Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. The people of Goldstein are very interested in defence and economic security. Will the minister inform the House why a sovereign defence industry capability is vital to Australia's national security and international interests, and is he aware of any other approach?

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Goldstein for his question. It is a very important point. This government, of course, made defence industry one of the fundamental inputs to capability for the very reasons that he enunciated. It is vital to build our sovereign capability in defence industry to truly protect our national security and promote our international interests. To play our part in maintaining an international rules based order, we need to maintain our role as a strategic regional power, and to do that we need a sovereign defence industry capability.

For example, we have a vital national interest in ensuring free passage for our trade and commerce through the South China Sea. This has been a bipartisan issue in recent years, but I wonder if the Leader of the Opposition agrees with this statement:

The South China Sea is China's own affair. On this issue, Australia should remain neutral and respect China's decision.

That statement was made by Senator Sam Dastyari, who is the Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate and the shadow minister for consumer affairs. He is not simply a backbencher on either side of a parliament. He holds an executive role in the opposition and, if the opposition were to be elected to government, he would be a minister in a Labor government and presumably the Leader of the Government in the Senate. It is contrary to Labor Party policy, it is contrary to the government's policy, and it is contrary to our national security and to our international interests. It does not endorse an international rules based order.

So the Leader of the Opposition needs to explain to the House or to the people, through the press, when he became aware that a business with links to the Chinese government had paid Senator Dastyari's personal debts. He needs to explain what action he took at that time and whether he is satisfied with Senator Dastyari's response to the revelations that occurred this week. Until he does that, this matter will not go away. The Leader of the Opposition needs to take responsibility for his frontbench, who are issuing contrary views to Labor policy, and it has now been revealed that the motivation for those views may be the fact that a business with links to the Chinese government paid that senator's personal debts.