Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I have to say that the Labor Party really are lost—they're lost at sea on this one. Every single speaker who has come into this House on the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020 claims to support the bill and then spends their entire time arguing against it. I think it goes to the problem with the Labor Party right now; they don't know if they're Arthur or Martha. They don't know what they believe in, the poor dears!

Here we have it again: we actually have a bill addressing a very serious issue of foreign policy and we still don't know what the Labor Party actually believe in. 'We support the bill,' they say, 'and, therefore, let's withdraw it, kick it into the long grass and just think for a little bit longer until we come up with a different idea.' This is the problem with the modern Labor Party! They haven't got a clue—not a clue!

The leader of the attack today was the deputy opposition leader. Guess what he started with? He started by claiming that the foreign minister's suggestion that the international institutions might need to be improved is nothing but sloganism—sloganism!

Imagine that, Deputy Speaker. This is the position of the Labor Party. What that implies is that the Labor Party are perfectly happy with all international institutions as they stand today. They're happy with them because the Labor Party have nothing to offer. They have no policy prescriptions, period. We're not talking about some obscure area of government public policy. We are talking about our foreign policy. We are talking about our national interest. We are talking about the security and safety of our nation, which is the core, No. 1 principle and objective of government. And the Labor Party are lost.

I think what we all know is that we are amidst a period of unprecedented uncertainty for those of us living today. That was the case before COVID-19. COVID-19 hit, and all of the complexities of the international political economy were accentuated. And here we are today. There is a need for us to do what nations do with foreign policy—that is, have an outward expression of who we are as a nation, of what we believe in. And what we believe in is best defined by what unites us. What unites us is not ethnicity, not the colour of our skin, not our history, not our gender, not how we walk, not how we talk. The one thing that unites us in this country is a common set of values, and those values are liberal values: freedom, equality, rule of law et cetera—the very values that define the nation we are but also the world in which we wish to operate.

It's one thing for a Commonwealth government to reflect those values in foreign policy and act accordingly. But it's a far greater challenge for other tiers of government—state and territory governments, and local councils—to do the same. It's very difficult for other tiers of government, and also universities, without the demonstrable expertise that lies with the Commonwealth, to get it right and to be consistent. That is the challenge we face and that is why today I stand to commend the Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020. This is why it's so vitally important. This bill plugs a gap. It plugs a gap in what should be a team Australia approach.

As some of those opposite have themselves said, Australia should speak with one voice. Internationally, it is vitally important that we speak with one voice, we coordinate and we act in a united fashion. But we need instruments to assist other tiers of government in this regard. A team Australia approach means that we continue intelligence briefings to premiers and chief ministers. It means seeking a level of bipartisanship on foreign affairs where we can. It means continuing to share intelligence with the Leader of the Opposition. And, in the words of those opposite during this debate, it means to speak with one voice. But, to plug that gap, we need the measures outlined in this bill.

We know that, in reality, states and territories, in an increasingly globalised world, will continue to engage with foreign governments and their entities. And with that engagement comes a commensurate degree of risk—risk that actions of states and territories or universities may not align with the foreign policy adopted by our nation. We cannot afford for such inconsistencies to exist. If they do exist, we need to make sure they are not exploited by foreign powers—foreign powers that understandably will pursue their own interests, but unacceptably may pursue their interests at the expense of our own, and that is what we must be mindful of. It is of a concern that no formal mechanism is in place today that provides the Commonwealth with oversight of arrangements entered into between Australian states and territories, and foreign governments. This is the gap to which I refer. This is the gap that needs to be plugged, and this bill does so.

It would be unreasonable if we were to expect states and territories, let alone local councils or universities, to have a full understanding of Australia's foreign policy—the specific risks and the sensitivities. Thus the mechanisms in this bill will assist, not constrain, other tiers of government along with universities and so forth. I want to emphasise that very point. In no way does this bill discourage states, territories and others from entering into arrangements with foreign governments and their entities, but it does propose that any such arrangements must align with Australia's broader foreign policy and our national interests. I think all Australians would agree that that simple objective is more than fair enough. To this end, the bill enables the minister to prevent negotiations or entry into arrangements or to invalidate existing arrangements where they are found to be inconsistent with Australia's foreign policy or where they adversely affect Australia's foreign relations.

The Labor speaker before me referred to the Victorian government's engagement with the People's Republic of China in relation to the Belt and Road Initiative, otherwise known as the BRI. It is important to therefore emphasise that this bill, regardless of the media surrounding it, including reference to the Victorian BRI deal, is country neutral. It is a framework that does not seek to target any one particular state. It's an act which is concerned with protecting and managing Australia's foreign relations with all foreign states, across all levels of government in Australia and it applies to all arrangements, whether or not they be legally binding. Nevertheless, let me openly address Labor's claim about Victoria's BRI deal, because it is a good case study on what a team Australia is not about.

As some in this House will know, the BRI is a mechanism used by China, the PRC, for prioritising overseas lending, investments and trade. The point here is not about one's view on the BRI and whether it's good or whether it's bad. The point is not about how the foreign minister might conclude on Victoria's deal with China on the BRI after an assessment under the terms referred to in this bill. The point here is simply this: it is ludicrous that despite the Australian Commonwealth government having neither signed up to nor endorsed the BRI, the Victorian government decided to go ahead and sign themselves up anyway. They did so without proper consultation with the Commonwealth. They did so without having the likes of DFAT do a detailed due diligence for their consideration. Therein lies the problem, because we cannot afford to see Australia picked off polity by polity. What we should see is Australia act as a united country, and a united nation, when it comes to foreign affairs.

This bill will ensure that the Minister for Foreign Affairs can assess arrangements between state and territory governments and foreign governments and entities related to them, and whether or not they would adversely affect Australia's foreign relations or be inconsistent with our foreign affairs—our policy. We know that any arrangement, whether by state, territory, university or other, with a foreign power will typically involve complex foreign policy considerations. These considerations are exclusively the remit of the Commonwealth government, and this bill reinforces that fundamental principle. It gives effect to the head of power that lies with the Commonwealth. The bill therefore carries my support, and I'm happy to commend it to the House.

See this speech in context