House debates

Monday, 21 November 2016

Questions without Notice

National Security

2:52 pm

Photo of Luke HowarthLuke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on the importance of maintaining a consistent approach, to safeguard Australia's national security?

2:53 pm

Photo of Ms Julie BishopMs Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank the member for Petrie for his question. As he well knows, under the coalition government Australia's reputation has been reinforced as a strong and reliable partner and ally in terms of our strategic and defence contribution to security challenges in our region and globally. We can be relied upon to support others. We are dependable. Most importantly, we are consistent in our approach to security issues, including border protection and defence.

We are prepared to advocate, to defend and to fight for our national interest while building stronger relationships with other nations and partners to strive for increased peace and security. A key to our global and regional standing has been the consistency in our approach. Other nations are clear about our values and for what and where we stand.

The contrast with the opposition could not be greater. Under this weak Leader of the Opposition, Labor's border protection policy is all over the place—it often depends on the time of the day—as they lurch from position to position. And it is clear that the Leader of the Opposition has learned nothing from the catastrophic border protection failures when they were in government. Not content with undermining our national security on that front, the opposition has now proposed a downgrade to our security alliance with the United States. But, once again, they are all over the shop, sometimes contradicting themselves within the same interview or speech. It reminds me of Labor's position on the South China Sea. They have five positions. Well, they have got four stated positions and a no position from the Leader of the Opposition; that makes five.

It is instructive that when under pressure the opposition declares its bipartisan support for the US alliance, but then it crab-walks away from the alliance by saying it is at a 'change point', knowing full well that this kind of rhetoric from the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate taps into that very rich vein of anti-American sentiment in the Labor left, as it seeks to ever more align itself with the Greens on national security. The trend is clear: the Leader of the Opposition describing the President-elect of the United States as 'barking mad'; the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate calling for a downgrade to the ANZUS alliance. The Leader of the Opposition is quite prepared to put our security alliance with United States at risk for some cheap domestic political points at home.

The Leader of the House described the lack of judgement. Combine the lack of judgement with his weakness—the Leader of the Opposition is a threat to Australia's national security. Whether it is border protection, or whether it is our alliances, Labor cannot be trusted on national security—no aspect of our national security.