Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (09:39): Well, that was it. I move: That the Senate take note of the explanation. Dare I call it an explanation—the few words, the pithy blurb by the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Yet again we see the arrogance of this government, refusing to be accountable to this parliament, refusing to respond to public allegations and refusing to put the national interest first. As they leave the chamber, ladies and gentlemen, this shows what this government thinks of the national interest. Walk out because you don't actually want to defend Australia's national interest. What a shameful group of cowards they are. In the past week, and including today— The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Colbeck, on a point of order. Senator Colbeck: Senator Wong's comments are clearly a reflection on senators on this side. I would ask you to consider whether they're— The PRESIDENT: My ruling over the last 48 hours, which I have discussed with the Clerk, was that where reflections are specific in nature and, I might say, directly identifiable to an individual, they are out of order; where they are made collectively in political debate, they are not necessarily out of order. I will encourage senators to be careful with their language, but I do not believe that crossed the line, given my rulings from the last 48 hours. Senator WONG: Thank you, Mr President. I thank you for your consistency. Well, what we have seen in this past week is Senator Cormann and Senator Payne refusing on seven separate occasions to assure this parliament and this Senate that one of its members, the member for Chisholm, is a fit and proper person to be in the Australian parliament. Now we have had it for the eighth time, with Senator Cormann again refusing to assure the Senate that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to be in this place. In fact, he refused to talk about anything at all. Do you know what he said? 'Gladys Liu was the elected member for Chisholm.' Well, that's not an answer to the issues and questions which are being raised. He said, 'The coalition won the election.' Well, that's not an answer to the serious allegations and questions which have been raised. He said that their tax policy is better. Well, that's not an answer to issues and allegations which have been raised. In fact, there were no answers because they have none. We have nothing from the government when it comes to responding to the allegations, the concerns and the issues which are being raised publicly, including by members of the Liberal Party, about the member for Chisholm. But, as inadequate as it was, we heard a little bit from Senator Cormann. We've yet to hear anything at all in the parliament from the member for Chisholm. The Prime Minister has hit the mute button when it comes to the member for Chisholm. The Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, and Senator Cormann continue to try and distract and claim there's nothing here to see. They're saying that we shouldn't dare, as the opposition, to ask questions about the member for Chisholm. Well, can they explain this: why is the media filled with reports that have their origins in leaks from the Liberal Party? Why is the media filled with reports that have their origin in leaks from your party, the Victorian branch of the Liberal Party? The government doesn't want to talk about that. They try to distract attention from that fact by impugning those opposite in our efforts to raise legitimate questions. But, whilst the Prime Minister is trying to project a united front, the member for Chisholm herself is yet to front the parliament. There are Liberal MPs and senators who are horrified at the Prime Minister's failure to assure the national interest. We know from what has been written publicly and what the Liberal Party members are saying privately that there are concerns. Let's remember how we got here. For weeks now questions have been raised over whether or not Ms Gladys Liu's connections make her a fit and proper person to be in the Australian parliament. In an effort to address those questions, the member for Chisholm gave a TV interview, an infamous interview, with Mr Bolt. The facts are that her answers in her interview simply raised more questions. So, in an attempt to deal with those questions, the Prime Minister's Office then wrote a press release that was issued in Ms Liu's name. And, when that in turn raised new questions about why her statements are so wildly inconsistent, the Prime Minister gave a press conference where he claimed that the only thing that happened was that she had given a clumsy interview. He was trying to create the impression she was a political novice. Well, those facts really are not supported. The member for Chisholm has been an active fundraiser and organiser for the Liberal Party for a long time. She, in fact, first ran for preselection in 2006. She was an adviser to Premiers Baillieu and Napthine, and she certainly has drawn attention over time, including running a social media campaign during the federal election in 2016, including one in relation to LGBTI Australians. She subsequently denied doing so, until faced with clear evidence. She has certainly been a prolific fundraiser. According to her preselection application, which can only have been leaked by her own colleagues in the Liberal Party, she fundraised $1 million. That's a pretty extraordinary sum for somebody outside of parliament, let alone someone in the parliament. In the Herald Sun today is the latest in an avalanche of reports raising serious questions that the member for Chisholm should answer. We see again questions around a range of activities, a range of allegations—a suggestion that references, for example, for permanent residency were promised to Chinese students or overseas students. We still have silence from the member for Chisholm. I ask this question: how are people supposed to have confidence in the member for Chisholm when she won't be accountable to them and she won't even speak in the place to which she's been elected on the issues which have been raised publicly? Now, as I said, it is clear there are many in the Liberal Party who simply do not have confidence in the handling of these matters by Prime Minister Morrison or the member for Chisholm. Last week, we saw a report in TheWest Australiananonymously quoting one of the Prime Minister's own MPs—and I note that it is Mr Hastie's hometown paper—'There should have been concerns when she was chosen to stand as a candidate and I believe those concerns were ignored.' The Herald Sun also reported—and this is an extraordinary allegation—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'. These are not my words. This is what has been reported in the Herald Sun. It was reported that security agencies had concerns such that it made it unwise to preselect her. I accept, given the position I hold now and that I have previously held, that people don't discuss the advice of security agencies. But, when such an allegation is made on such a serious issue on the front page of a national and serious newspaper, it should be answered, and it should be answered by the government of the day, because it is a very serious allegation to say that the Liberal Party was warned that it was unwise to preselect her. It may be true; it may not be true; I'm not in a position to assert that. But we are in a position to know that was printed on the basis of sources obviously within the Liberal Party. And at no stage has the Prime Minister of this country responded to that allegation and at no stage has his minister representing him here responded to that allegation. That has nothing to do with her interview. It is whether or not the Prime Minister is putting his political interests ahead of Australia's national interest. Government ministers have repeatedly in this place refused to assure the parliament that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to be in the parliament, and it is obvious that the member for Chisholm will not provide that assurance. As I said earlier, much of the information in the reports originates from leaks inside the Victorian branch of the Liberal Party. You can probably tell me more about this than I would know, Mr President. It is obviously a very happy place at the moment! The government is trying to distract us from that fact by impugning attempts by the Labor Party and by the media to raise legitimate questions. And, shamefully, Mr Morrison has injected race into this debate. He's trying to shield himself from accountability by hiding behind the Chinese Australian community. He's suggesting that to ask legitimate questions when public concerns have been raised—not by the Labor Party but by others—is an attack on the entire Chinese Australian population. If we follow his logic, every time you're asked a difficult question it constitutes a racial smear on all Chinese Australians. Well, I'm pretty confident that that's not his view if I'm asked a difficult question or if any other Labor member who happens to be of Chinese heritage is asked a difficult question. That's not a smear on all Chinese Australians. In fact, making this about race is a really grubby political tactic and a dishonourable political tactic. It might help Mr Morrison deal with a political problem of his own making, but it certainly will not help Chinese Australians who seek to make, and are making, a contribution to this country. I also want to make a comment about the diversity of the Chinese Australian community. It's a very diverse community. You have Chinese Australians who are descendants of those who came during the gold rush. There are others, like myself, who are ethnically Chinese—in my case, my father—and were born in other parts of Asia. This is the South-East Asian community: children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the diaspora from southern China into South-East Asia. There are some who are Taiwanese Australian. There are those who were welcomed by a Labor prime minister to stay in this country after the Tiananmen crackdown and there are those who have come more recently from mainland China. It is a diverse community and it is a hardworking community. It is a community that does share a love and loyalty for this country. It is also an informed community, and so many Chinese Australians can see right through what the Prime Minister is doing. Senator Ruston interjecting— Senator WONG: I'll take that interjection. They can see what I'm doing, yes. I'm raising legitimate questions about Australia's national security and I'm responding to your grubby political tactic of trying to make this about race. Senator Ruston interjecting— Senator WONG: Yes, you, because you are part of it. You are a cabinet minister, and it is shameful. As someone who has experienced racism firsthand, I object most strenuously to the way you are using it in order to divert attention from legitimate questions that even your own Liberal Party have asked about these issues. I'd make the point that the Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, is taking this approach in spite of warnings from inside his own party room. As Mr Hartcher quoted, a senior Liberal said, 'This is a profound error.' There are many Asian Australians who have experienced racism in their time in this country. I remember when Mr Morrison's hero, John Howard, called for cuts to Asian immigration. I remember what that meant for our community, and I remember that there were some in the Liberal Party then who stood up against it. But there were many who did not. I also remember this Prime Minister—the man who now says that you can't use race and that everything about this issue is about race—using the slur 'Shanghai Sam' 17 times, and then he misled the country and denied doing it. Really, does anyone believe him? Did you listen to him in the House of Representatives? 'I didn't hear the question.' Did anyone listen to the audio? It's as clear as a bell. And he's saying, 'I didn't use either of those phrases.' I think anyone who watched the Prime Minister in the House of Representatives saw precisely what he was doing. He got caught out. He hadn't told the truth and he got caught out. Remember, this is the same Mr Morrison who, according to leaks out of the Liberal Party, urged the shadow cabinet to exploit community concerns about Muslim immigration. This is the bloke who's lecturing us about race. His own colleagues leaked on him and said he urged the coalition shadow cabinet to exploit community concerns about Muslim immigration. He urged the coalition to appeal to fear of immigrants. Everybody can see that this Prime Minister is seeking to avoid questions and he is using a grubby smear in order to try and avoid answering legitimate questions about the member for Chisholm. Well, we're not going to be deterred nor intimidated by this obvious distraction, and I suspect members of the media won't be. I suspect members of the community will not be. Because, ultimately, we are judged in this country not by our ethnicity or our faith, but by what we do—by our values and our actions. If one is elected as a member or senator in this place, we are accountable to the people who elect us through the parliament. That is the Westminster system. As yet, we have not had the member for Chisholm have the courage and the decency to stand up in this parliament and respond to the very, very lengthy, very serious set of allegations and concerns which have been raised about her and she should. The member for Chisholm must be accountable, and Mr Morrison should make her be so.