Senator BROCKMAN (Western Australia—Deputy Government Whip in the Senate) (15:20): I rise in the debate to take note of the answers to various questions. Senator Ayres, I had some hope when you asked your question; you actually asked a policy question in this place—a policy question! It's been so long since we've heard a policy question from those opposite. It was such a relief, but now, in the taking note debate, we get to the point where we're back to the same old, inside the Beltway, politics for the sake of politics from the Labor Party that we've seen so often. Labor have form in this area. I find it almost extraordinary that they are the ones who want to bring up Sam Dastyari. We heard from Senator Cormann earlier; we heard about some of the exploits of that particular individual in the past and some of the activities that he was involved in that led to his eventual departure from this place. It is quite extraordinary for the Labor Party, who have got such form in this area, to be running these sorts of lines—this attack on a single coalition member of parliament—to muddy the waters on their own pretty shabby dealings. We've all heard Labor's new policy to ban plastic bags—it's not an environmental policy; it's a donation policy. The Labor Party have got a track record of using these sorts of thinly veiled xenophobic attacks against those they don't like. Talking about the Adani coalmine, the member for Sydney said: 'You cannot rely on an Indian mining company to bring jobs to Central and North Queensland.' We all remember Michael Daley's claims about Asians with PhDs taking jobs. We all remember Luke Foley talking about 'white flight'. And we all remember the union campaigns against the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement. We remember the paid advertisement on TV featuring—well, let's say a Caucasian family, the mum folding the laundry, talking about the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement. This is pretty thin, pretty sad stuff from the labour movement and from the Australian Labor Party. The member for Chisholm addressed some of these potential happenings in her first speech, in fact. She said: I do not underestimate the enormity of being the first Chinese-born member of this place. I know some people will see everything I do through the lens of my birthplace, but I hope that they will see more than just the first Chinese woman elected to this place. I hope they will see me as a strong advocate for everyone in Chisholm. Chisholm is where my heart is. I think Senator Cormann really belled the cat when he talked about the fact that the Labor candidate for Chisholm was a member of many of the same organisations that are currently the cause for the attack on the current member for Chisholm. It really does call out those opposite for their lack of focus on policy, for their desire to attack a single coalition backbencher, a backbencher who gave a clumsy interview—I think that is the best word for it. All of us, early in our careers, have perhaps given interviews where we haven't quite got the words out correctly. I think we can all very much feel for that. But Ms Liu has made it very clear in subsequent statements, including statements to parliament, that she did choose her words poorly during that interview and that, on the declarations matter, she has complied with all relevant state and federal disclosure laws. I call on those opposite to really consider what they're doing with this current attack on a single member of parliament. It is not a particularly edifying example of the way this chamber or this parliament should behave, and I certainly would ask all members opposite to reflect on that.