Lidia Thorpe: Senators discuss action against protest as expert points out her oath defence is ‘heir’ thin

Senate President Sue Lines says independent Lidia Thorpe is properly sworn in as a senator despite confusion over her mispronunciation of a word.

Senators are set to discuss if action can be taken against Senator Thorpe’s protest during King Charles’ parliamentary welcome as she declared no one could kick her out.

Cabinet minister Katy Gallagher, the leader of Government business in the upper house, and Opposition Senate leader Simon Birmingham both flagged on Thursday that they would examine how best to respond to the protest and Senator Thorpe’s subsequent revelation she deliberately mispronounced words in her sworn affirmation to the Crown.

Senator Thorpe has denied she broke the affirmation to the monarch all parliamentarians must swear when she marched toward King Charles and Queen Camilla during a reception at Parliament on Monday yelling, “You are not our king” and accusing the royals of genocide.

Since the incident, which made international headlines, Senator Thorpe has faced staunch criticism from across the political fold and community – including respected Indigenous leaders – and calls for her resignation.

But the Gunnai, Gunditjmara and Djab Wurrung woman insists she can’t be kicked out of parliament for breaching the parliamentary oath because she technically didn’t swear allegiance to the crown.

She claimed on Wednesday she swore allegiance deliberately to the Queen’s “hairs”, instead of “heirs”.

But on Thursday after questions about what this meant for the validity of her position, she walked this back, saying she simply mispronounced what was written on the card.

“I’m an independent. No one can kick me out of there. I’m there to fulfil my job,” she said.

She described having to take the parliamentary oath as “completely inappropriate and self-destroying”.

“I have a Senate seat for the next three and a half years, and I’ll be using that to get justice for my people,” she added, calling her work “unfinished business”.

Senator Lines had to pull Senator Thorpe into line in 2022 when she initially referred to “the colonising her majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second” while reading the oath.

The Senate president made the then-Green read the words as written.

On Thursday, Senator Lines said she believed Senator Thorpe had been properly sworn.

“What I would say is senators mispronounce words all the time in there,” Senator Lines told The West Australian.

“She is, for all intents and purposes, a properly sworn senator and ... if a senator has a particular view on that, then that’s something that can be raised in the Senate and the Senate will make a decision on what it wants to do.

“But she is. She’s properly sworn. She’s signed the oath because when you sign the book, you sign the oath.”

Constitutional law expert Anne Twomey was also of the opinion because Senator Thorpe had also signed a written version of the affirmation, correctly spelled, and that the wording pledged allegiance to the Queen’s “heirs and successors”, the way she pronounced any of it did not matter.

“This particular issue is completely bonkers and frankly, normally I say ‘go away’ but it’s an opportunity to explain things to people about the constitution and how it operates,” she told ABC.

Senator Gallagher said there would be discussions next week about how the chamber could respond to Senator Thorpe’s behaviour and how the institution of the Senate was upheld and respected.

She said Senator Thorpe should reflect on her role and “how she wishes to play that role in what’s an important institution, including for the causes that she seeks to represent”.

As to the question of whether the affirmation had been properly sworn, Senator Gallagher said there were plenty of experts who would have a view.

“Everything about this incident really needs to be resolved and considered in the lead-up to when we sit again as a chamber,” she said.

Senator Birmingham said Senator Thorpe’s claims meant there was now doubt over her eligibility and and validity of taking up a seat in Parliament.

“Lidia Thorpe seems to be trying to wear as some badge of honour her claim that she is subverted that process, and in fact that she didn’t make or take the affirmation of office,” he said.

“That is her claim – it is not one that I’m making up or seeking to create an issue around, she has volunteered that information.”

Senator Lines said any question around challenging validity was up the the chamber and her role was to enforce the standing orders and ensure there was respect in the chamber.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton said Senator Thorpe’s protest was predictable and he thought the Government should have been prepared for something like it to happen.

“I couldn’t see her from where we were seated on the stage, but I’m told that she had her back turned to King during the course of his speech and it was obvious that she was going to make some sort of scene,” he told 2GB’s Ray Hadley.

“The fact that the government took so long to react to it, surely it would have been planned for. And I just think it’s all about her, all about attention and (I’m) really, frankly, loathe to give it to her.”

As Senator Thorpe started her protest on Monday, she was ushered out of the Great Hall by the Prime Minister’s personal security officers.