![Statements from the current special minister of state Scott Ryan, and his predecessor Mathias Cormann reveal the details ...](/content/dam/images/g/s/j/k/f/f/image.related.afrArticleLead.620x350.gsjwcl.png/1478523590768.jpg)
![](/web/20161108134622im_/http://www.afr.com/content/dam/images/g/h/c/f/4/z/image.imgtype.afrAuthorAvatar.120x120.png/1432867148068.png)
Monday, November 7, was a particularly weird day in federal politics. But the really disturbing development, amid a wall of strangeness about racial discrimination, Donald Trump, climate change and abandoned colleagues, was the spectre of two political parties choosing before the federal election to ignore clear signs that candidates for the Senate were not eligible to stand.
The Coalition chose to ignore that Bob Day from Family First had dodgy financial arrangements in place which must have raised questions about his eligibility.
One Nation chose to ignore that there were multiple reasons why its lead candidate in Western Australia, Rod Culleton, was not eligible to stand, or at best, would soon be rendered ineligible.
Monday was the day when the Senate had to consider referring the election of Day and Culleton to the High Court.
The government also asked the Senate to refer the matter while failing to release the legal advice it had received.
The ensuing debate threw up some extraordinary developments, including Pauline Hanson abandoning Culleton.
There was an often bizarre intervention by Culleton which – at its pointy bit – saw him reverse his previous position that he would abstain from voting in the Senate while his position was unclear.
But the most interesting revelations concerned the Coalition's approach to Bob Day – long regarded as the friendliest vote for the government on the Senate crossbench.
Statements from the current special minister of state, Scott Ryan, and his predecessor Mathias Cormann reveal the details of a seriously concerning lack of curiosity about Day's circumstances.
Cormann told the Senate that "a few hours" after he had been sworn into the job on December 29 last year, Day emailed him quizzing him about whether the government would be paying him rent on his offices.
While Cormann insisted that queries kept being made of Day, and suggested the former senator was less than forthcoming in his answers, the Department of Finance became aware some time in February or March that "the bank account to receive the rental payments was an account linked to the then Senator Day".
Did not seek legal advice
That is, at least three months before the federal election, the government knew Day's business arrangements were highly suspect but did nothing to stop him standing.
Cormann told the Senate at "at no point did I received any advice" the arrangements could be a potential breach of section 44 of the Constitution (which is the matter the High Court is now expected to be asked to consider).
And one suspects the Coalition thought it might all go away since Day wasn't regarded as all that likely to be returned.
But it did not seek legal advice on the matter until August, when Ryan and Cormann informed the prime minister that there might be a problem.
Similarly, while Pauline Hanson abandoned Culleton suggesting he had misled her, there is plenty of evidence that One Nation was warned that there were multiple reasons Culleton was not a viable candidate for the Senate.
Now both the Coalition and One Nation's political positions are damaged. And the High Court has some very complex questions to consider in both cases.
Meanwhile, Culleton has dealt himself back in to an increasingly complex game of horse trading in the Senate. With Day gone, the negotiating power of every cross bencher has been increased.
It is feeding a frenzy of demands for deals on Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, restrictions on imported building products, protection for building industry customers, amendments to the backpacker tax and paid parental leave.
It is not a parliamentary year that is going to end well.