had been advised of an intended “disruption” by the Speaker’s office as well as Callinan, but would not discuss who had provided the information to the Speaker’s office or why he had considered it to be credible, given that it had not come from Asio, the AFP or parliamentary security management.

The secretary of the department of parliamentary services, Carol Mills, said the original warning about a “potential protest” possibly occurring outside parliament house that day had come from the Australian Federal Police. Her staff had notified others in parliament house, including the usher.

Mills confirmed the draft rules she and her staff had prepared did not include the ban on facial coverings. That had been added after a “robust” discussion at the meeting with the presiding officers.



Callinan said parliament’s security management board – comprising herself, the sergeant at arms and the secretary of the department of parliamentary services – had no formal meetings either at the time of the interim decision or since.



But the officers had attended a meeting in the Speaker’s office that day - the final day of the last parliamentary sitting – where the Speaker and the Senate president took the decision to add the interim ban.

In a new information circular issued to parliamentarians and staff on Monday morning, the department of parliamentary services backed down on the most controversial element.

Explaining the new interim arrangements, the department said: “All visitors entering parliament house will be required to temporarily remove any coverings that prevent the recognition of facial features.

“This will enable DPS security staff to identify any person who may have been banned from entering parliament house or who may be known, or discovered, to be a security risk. Once this process has taken place, visitors are free to move about the public spaces of the building, including all chamber galleries, with facial coverings in place.”