Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queensland) (15:07): This whole kerfuffle, if I might call it that, has been the subject of a lot of comment around the place and a lot of discussion in this particular chamber and in the other place. The thing that I'm so curious about is why those Labor Party members of parliament who have been named and who have actually admitted certain inappropriate procedures as far as their citizenship goes have not referred themselves to the High Court. I'm particularly interested in a number of people here. I see Senator Gallagher coming into the chamber. I don't know what her position is. Senator Gallagher: Read my statement. Senator IAN MACDONALD: I don't think I have ever heard her indicate it. But I have read certain articles written by particular journalists as recently as 8 November and 10 November raising issues about Senator Gallagher's position. Senator Pratt: She made a statement to the chamber. It couldn't be more transparent. Senator IAN MACDONALD: I think the interjection was saying that she's fine. If she is fine, can we see the evidence? Can we have a look at the evidence? If there is evidence, why would you not produce it? The same goes for other Labor Party people. It's an unfortunate saga in the annals of this parliament, I have to say. It's something that, I might say, has come completely from left field. Everyone's blaming Mr Turnbull for it, but it's very, very clear that it has nothing to do with Mr Turnbull and nothing to do with the government as such. It is simply an issue that has arisen under the Constitution, and certain facts have come forward that have made a number of parliamentarians think carefully about their origins. Could I just, as an aside, say that my great-great-great-great—or something—grandfather came out from Scotland, not a few years ago, like Senator Cameron, but in the 1850s. On my mother's side, they came out from Germany, I think, in the 1860s. But I don't know. Perhaps Senator Gallagher has appropriate advice or appropriate evidence. But why isn't it tabled? Why isn't it tabled in this chamber? Why don't the other Labor members of parliament who have been questioned table the information? If it's there—if Senator Gallagher says, yes, she's fine; it's there; she's got the renunciation; it's all tickety-boo, so to speak—then let's see it and put the question beyond doubt. If it's not beyond doubt, then it requires Senator Gallagher and others in the Labor Party to do the honourable thing, as has been done by many coalition members, in getting the High Court to look at it, to determine it and to make it clear one way or the other. If there is a reasonable explanation for why Senator Gallagher shouldn't do that, then please tell us. But, otherwise, why don't we just put the matter beyond dispute? Why don't we table publicly all of the relevant information so that the public at large can be assuaged? As I say, these journalists are respectable people, as far as journalists go, and they seem to have some doubt about Senator Gallagher's citizenship. I don't really have the doubt, because I simply don't know. But, if the evidence is there, why aren't Labor people, including those in this chamber, coming forward with the documentation to put the matter entirely beyond doubt and entirely beyond argument? That would seem to be a very reasonable way to go.