Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker Scott, and congratulations on your position.

Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition made a careful, nuanced statement about the events relating to Australia's relationship with Indonesia. He said:

The opposition supports the Prime Minister's commitment to national security, and it supports the comments about the importance of our national security.

He added:

… it does also require Australia to recognise that our Indonesian friends have been offended.

He emphasised that this 'should be above party politics.' He concluded in very measured and grave terms:

Labor wants the government to be successful in rebuilding the relationship with Indonesia. This is what all sides need and want—a recovery of trust.

In passing, he also suggested that perhaps the government, the Prime Minister, consider the kind of reaction by the American President to a similar problem concerning German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The Leader of the Opposition did not say, as some media outlets say, that Australia should apologise. It is true that in 2004 Indonesian officials admitted spying on Australia. But these tit-for-tat allegations do not help solve the current situation.

It is true that the person who is the progenitor of all these Australian secrets, Mr Snowdon, is now happily ensconced under the protection of the Russian government of Mr Vladimir Putin. Of course, Mr Snowdon's original public purpose was to protect the privacy of US citizens. At least, that is a defensible aim. What is the purpose of all of these revelations now? They certainly do not help Australia; they certainly do not help Indonesia. Who elected Mr Snowdon and The Guardian newspaper to represent our interests? But, worst of all, is the reaction of News Limited to the Leader of the Opposition's measured and nuanced responses. Greg Sheridan, in his front page article, said that the Leader of the Opposition had 'urged' the government to do something. No—he said 'consider.' The editorial refers to the Leader of the Opposition 'obliquely referring'. It does not say what he actually said. Dennis Shanahan is worse; he missed all the nuances. He said that the member for Maribyrnong was 'too tempted, less certain and precise'. I think he should appear on the psychic channel if he wants to channel what the leader is thinking rather than focus on his actual words.

The opposition was very careful. We want to restore Australia's relations with Indonesia. We support the government doing something about this matter. Something will have to be done. It was only a consideration of what other countries have done that was offered by the— (Time expired)