Mr Brough was one of Mr Turnbull's key backers and numbers men and his elevation to the ministry is widely regarded as a reward for his plotting, especially amongst the prime minister's internal critics. Special Minister of State Mal Brough (right) has been accused of misleading Parliament. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen The opposition is accusing Mr Brough of misleading the Parliament, after the Minister claimed on Tuesday the Nine Network's 60 Minutes program edited a question put to him, about whether he asked former political staffer James Ashby to make copies of the diary of his then boss Peter Slipper. In the interview, televised in 2014, Mr Brough was shown agreeing that he asked Mr Ashby to procure Mr Slipper's diary. Mr Slipper was the Speaker at the time and the Member for Fisher, a seat Mr Brough went on to win from Mr Slipper in the 2013 election. Mr Brough told Parliament: "In relation to the 60 Minutes interview, what was put to air was not the full question."

However 60 Minutes then released the full video of the question and answer which shows the only editing that took place was cutting out the "ums and ahs" of the interviewer Liz Hayes. The government's leader of the house, Christopher Pyne (right), did not try to defend Mr Brough but instead gagged the debate in Parliament. Credit:Andrew Meares Apology to the House Mr Brough responded just before midday on Wednesday in a short statement to the House. "Yesterday during question time I said: 'In relation to the 60 Minutes interview, what was put to air was not the full question.'

"Mr Speaker, my recollection of the interview was that the question was put to me in a somewhat disjointed manner, and I answered the question without clarifying precisely what part of the question I was responding to. "This is confirmed by the tape provided by 60 Minutes and that was the reason for my answer yesterday. "Mr Speaker, I have taken the opportunity to review the tape and transcript, and apologise to the House if my statement yesterday unwittingly added to the confusion rather than clarifying the matter." Elsewhere in Parliament, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop did not say whether she thought Mr Brough's position was tenable but said she believe he had not misled Parliament. "Due process should be allowed to run and therefore the matter should be party of this investigation, but due process - allow it to run," she said.

Asked if Mr Brough had misled Parliament, Ms Bishop responded: "No I do not believe he did." When asked "why not," Ms Bishop would not elaborate and only said "because I do not believe he did." Labor renewed its attack on Wednesday morning, accusing Mr Brough of misleading Parliament. It attempted to censure the Mr Turnbull for failing to sack or stand aside Mr Brough. Mr Turnbull arrived back in Canberra early on Wednesday morning after attending climate talks in Paris. Shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus called on the House to censure Mr Turnbull, who was not present in the chamber at the time, for his "atrocious judgment in appointing the member responsible for government integrity and his complete and utter failure to show leadership and sack or even stand aside as the Special Minister of State". In a telling move, the government's leader of the house Christopher Pyne did not try and defend Mr Brough and instead simply gagged debate and used its numbers to defeat the motion.

Earlier, the veteran Liberal MP and former attorney-general Philip Ruddock did not rule out the idea of Mr Brough being stood aside. "I have heard explanations that would satisfy me but let's see how it unfolds," Mr Ruddock told the ABC. Following the 60 Minutes interview in 2014, Labor immediately asked the Australian Federal Police to investigate whether Mr Brough's conduct breached the Criminal Code and Crimes Act. Last month, Australian Federal Police raided the homes of Mr Brough and Mr Ashby in relation to their investigation prompting a renewed and sustained attack from the federal opposition in Parliament. Follow us on Twitter