as a non-political legal advocate and advisor to parliament exists in order to complement the Attorney-General who due to their political role can generally not offer legal services to government. Some concern arose when the role of Solicitor-General was first created concerning the lack of accountability in the position. In order to address these concerns particular prominence has been given to the Attorney-General maintaining all accountability for the actions of the Solicitor-General. Solicitor-General Gleeson in 2014 remarked that the Solicitor and Attorney-General should work together in order to be sure that the Attorney-General is adequately briefed and advised to be able to report to parliament. Gleeson commented that his particular system involved monthly reports to the Attorney-General briefing them of any requests for advice and reports of any advice provided. In 2015, Guidance Note 11 codified that all legal advice requested of the Solicitor-General and subsequently provided to be given to the Attorney-General. Resignation of Solicitor-General Gleeson On 7 November 2016, Solicitor-General Gleeson resigned from the post citing in his resignation letter that his relationship with Attorney-General Brandis was “irretrievably broken”.Gleeson criticised Brandis suggesting that he was not referred to on marriage equality and anti-terrorism citizenship laws. Gleeson also is remarked as being frustrated about his opinion being misrepresented to the public. He claimed in particular that he was not consulted concerning legislation aiming to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals under anti-terror laws when it was suggested by the government he had provided advice that the legislation would succeed against a challenge in the High Court. The general consensus however is that the central issue was Gleeson claimed to not have been consulted regarding the Legal Services Amendment (Solicitor-General Opinions) Direction 2016, which necessitated approval by the Attorney-General of any legal questions brought to the Solicitor-General for advice. Gleeson suggested this effectively blocked the Solicitor-General providing advice without the express permission of the Attorney-General which is contradictory to the independence of the role from the executive branch of government. He explained this was especially problematic in the situation where an election resulted in a hung parliament and the Governor-General sought the advice of the Solicitor-General which under the amendment would be unlawful. Brandis claimed in the Explanatory Statement of the amendment that he had in fact consulted Gleeson and sought feedback. The dispute resulted in the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs launching an inquiry. The result