Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (15:05): I seek leave to move a motion relating to an explanation from the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Leave not granted. Senator WONG: Pursuant to contingent notice, I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Wong) moving a motion relating to consideration of matter, namely a motion relating to an explanation from the Minister representing the Prime Minister. This is a motion which, if passed, will require Senator Cormann, on behalf of the Prime Minister, to come in on Monday at 12.20 to provide an assurance to the Senate that he refused on multiple occasions to give today, and that is the assurance from the government and the Prime Minister that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to remain a member of the Australian parliament. This government is failing in its most important duty, and that is to assure Australians that it is properly, sensibly and apolitically managing Australia's national security. For weeks now, questions have been raised over whether the member for Chisholm's connections mean that she may not be a fit and proper person to be in our parliament. In an effort to address the questions, she gave a television interview, a very famous television interview, but the problem is that her answers simply raised more questions. In an attempt to deal with those new questions, the Prime Minister's office wrote a press release that was issued in the member for Chisholm's name. When that in turn raised new questions about why the member for Chisholm's statements are so wildly inconsistent, the Prime Minister then gave a press conference where he claimed that the only thing that has happened is that the member for Chisholm has given a somewhat clumsy interview. He's claimed that there is no credible suggestion of any inappropriate behaviour in relation to the member for Chisholm. Well, patently that is untrue, because this morning Australia awoke to an extraordinary report in a number of newspapers that senior Liberals were warned by security agencies that concerns about the member for Chisholm's links to the Chinese Communist Party made it unwise to preselect her. This is not the Labor Party asserting this; this is a public report in a newspaper, and it needs to be responded to by the government. It needs to have a response by the government—a response that is more than hyperbole, more than bluster and more than aggression and actually deals with a very serious accusation that has been publicly made about a member of this parliament: the assertion that security agencies warned senior Liberals that concerns about Ms Liu's links to the Communist Party of China made it unwise to preselect her. It has nothing to do with her interview; it is about whether the Prime Minister is prepared to put winning marginal seats ahead of national security and whether he is now putting his one-seat majority ahead of national security. One of the government's own MPs is quoted in the papers as saying: … there should have been concerns when she was being chosen to stand … and I believe those concerns were ignored. The Prime Minister should provide an honest answer. But, instead of the Prime Minister and his ministers who have responsibility for national security and who sit on the NSC providing an honest answer, this government and this Prime Minister are playing clever tricks on race. I will say this: there is only one person who is making these specific and serious concerns about the member for Chisholm an issue about race, and that is Scott Morrison. There is only one person who is linking these specific, serious concerns about the member for Chisholm to the entire Chinese Australian population, and that is Mr Morrison. It is the Prime Minister who is using this issue as a shield from accountability to the parliament and the Australian people. The Prime Minister is hiding behind the entire Chinese Australian community to avoid saying why he has ignored warnings from our national security agencies. Can I say that is one of the lowest acts I have seen in all my time in this place—that you would use Chinese Australians in order to avoid answering questions about why you are ignoring advice from national security agencies. Because of what the Prime Minister has done, it is more important than ever for Chinese Australians and our inclusive democracy for these specific concerns to be addressed, because all of us in this place must be able to provide a public assurance that we have no conflict of interest in serving the Australian people. That is a basic democratic requirement. I would say to the minister: if you avoid this motion, if you avoid coming in to give a statement that provides the assurance that you and Senator Payne have repeatedly declined to give—that Ms Liu is a fit and proper person to sit in this parliament—it really says that you do not understand the role you have in this democracy. (Time expired)