Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) and the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Senator Payne) to questions without notice asked by Senators Ayres and Watt today relating to Australia’s relationship with China.

I thought that today's question time was pretty instructive. The strongest indication I think was when Senator Birmingham had an opportunity to signal a change in direction and an effort under his leadership to respond effectively to these questions of national interest, and I'm disappointed to see that the new leader in this place failed that test. It should have been a pretty easy test really. On one side, there's a national interest, and on the other side there's the partisan interest. It's manifestly in the national interest to call out the conduct of Senator Abetz, and it's manifestly in the national interest to call out the conduct of Senators Canavan, Christensen and Kelly in relation to their wild, unhelpful and reckless comments in relation to the whole host of issues that go to our relationship with China. So weak is Senator Birmingham's grip on the coalition caucus, so shallow his commitment to principle and to the national interest, that he squibbed it.

Australians of Chinese descent will be watching very closely. What they will see is that, for all the fundraising dinners, all of the nice words and all the grooming of members of the Chinese-Australian community, when push comes to shove the Liberals and Nationals will never stand for the Chinese-Australian community, not even when it's easy, not even when it's straightforward. It should be straightforward. What we heard was Minister Payne in here exhorting people in the Senate, other senators, to follow her example that the most important principle here was freedom of speech. Well, there are other principles that matter too—principles of responsibility, principles of leadership, principles of not being reckless when it comes to the national interest.

I thought that what Senator Payne said came very close to what we remember Senator Brandis saying, that everyone's got a right to be a bigot. People in this place have responsibilities. I say that Senator Abetz was wrong in his approach on the Foreign Affairs Committee for three reasons: (1) it was morally reprehensible, (2) what Senator Abetz said reinforces the Chinese Communist Party line that they are delivering to people of Chinese descent all around the world and in Australia, and (3) it reinforces the Chinese Communist Party government's propaganda line within China.

There is an important distinction here. I don't say that Senator Abetz is a racist. I disagree strongly with Senator Abetz, but I don't see him that way. But his conduct here is the result of assumptions that are driven by views about race. What he asked those three witnesses to do was unconditionally condemn the Chinese Communist Party dictatorship—despite its McCarthyist overtones. But at least Joe McCarthy asked everyone the same question; Senator Abetz only asked those witnesses—nobody else. They came with a genuine submission to this diaspora inquiry, talking about the issues of interference, the issues of dislocation, asking for a safe space for debate and support for their engagement but they had the door slammed in their face. Just when they were asking for tolerance and inclusion, they got the cold shoulder.

What Senator Abetz said reinforces the propaganda line that is taken by the government in China to Australians of Chinese descent. They say, 'You will never be accepted here'. We know this isn't true. We know that since the gold rush Chinese Australians have been a core part of the Australian story. But Senator Abetz sent the opposite message. People of good faith seeking inclusion were given the cold shoulder. Finally, sadly, Senator Abetz's message was a propaganda victory for the Chinese government in the context of the difficult issues we face in our relationship today. (Time expired)