The federal Parliament's own department misled the Senate with deliberately falsified evidence, according to an inquiry into maladministration at Parliament House.
The federal Parliament's own department misled the Senate with deliberately falsified evidence, according to an inquiry into maladministration at Parliament House.
The Labor Senator John Faulkner told the Senate this week the conduct of senior officers of the Department of Parliamentary Services represented ''the worst and most disgraceful behaviour I have ever seen from an agency or from any witnesses at a parliamentary committee''.
The Senate finance and public administration committee has found Parliamentary Services falsely claimed in a Senate estimates hearing that a heritage assessment had been made before two historic billiard tables were sold. A senior officer later directed that a heritage assessment be fabricated to support the misleading evidence given to the committee.
''I know of no other comparable example of evidence being fabricated or deliberately designed to deceive and mislead a Senate committee,'' Senator Faulkner said. ''This is the lowest of the low. How shameful it is that this whole episode relates to a parliamentary department.''
The ''billiards table affair'' has claimed the scalp of the former department secretary Alan Thompson, who announced his early retirement in January. Other senior officers associated with the scandal have left, been moved to new duties or are on leave.
The department came under scrutiny in February last year when questioning by Senator Faulkner revealed the two billiard tables had been sold for $5000. Both were bought by departmental officers.
The chief financial officer, Judy Konig, told the Senate estimate committee hearing: ''We have a policy that requires the heritage assessment of any items that the department is getting rid of or that have been declared surplus. In this case, these were assessed as having no heritage value.''
Mr Thompson later apologised for providing ''misleading and inaccurate information'' to the Senate, adding his department's conduct was ''inconsistent with our commitment to serve the Parliament honestly, diligently and competently''.
Nearly $100,000 was spent on reviews arising from the sale of the tables that yielded only $2000 after auctioneer and removalist fees were paid.
The Senate committee's report released this week condemned department executives for ''a series of events which at best can be called slipshod and at worst a complete lack of understanding of the duties of officers of the Parliament''.
The Senate committee inquiry has also heard of the Parliament House architect Romaldo Giurgola's ''extreme distress'' that Parliamentary Services failed to consult him on changes to the internal design of the building.
Mr Giurgola and colleagues from his firm revealed the department had over eight years failed to finalise a key document intended to guide the long-term preservation of Parliament House, and custom-made furnishings and fittings were sold off or discarded in skips.
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
What was the 'billiards table affair' at Parliament House and what did the Senate inquiry find?
The 'billiards table affair' refers to the sale of two historic billiard tables by the Department of Parliamentary Services. A Senate finance and public administration committee found the department deliberately misled the Senate by falsely claiming a heritage assessment had been done and that officers later instructed a fabricated assessment be produced to support that misleading evidence.
Who were the main people and offices named in the inquiry into maladministration at Parliament House?
The inquiry named the Department of Parliamentary Services and senior officers involved in the sale. Former department secretary Alan Thompson announced early retirement after the affair; the department's chief financial officer Judy Konig gave evidence to the committee; and Labor Senator John Faulkner strongly criticised the conduct. Architect Romaldo Giurgola was also cited for distress over failures to consult him on building design changes.
How much were the two historic billiard tables sold for and who bought them?
The two billiard tables were sold for $5,000, and both were purchased by departmental officers.
What were the financial consequences of the sale and subsequent reviews?
Nearly $100,000 was spent on reviews and follow-up related to the sale, yet the process only yielded about $2,000 after auctioneer and removalist fees were paid—highlighting a significant net loss and costly administrative fallout.
What did the Senate committee say about the department's conduct and competence?
The committee condemned department executives for what it called 'a series of events which at best can be called slipshod and at worst a complete lack of understanding of the duties of officers of the Parliament.' Senator John Faulkner described the behaviour as the 'worst and most disgraceful' he'd seen and said the falsification of evidence was particularly shameful.
What procedural and heritage management failures did the inquiry uncover?
The inquiry found the department falsely claimed a heritage assessment had been done and then had that assessment fabricated. It also heard that the Parliament House architect, Romaldo Giurgola, and his firm were not consulted on internal design changes, and that over eight years a key preservation document was not finalised while custom-made furnishings and fittings were sold or discarded.
What happened to senior staff after the committee report?
As a result of the scandal, former department secretary Alan Thompson announced his early retirement. Other senior officers associated with the affair either left, were moved to new duties, or went on leave.
What should everyday investors take away from the Parliament House maladministration story about governance and asset management?
The episode highlights how poor governance, lack of transparency and weak internal controls can lead to wasted resources and reputational damage. For everyday investors, it reinforces the importance of monitoring governance practices, accountability and clear asset-management policies in any organisation—public or private—to reduce the risk of avoidable financial loss.
Call 1300 880 160
Start a chat
Schedule a call
