David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Wong. The Albanese government is trying to appease an increasingly belligerent United States, having recently provided an additional $800 million to the US military as part of AUKUS, bringing the total money paid to Donald Trump under AUKUS to $1.6 billion. This is right at the same time as Donald Trump has put AUKUS under a blowtorch, with a review that might see the subs cancelled. What possible justification can the government provide as to why we're giving Donald Trump $1.6 billion for nuclear submarines we may never get, with no strings attached and no clawback?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the Greens political party's position on AUKUS is well known. I think the Greens political party's position on the US alliance is well known. You're entitled to those views. They are views that do not accord with the views of the majority of the Australian people. They are views that we in this government do not share, and I would hazard a guess—I would hope—that those on the opposite side would also not share those views. While I'm talking about AUKUS—and you've made your views on that very clear, Senator Shoebridge—

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ask Paul Keating about AUKUS!

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

 Are you going to keep interrupting? I like the way that you're happy with having standing orders for yourself but not for anybody else. Is that how it works? Are you done?

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Through the chair!

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, through the chair? I'm pleased that you are again seeking to impose standing orders on everyone else that you don't impose on your members.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, on a point of order?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

President, I'd just ask you to direct the minister to provide an answer to my question about the $1.6 billion paid to Donald Trump under AUKUS.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, if you want the minister to answer your question, don't make interjections, because, as you know, the minister is also entitled to respond to interjections.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will come to the question, but I think the hypocrisy of the Greens is clearly on display. They believe the standing orders should be used to protect them, but not anybody else, nor any other standard in the chamber. We all see that, Senator Shoebridge. You dish it out, but you can't—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

President, I've been sitting here in silence waiting for an answer, and you know that what we got from the minister is not relevant.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, resume your seat. The minister had just stood up. I'm listening, and I'm sure she is going to come to your question. Thank you for listening.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are committed to AUKUS because we believe it is an important contribution to strategic balance in the region, and that matters to Australia. It matters to the peace, prosperity and stability of the region. We are invested in AUKUS because we believe that hard deterrence is an important part of preserving stability, alongside the reassurance that can be provided through engagement and diplomacy. So everything we do—whether it is through the AUKUS partnership, our engagement with ASEAN and the East Asia Summit, our alliance with the United States, our special strategic partnership with Japan, our deep friendship and cooperation with the Republic of Korea, our work with India, our work through the Quad or our work in the Pacific—is all about stability and peace in our region. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, first supplementary?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, we've been told time and time again by Labor that AUKUS is based on shared values with the United States. How do we share values with the United States under Donald Trump that has withdrawn funding from UNESCO for alleged divisive, social and cultural causes, pulled out of the Paris agreement on climate and caused chaos with its traditional defence and trade partners around the world? How do we share values with that regime?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

AUKUS is about Australia's interests. It's about Australia's interests. It's about what are our interests in an era that is increasingly complex and contested. It is a capability that goes to Australia's interests, and I would argue that it is a partnership in all three countries' interests. We are very clear. We make decisions in Australia's national interest, and that includes working with others. That is what AUKUS is, but that is not the sum of all that we do. Senator, you have made your views on AUKUS very clear. You are opposed to it. You are entitled to that.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order: could I please request that answers be directed through the chair?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Allman-Payne. I will remind the minister to—

Honourable senators interjecting—

Order! Order! Minister Wong, direct your responses to me.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Greens political party have made it clear that they have double standards when it comes to standing orders in this place. They want standing orders for them, but they are not prepared to respect them for others or for the rest of the chamber. We all know that. Here we go again!

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order on relevance: it's obviously easier to uphold standing orders than it is international law in relation to Gaza.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Whish-Wilson. Order! Order! I cautioned the chamber earlier about making a point of view, not a political statement, or not adding to the question yourself. I'm not sure if you were here during the moment I said that, Senator Whish-Wilson, but it does apply to you. Political points are not points of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our decision to continue to invest in AUKUS is about Australia's national interest, and we stand by it.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, second supplementary?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, this government has refused to call out Donald Trump on his extreme proposals for Gaza and his illegal unilateral bombing of Iran and has now given into the US on beef imports. Is this all just a play to keep the disastrous AUKUS deal on life support?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are three erroneous statements in that question, at least. I'll go to the third one. In relation to beef, I would make the point that we have gone through a rigorous, science based, risk based assessment over the last decade. The process for this was in fact commenced under the coalition government. The announcement does allow for expanded access to include beef sourced from cattle born in Canada or Mexico which is legally imported and slaughtered in the United States. The decision is consistent with what we said all along: we will not compromise on biosecurity. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry is satisfied that the strengthened control methods put in place by the US effectively manage biosecurity risks. We stand for open and fair trade, and Australia's cattle industry has benefited from this. (Time expired)