Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by Senator Brandis to a question without notice asked by Senator Gallagher relating to the Deputy Prime Minister.

I move this motion on the basis that that was one of the most enjoyable question times I've had in this place for years! To watch the senators on the other side bury their heads, time after time, when Senator Brandis was on his feet was absolutely delicious! This is one of the worst days that this government could have had. I will quote Paul Kelly, The Australian's editor-at-large, which is something I wouldn't normally do. Paul Kelly says:

Whether or not Joyce is found ineligible, the government’s standing will be diminished and its vulnerability paraded. It proves yet again that Labor is structurally superior on politics— it outsmarts, outmuscles and out-thinks the government on almost every issue.

Luck runs Labor’s way but that is no accident.

Who would have thought that Paul Kelly would expose the weaknesses in this rabble of a government, this government that can do nothing right, this government that is so consumed by its internal disputes and its will to survive. Who would have thought that such an eminent commentator from the right wing of politics would stand and say that this government is in such a mess. He goes on to say:

How long before the Prime Minister will address the political weakness at the heart of his government, a weakness obvious to the entire world? As if to prove its ineptitude the government’s tactical response yesterday—accusing Bill Shorten of seeking to seize office by a conspiracy with a foreign power (New Zealand, of course, who else?)—was gobsmacking.

So here we have one of the most senior commentators in politics in this country saying that the government's response yesterday was absolutely gobsmacking.

And then there is Mark Kenny. Senator Brandis was quite disparaging about Mark Kenny. Well, Mark Kenny has been around a long time and he certainly can see a problem when it's there. He says:

Government is no business to be in if you're not very good at politics, nor up for the fight.

Not only is Mark Kenny saying you are a hopeless lot, a rabble of a government, he's saying you're not even up for the fight!

This is the most inept government I have ever seen. You have one of the weakest prime ministers this country has ever seen. You've got an Attorney-General who tries to bluff and bluster his way out of every problem that is before this parliament; it's no wonder that you bury your heads in your hands every question time. This was a fantastic question time, because it just demonstrated how out of touch the coalition is and how this coalition is consumed by issues that are not important to the rest of the country.

This is a government that cannot understand that ordinary working families and people on social security benefits are battling in this country. All they want to do is run arguments between each other and demonstrate that they are not fit to be a government in this country. The Prime Minister should resolve the chaos in the coalition. The Prime Minister should show a little bit of courage, call an election and let the public have their say on what is the worst government this country has ever seen. (Time expired)

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Paul Kelly said that you're gob-smacking!

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the scheme of stunts for distractions, this one really takes the cake. I mean, the second this government come under any kind of pressure, they completely drop the ball; they just go a little bit crazy. What has happened now to the great party of Menzies? What has happened to the great party of Australian conservativism? This great party—which I've disagreed with on many things—was a party of principle. It was a party of government. It was a party that was able to do things in government, even though I may have not agreed with them all the time. This is now entering Venezuelan politics. That's where we're heading to now: Venezuelan politics. It has gone from the party of Menzies to the party of Maduro. I know you find that hard to hear and you're walking out. I understand you can't hear this, Senator Paterson. I understand it's too hard for you.

Let's just go through what they've done in the past week. They're saying now that they're planning to unilaterally start sending members of parliament—they are releasing lists of their enemies—to the High Court for investigation. These are people who have no case to answer, people who have proven their citizenship. This is a reverse onus of proof. They are using the numbers they have in the lower house to randomly start sending people for investigation. This is Venezuelan politics. They're starting to criminalise the actions of their opponents. It has been one attack on the trade union movement after another. The only thing the rabble of a mob that make up the government of Australia can agree on is that they hate workers' rights and conditions and the trade union movement.

Every couple of months, they dig themselves out of their own internal fight, their own internal brawl, and stick their heads up just so they can have another slag at the trade union movement. It's so obscenely crazy—the claims they're making about the leader of another political party, Mr Bill Shorten from the other House. When you turn around and start talking about actions that people made a decade or so ago—and we're suddenly going to start criminalising them just to take this path so we can damage our political opponents. It's Venezuelan politics.

And then, to distract from the disaster of where the foreign minister took things yesterday, to come into this chamber and try and attack the credibility of Senator Penny Wong! That's not only crazy; that's stupid. Who takes on Penny? I mean, some of us have been in Labor politics our entire lives and we think we're pretty tough; we think we're pretty strong. But I wouldn't take on Penny Wong. No-one here would take on Penny Wong. And, when Senator Brandis takes on Penny Wong, he loses the vote. He is running a Venezuelan-style government but he doesn't even have the numbers to do it properly.

Then we decide we need a foreign enemy: New Zealand! New Zealand is this evil foreign opponent that we all have to rally against together. Senator Hinch, who was once—and is no longer—a New Zealander, doesn't look that scary. He doesn't look that tough. This is an attack on your former people, Senator Hinch, and you should not stand for this. It is bad enough that the New Zealanders think they're better than us at sport, but now it appears there is an entire conspiracy across the ditch to try and bring down the Australian government. Let's be clear what they're really saying. How dare Barnaby Joyce's dual citizenship be exposed!

How dare that come to light! Who do these people think they are! Don't they know their place!

These people have suffered enough. They're New Zealanders. It's hard enough being a New Zealander, being the butt of every Australian joke that goes around. It's tough enough being a New Zealander and living there. I understand that a lot of New Zealanders regret the decision they made not to be part of Australia, and they have to live with the bad choice they made over a century ago. But the reality is that this is a desperate, pathetic, hopeless government that has nothing left. It can run any distraction it wants, but it's going to get it nowhere. (Time expired)

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's always entertaining watching Senator Dastyari. I have to say, if anybody was ever doing Venezuelan vaudeville, you did it very well today. But can I just start on the comments that the New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs, Gerry Brownlee, made in response to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Ms Bishop.

Senator Dastyari interjecting—

I know you are very exercised about that, Senator Dastyari, so let me tell you what the Foreign Minister of New Zealand actually said about this: 'It's a perfectly reasonable reaction, given the fact that a New Zealand member of parliament from the New Zealand Labour Party, under the influence from the Australian Labor Party, was asking questions clearly designed to remove a government supporter in Australia—that's the bigger problem here.' That was the reaction of the New Zealand government.

In the middle of an election campaign in New Zealand, engaging in this sort of action is totally and utterly reprehensible. The New Zealand Labour leader, Jacinda Ardern, has revealed that Bill Shorten and the Labor Party sought to use the New Zealand parliament to undermine our government. This is highly unethical, at the very least. More importantly, it puts at risk the very important relationship between our two countries. It shows that the Leader of the Opposition is willing to interfere in the political system of a foreign country for base political advantage. It shows you don't have any interest in section 44 of the Constitution—the uncertainty that surely raises questions about your own people.

Senator Cameron interjecting—

I bet, Senator Cameron, you've got people on your side of the fence that are just sitting there, fingers crossed, anxiously watching what's happening in the High Court and hoping and praying that they're not going to be exposed. Don't tell me that you don't have people in your own ranks who are sitting there—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Fierravanti-Wells, I remind you to address your comments to the chair.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy President, don't tell me that they don't have people across there who are sitting there, fingers crossed, hoping that they're not going to get caught in this whole saga. But let's return to Senator Wong.

Senator Wong aspires to be the Foreign Minister of this country, but she has some serious explaining to do. It is unprecedented to use the officers of a foreign power to undermine a properly elected government. I remind Senator Wong that the Turnbull government was properly elected, and there are some questions that she has to answer. When did your chief of staff first discuss this matter with his labour counterparts in the New Zealand Labour Party? Did he seek your approval to make this contact? What was his purpose in making the contact? When did he tell you he had done this? What was the content of the conversation with Mr Hipkins? Did your chief of staff report that conversation back to you? Did your chief of staff help formulate the question that was asked in the New Zealand parliament? When did you first know that this was to be raised in the New Zealand parliament?

Senator Wong, you can't just adopt the Sergeant Schultz defence, 'I know nothing', which is precisely what she came in here to allege to this Senate. Are you seriously telling us that you had no idea about the actions of your chief of staff? Your closest and most trusted adviser contacts a sitting Labour member of the New Zealand parliament, and you, the shadow minister for foreign affairs, have absolutely no idea about it!

Let me remind you, Senator Wong, that politics is about perception. I can tell you that the perception out there is that you are not being truthful with the Australian public.

Both the New Zealand government and the New Zealand Labour Party have condemned what has transpired. The New Zealand Labour Party have admitted that it was wrong; it was unacceptable; it should never have happened. If they can judge what was wrong, unacceptable and should never have happened, why didn't Senator Wong take on the same judgement? The New Zealand government has been embarrassed by this, and the conduct of New Zealand Labour has been called into question. We find that the Australian Labor Party, through Senator Wong, has been put up to it. Can Senator Wong explain how using a foreign government's parliament to undermine the Deputy Prime Minister of our country is merely 'unwise'? (Time expired)

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The British futurist and writer Alan Moore said:

The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory, is that conspiracy theorists believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is actually chaotic.

The truth of this government, of course, is that it is utterly chaotic. It may be comforting, in the delusional state that they've got themselves into, for their tactics team to believe that there is a conspiracy out there to undermine the government and destabilise the government, but, sadly, that doesn't align with reality. The reality is that their government has been destabilised by one very, very simple fact: the Deputy Prime Minister, until very recently it seems, was a New Zealand citizen. It's actually very embarrassing. I understand why their political leadership is desperately looking for an alternative narrative, a story other than, 'Whoops, we made a mistake,' because their backbench are deeply embarrassed by the performance of their frontbench at today's question time and more generally out there in the world.

I watched their backbench today. I watched them as Senator Brandis provided increasingly desperate answers to sensible questions from people on this side of the House. They weren't looking up, all agog, in admiration of their fearless leader here in the Senate. They were watching Senator Brandis and then they were looking down at their phones. They were looking at their phones because they could not believe what they were hearing. Senator Brandis was talking about conspiracy theories that are barely credible. They're not credible to anyone in the media, they're not credible to anyone who's watching this extraordinary performance, and they're certainly not credible to people on this side of the chamber.

I want to go to the kind of detachment from reality that is required to prosecute a conspiracy theory of this kind. Today, Senator Brandis was asked some fairly basic questions about things which have been said in the public domain—things that are written down; transcripts that you can look up on the internet. Even then, he was unable to accept the reality of what transpired yesterday. He was asked about whether he accepted the position that was set out by the New Zealand Minister of Internal Affairs, Peter Dunne, when he explained that the confirmation of Mr Joyce's New Zealand citizenship was, in fact, instigated by media inquiries. How did Senator Brandis answer this? He said, 'I don't accept that this is what he said.' I can read the tweet that was put out by the New Zealand Minister of Internal Affairs. He said:

This is so much utter nonsense—while Hipkins' questions were inappropriate, they were not the instigator. Australian media inquiries were.

This is on the public record; this is still on Twitter. Yet what does Senator Brandis say? He says, 'I don't accept that this is what he said.' This is deranged, this is detached from reality and it is not a sustainable political argument to make in this place.

Given that Minister Bishop has said that she doesn't accept Mr Dunne's version of events, Senator Brandis was asked whether Minister Bishop has informed her counterpart that she considers that he's lied on this occasion. What did he say? 'That is not what she said.' Again, I can read from the transcript. I, like every other person in this place, can actually read. What happened was that the journalist said:

Minister, the New Zealand Minister, the relevant minister Dunne, has said today that it's utter nonsense to suggest that the Labour Party's question played any role and that it was actually media enquiries and not the Labour Party's question. What do you say to that?

What's her answer?

I don't accept that.

She clearly repudiates the statement made by her counterpart in the New Zealand government, and yet, when asked about this, what does Minister Brandis say? 'That's not what she said.'

Well, I've got something to say to the government and those sitting behind government frontbenchers: you cannot wish away reality. That is not an option. For all that people might wish to believe that this is over, we are still living in a reality-based community, and on this side of the chamber we will continue to prosecute our arguments based on fact—based on what actually happened, not based on some version of events that you wish happened. You'd do well to return your thoughts to reality as well.

Question agreed to.