Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. I refer to the minister's Queensland LNP colleague Mr Christensen, who says of the LNP's failure in the Queensland election:

A lot of that rests with the Turnbull govt, it's leadership & policy direction.

Is Mr Christensen correct?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I don't think he is, Senator Chisholm. I know that you were involved in the Queensland election campaign, as was I, so you're the last person to whom I need to point out that the Queensland election campaign was entirely fought on state issues.

Now, of course, all state election campaigns have a national dimension, and particularly in a state as big as Queensland. Of course they have a national dimension, but, as you well know, Senator Chisholm, the issues in the Queensland election campaign were state issues. The LNP mounted a critique of the government of Annastacia Palaszczuk as a do-nothing Labor government—from which, by the way, I don't for a moment resile—and the ALP mounted a critique of Tim Nicholls and his LNP colleagues as being, as they had it, 'under the shadow of Campbell Newman'.

As you also know, the Adani coalmine was a very big issue in the election campaign, particularly in relation to the state government's attitude towards supporting an application for NAIF funding. And there was the question that the Labor Party prosecuted, with some success I'm bound to say, about the possibility of a hung parliament. I might say we don't yet know whether there will be a hung parliament, and we wait to see whether Annastacia Palaszczuk, in the event that her party does not have an absolute majority of seats, keeps to her word of no deals with any crossbench or minor party.

But, Senator Chisholm, as you know, and I don't detect any vigorous dissent from what I'm saying, it was an election fought on state issues. We both know that. It was an election in which the Labor Party did quite well—may I congratulate you; may I congratulate Premier Palaszczuk on her relative success—but to suggest that it was fought on federal issues, as we both know, is fanciful.

Scott Ryan (President, Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, a supplementary question.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This morning, Minister Birmingham warned coalition MPs and senators against 'flirting with parties like One Nation'. Does the Prime Minister agree that flirting with One Nation cost the Queensland Liberal National Party seats in Saturday's election?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, I don't know what the Prime Minister has had to say about the matter. But I'll tell you what I've had to say about the matter, and I will repeat it here: flirting with One Nation is poison. Flirting with One Nation is poison for my side of politics. My attitude to One Nation, with whom I deal courteously and professionally in this chamber, by the way, is, nevertheless, that One Nation has nothing to offer the people of Queensland. You make a debating point, Senator Chisholm, but isn't it interesting that if the government of Annastacia Palaszczuk is returned with a majority, that majority will be comprised of seats won from the LNP on One Nation preferences—seats like Mansfield, seats like Aspley and seats in Brisbane won by the Labor Party on One Nation preferences. (Time expired)

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President, Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my left. Senator Chisholm is on his feet, but he won't get the call until there is silence.

Senator Wong interjecting—

Order, Senator Wong. Senator Chisholm's on his feet. I'm sure he'd like to ask his question. Final supplementary question, Senator Chisholm.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Who does the Prime Minister blame for the Liberal-National Party's poor performance? Is it the Turnbull government's leadership and policies as Mr Christensen suggests, flirting with One Nation as Senator Birmingham suggests, or the 'very, very mediocre' Queensland LNP as the minister himself has suggested?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, you talk about flirting with One Nation. I'll tell you what my experience was at the polling booths in Brisbane on Saturday. Regardless of what the Labor Party how-to-vote cards may have said, Labor Party booth workers, obviously under instructions, and trade unionists who were there at booths advancing the Labor candidate's interests were saying to voters as they entered the polling booths, 'Put the LNP last'—in other words, 'Give your preference to One Nation.' We are very familiar with the Labor Party talking out of both sides of its mouth. Don't worry about what your official position was, Senator Chisholm—your booth workers and your trade union surrogates were saying the opposite.

Scott Ryan (President, Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator Brandis. On a point of order, Senator Cameron?

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

A point of order on relevance: the question was about the poor performance of the party and whether the Turnbull government's leadership and policies are flirting with One Nation or—

Scott Ryan (President, Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cameron, you do not get to restate the question. You have raised your point of order on direct relevance.

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

He should answer the question.

Scott Ryan (President, Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister is being relevant to the question as asked. Senator Wong?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, it is common practice when a point of order on direct reference is raised for reference to be made to the question in order to make the point of direct relevance. I trust you're not suggesting that that can't occur?

Scott Ryan (President, Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I'm not suggesting that, Senator Wong. I'm suggesting the question shouldn't be restated in a point of order. But a point of order can always draw attention to the question.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was referring to the part of the question that raised the issue of flirting with One Nation and I was pointing out that, notwithstanding their public position, Labor Party booth workers and trade union surrogates were asking constituents to preference One Nation. (Time expired)