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

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann. Can you please advise the Senate how many times Prime Minister Morrison referred to former Senator Dastyari as 'Shanghai Sam'?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much. I will take that question on notice.

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, a supplementary question?

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

When the Prime Minister was asked on Friday, 'Why was it racist to question Gladys Liu's connection to China but it wasn't racist to call Sam Dastyari "Shanghai Sam"?', the Prime Minister replied, 'I didn't use either of those phrases.' Given the Prime Minister used the term 'Shanghai Sam' at least 17 times, why did the Prime Minister deny using the term?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, I've already taken the primary question on notice, so I'm not going to accept the assertion that is made. What I would say is that there's absolutely no equivalence between the circumstances of former Senator Dastyari—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) | Link to this | Hansard source

Former Senator Dastyari gave advice to a foreign national that he was likely to be bugged, and then gave countersurveillance advice. He gave a press conference in the official Commonwealth parliamentary offices—

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, on a point of order?

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

Direct relevance. I simply asked why the Prime Minister denied using a term when he self-evidently had.

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Senator Cormann.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) | Link to this | Hansard source

I think that Senator Wong, for obvious reasons, is incompletely referencing her question. Senator Wong did more than that. Senator Wong—

Senator Wong interjecting—

In relation to the first part of the question, I have already taken it on notice. In relation to the second part of the question, she sought to create an equivalence between former Senator Dastyari and Ms Liu, and I was explaining why there is no such equivalence.

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

If I could rule on the point of order. Senator Wong?

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

If I may, on the point of order, Mr President—

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, Senator Wong.

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

the equivalence that I quoted was in the journalist's question to the Prime Minister. They were not my words, and the question is about why the Prime Minister didn't tell the truth.

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

I made the observation last week in question time—I believe the term I used was 'a glancing comment' on other activities was appropriate to be directly relevant. But in this context this subject matter was specifically introduced in the question, and I believe the minister is being directly relevant by addressing former Senator Dastyari because that was introduced in the question; whereas last week I ruled that a glancing comment, but it not being the focus of the answer, was more appropriate to be directly relevant. So, in this case, I think Senator Cormann is being directly relevant.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) | Link to this | Hansard source

We're getting to the nub of the question. The Labor Party is trying to create this equivalence. There is no equivalence. Former senator Dastyari took money for himself personally. He then went off and gave a press conference with a foreign national in Commonwealth parliamentary offices in front of the Australian flags and behind the Commonwealth crest, announcing that there should be a change in Australia's bipartisan foreign policy in relation to China. Then not only did he warn the foreign national—

Honourable senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The rules about parliamentary language apply as much to interjections as they do to formal speeches. Can I urge senators to keep that in mind? Senator Wong.

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

I ask the minister representing the Prime Minister, why did the Prime Minister mislead the Australian people? Will he now correct the record and explain his actions to the parliament? To assist the Senator I seek leave to table documents showing the 17 times Mr Morrison used the phrase which he then denied to the Australian people he had used.

Scott Ryan (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Is leave granted?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) | Link to this | Hansard source

No. Senator Wong well understands the longstanding basic courtesies about tabling of documentation. I think Senator Wong is very well aware of this. This is just a stunt. I have already taken the primary question on notice. If Senator Wong observes the usual courtesy, of course, we will consider providing leave later.