Australia politics live: Former ASIO boss warns government’s national security rhetoric only serves China’s national interest

Independent MP Jacqui Lambie has taken an almighty swing at both major parties after a week of “appalling” attacks in parliament.

Scott Morrison in parliament yesterday. Picture: Gary Ramage/NCA NewsWire

Welcome to our live coverage of Australian politics.

This is the last time the House of Representatives will sit until Budget week in March 29.

There are a handful of policy debates bubbling away and Senate estimates continue, but the main topic of conversation in Canberra today is the government’s increasingly blunt rhetoric on national security, where it is essentially accusing Labor of being soft.

The Prime Minister has spent the past week claiming Anthony Albanese is the Chinese Communist Party’s favoured candidate for the election. Yesterday he went so far as to label Labor’s deputy leader, Richard Marles, a “Manchurian candidate”.

That rhetoric was presumably the catalyst for a rare national TV appearance from ASIO head Mike Burgess last night. Mr Burgess warned the politicisation of national security was “not helpful” for Australia’s intelligence agency.

And one of his predecessors, Dennis Richardson, has this morning stressed that the government’s rhetoric would only serve one country’s national interest: China’s.

Stream more political news live & on demand with Flash, a dedicated news streaming service. New to Flash? Try 14 days free now >

Read on for the latest updates in what promises to be a cranky day.

Signing off

And that, friends, concludes our last live blog of this sitting fortnight. Senate estimates continue tomorrow, but even I’m not nerdy enough to keep this show rolling solely for that.

If any news happens this evening, rest assured news.com.au will have it covered elsewhere.

‘Couldn’t give a stuff’: Lambie unleashes

I’m going to (probably) end today with the guest who came right after Kevin Rudd on Afternoon Briefing, independent MP Jacqui Lambie.

“I am quite appalled by some of the argy-bargy that has gone on in the House in the past week. You can smell an election coming up, no doubt about that,” Ms Lambie said.

She noted that she and Rex Patrick had proposed holding an inquiry into the Chinese Communist Party, without support from either of the major parties.

“It seems like the one time they want to (talk about) these issues is when we are running into an election. Quite frankly, I find that frightening,” she said.

Asked about the Global Times piece essentially endorsing Anthony Albanese over Scott Morrison this week - this one - Ms Lambie said most Australians wouldn’t care.

“Do you want me to be honest? I think most Australians out there couldn’t give a stuff and are not paying any attention. That is where I think we are right now," she said.

“How about you do what you are supposed to be doing? I don’t even know what their policies are. That has all gotten lost.

“You’re not talking about why they should be voted back in - how about get back to basics going into an election instead of slagging each other off? Because that is all they’re doing.”

Jacqui Lambie. Picture: David Gray/Getty Images

Kevin Rudd accuses PM of ‘fiction’

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd appeared on Afternoon Briefing today to vent about the government’s national security rhetoric.

“It’s quite unprecedented for national security officials, both the present (ASIO boss Mike Burgess) and previous (Dennis Richardson) to open up publicly,” Mr Rudd said.

“Why is the government doing this? The Liberal Party is politically desperate, and behind in the opinion polls. This is all the politics of deflection away from the record on Covid, on vaccines, on boosters, 700 aged care deaths, as well as their appalling performance in terms of deficit numbers which make the nation’s eyes water.”

Kevin Rudd throwing stones about deficits. That’s the crazy world we live in.

“What Dennis has said is readlly important. He said there is only one country advantaged by an artificial division in Australia, a bogus division on national security policy, and that is China itself,” he said.

“Right now, on the essentials, we have frankly a bipartisan national security and foreign policy position on China. This is all election politics, because it's creating a distraction agenda from the real stuff working families are concerned about.”

Now “working families” is getting trotted out. It’s like we’re back in 2007. I don’t like it.

Mr Rudd went on to argue that Scott Morrison is a master of “conflating fact with fiction”.

“(He is) creating a fictional political narrative, when the national security policy establishment in this country, who are not affiliated with Labor or the Liberals, have said that frankly, there is no foundation to this case,” he said.

And so on.

Sigh

Let’s all stop calling each other Manchurian candidates already. Please. Pleeaase.

Equal opportunity on the Manchurian candidates now. They’re everywhere ! Now it’s the PM pic.twitter.com/TgSe3uZI6z

— Samantha Maiden (@samanthamaiden) February 17, 2022

‘All he is is small’: Albanese belittled

It took about half an hour, but the China thing did eventually come up during Question Time, courtesy of Labor’s Richard Marles (the guy Scott Morrison called a Manchurian candidate yesterday, before withdrawing the remark).

Mr Marles brought up the leaked text messages from former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian, sent during the bushfires. She reportedly said Mr Morrison was more concerned about politics than people.

“More than 700 people have died of Covid in aged care this year, but the Prime Minister has spent this past fortnight focused on a desperate, untrue scare campaign. Wasn’t Gladys Berejiklian right? Why won’t the Prime Minister just do his job?” he asked.

Mr Morrison said the premise of the question was “false”.

“I am asked about the job of Prime Minister,” he said, going on to spruik the government’s economic record before pivoting to national security.

“It is my job to keep Australians safe,” said Mr Morrison.

“If there is any country out there, including in our region, who think they can bully and coerce Australia, they won’t find a preferred candidate in this Prime Minister. They might find one on the other side, and they certainly seem to have found one. But they won’t find one in this Prime Minister.

“You cannot be weak-kneed if you want to do this job. Strength in this job is what this job is all about. The leader of the Labor Party likes to think he’s a small target. That’s his plan. All he is is small. And he is diminishing by the day. He is diminishing by the day.”

Anthony Albanese listens to the Prime Minister during Question Time. Picture: Gary Ramage/NCA NewsWire

The next question, a dixer, was directed at Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews. She continued with the whole strength is good thing.

“The safety and security of our local communities relies on the strong approach that this government has taken on a whole range of issues,” said Ms Andrews.

“Strong borders, a strong stand against those who commit crimes, a tougher approach to sentencing. These are things that Australians know they can rely on a Coalition government to deliver.

“It is in stark contrast to those opposite. Frankly, it is quite disturbing that they don’t want us to be here talking about national security or community safety. Australians clearly want to feel safe and secure in their communities.

“But unfortunately, Labor seems to be very focused on being a small target. A teeny target, in fact, very focused on trying to slide in, slide in.”

The one thing I will say in Karen Andrews’ favour, compared to every other person in the House: she doesn’t bellow into the microphone. Can think of a few government ministers who could benefit from following her example.

“I think it is very fair for the Australian people to be able to have the opportunity to witness a very stark contrast between the government and those opposite, who have been recently silent on a range of issues, particularly on community safety and national security matters,” she concluded.

Later in Question Time, just to round things out, Mr Morrison repeated his assertion that Labor “is the Chinese government’s pick at this election”.

That face when you’re sitting through your thousandth Question Time and you realise you could have, ya know, not been a politician. Picture: Gary Ramage/NCA NewsWire

Spy chiefs ‘need to be careful’

Liberal MP David Sharma also defended the government’s national security rhetoric during an appearance on ABC TV just before Question Time.

Mr Sharma did not agree that deputy Labor leader Richard Marles was a “Manchurian candidate”, though his bigger concern was ASIO bosses dictating the terms of acceptable political debate.

“I think certainly, things that Richard Marles has said and done, including on his most recent visit to Beijing, should be open to scrutiny,” Mr Sharma said (yesterday’s Manchurian candidate attack came as the Prime Minister was roasting Mr Marles over a speech he gave in 2019 in Beijing).

“I don’t want to live in an Australia where we can’t debate certain things because the spy chiefs tell us not to,” Mr Sharma continued.

“They need to be careful not to interfere in what is the domain of elected representatives.”

He proceeded to say Labor was “scared of a debate” and was “trying to shut down debate on this issue”.

The thing I would ask about that is ... what debate? The government isn’t seeking to debate China policy. It’s just repeatedly saying Labor is soft on China. As things stand, there aren’t any substantial policy differences to debate.

To put that another way: we are not in a situation where the government has proposed a change in Australia’s stance towards China, and Labor is disagreeing, or vice versa. We’re in a situation where the government is saying Labor will go soft on China, Labor is insisting it won’t, and ... that’s it. That’s the whole discussion.

Minister refuses to comment on PM’s jab

The ABC’s political editor, Andrew Probyn, grilled Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews on the government’s national security rhetoric during her media conference announcing Hamas’s designation as a terrorist group.

He asked her about the remarks from former ASIO chief Dennis Richardson, who this morning said the government was creating a perception of a policy difference with Labor on China when no such difference actually existed.

Mr Richardson also said the government’s rhetoric was serving only one country’s national interest, that country being China.

“Dennis Richardson is a man of the highest pedigree in intelligence and diplomatic circles. He is in effect saying that the only country that is served by what your government is doing, by what your leader is doing, is China. I ask you, who is served, and is the national interest served, in your leader saying the deputy Labor leader is a Manchurian candidate?” Probyn asked, referring to yesterday’s ugly scenes in Question Time.

“The national security interests of Australia are very well served by the Morrison government. I am very firm on those views. There are other people that will have their own views on that, and they are entirely at liberty to have them,” Ms Andrews said.

“Is Richard Marles a Manchurian candidate?” Probyn pressed.

“I’m not going to comment on that at all. My interest is, quite frankly, at a higher level,” she shot back.

“Higher than the ones expressed by the Prime Minister?” he asked.

“My view is at the higher level, which is the national security interests of Australia. They are the things we should be focused on. I am not going to break this down onto an individual commentary on any individual.”

PM’s ‘laughable excuse’ roasted

I’ll return to those tense scenes in Senate estimates, but we have a couple more stories to take note of first.

Story one: the government has announced it will classify the entirety of Hamas as a banned terrorist organisation.

At present, only Hamas’s military wing, known as the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, is listed as a terrorist group.

“The views of Hamas and the violent extremist groups listed today are deeply disturbing, and there is no place in Australia for their hateful ideologies,” Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews said.

Story two: a pair of moderate Liberal MPs, Bridget Archer and John Alexander, have delivered speeches in the House of Representatives in support of establishing a federal integrity commission.

Scott Morrison promised to create a federal ICAC before the 2019 election, but in Senate estimates this week the government conceded it would not be moving forward with legislation in the foreseeable future, citing a lack of support for its proposal.

Labor and the crossbench do not believe the government’s proposal is good enough. Hence the long-running impasse.

Ms Archer told the House it was clear parliament was “running out of time” to pass legislation on the matter.

“This is such an important issue. It’s fundamental to the trust and confidence that we need from the Australian people to do our jobs. And so I would urge co-operation and collaboration from all parties, on all sides, to take this forward in the next parliament,” she said.

Mr Alexander, who is leaving politics at the election, urged his colleagues to "stop bashing heads and put our heads together”.

“For too long, this has been a political football,” he said.

Independent MP Helen Haines was more explicit in her criticism of the government. She said it was “clear” that Mr Morrison “had not intention of working on this in a bipartisan way”.

“The Prime Minister’s laughable excuse that he cannot legislate his integrity commission proposal because the opposition won’t support it is totally absurd,” she said.

‘Grubby and shameless’: Hearing derailed

Right, Senate estimates blow-up number two. This one also comes from the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee. Any more drama there and we’ll have enough to start a new soap opera.

Luckily this one isn’t about an obscure topic, like the weight ratio of frigates. It’s about the main political debate of the week: national security, and specifically the government’s effort to paint Labor as weak on China.

“We’ve seen several extraordinary interventions over the last week from currently serving and former senior intelligence and security officials, about the importance of the work of national security officials remaining apolitical, and about the broadly bipartisan approach to national security in this country,” Labor Senator Kristina Keneally said.

(She was referring to the remarks from current ASIO boss Mike Burgess and former ASIO boss Dennis Richardson, which you can read about below.)

Ms Keneally read out a quote from former DFAT Secretary Frances Adamson, which emphasised the importance of bipartisanship. She asked Defence Department Secretary Greg Moriarty whether he agreed with the quote.

“I believe Australia's national resilience is an important contributor to our overall defence posture,” Mr Moriarty said.

“And national resilience depends on national unity, to a certain extent.”

Ms Keneally proceeded to ask him whether “stoking division” in Australia could “serve the interests of Beijing.

Minister Simon Birmingham interjected, suggesting Ms Keneally was trying to get the Defence Secretary to engage in “commentary” and should confine her questions to matters strictly within Mr Moriarty’s purview.

Fast forwarding a few minutes, Mr Birmingham was asked about Mr Richardson’s comments this morning, in which he accused the government of seeking to create the perception of a difference between the major parties on China where none actually exists.

“I have enormous regard for Mr Richardson, but I don’t agree with his starting premise,” Mr Birmingham responded.

“In terms of points of difference, those points of difference have been created by (Anthony) Albanese’s statements, or in the lived experiences and proof, for example in areas such as defence investment (i.e. he argued Labor spends less on defence than the Coalition).

Ms Keneally read out another quote from Mr Richardson.

“Minister, why is your government trying to manufacture differences with the opposition, in the context of an election, when it only plays into one country’s interests, and that is China?” she asked Mr Birmingham.

“I don’t accept that. Our government has simply responded to comments and statements made by your leader,” he shot back.

Out of nowhere, Labor Senator Tim Ayres interjected to vent his displeasure.

“Grubby, reckless and shameless,” he said.

“You utterly debase yourself, Minister. You utterly debase yourself. Absolutely shameful.”

Chairman Eric Abetz temporarily adjourned the committee before things could get uglier.

An unimpressed Kristina Keneally during Senate estimates.

Unemployment rate remains unchanged

We shall take a very brief interlude from the nerdiness of Senate estimates to note the unemployment rate remained at 4.2 per cent in January.

The Australian economy added about 13,000 jobs.

‘You lied to us’: Drama in Senate estimates

I have two classic blow-ups from Senate estimates to tell you about.

The first one comes from the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, which started its proceedings this morning by grilling Defence Department officials on a program to build frigates.

Crossbench Senator Rex Patrick accused one official, Sheryl Lutz, of “lying” to the committee during a previous session of estimates in June of last year.

I’m afraid the details underpinning this accusation are on the dull side, but we must slog through them nonetheless.

Short version: we’re building some frigates. Last year, Defence told estimates that initial modelling indicated everything about the design was fine and dandy. It subsequently realised there was a problem with the ships’ weight.

This morning Mr Patrick and other senators, particularly Labor’s Kimberley Kitching, were asking about a leaked engineering report detailing the design challenges.

Mr Patrick took issue with Ms Lutz’s claim the report descibed “potential” problems.

“It’s incorrect to characterise it as ‘potential’ problems. That report states the current view of engineering staff as to the state of the vessel design. Please don’t try and snow job us, OK?” Mr Patrick said.

“I look back at what you told this committee in June last year. That there were no weight problems.”

“Senator, I’ve never said there were no weight problems,” Ms Lutz protested.

Mr Patrick quoted her own words back to her, including: “All of the modelling has been done. There is no impact on the propulsion chain.”

“This report says that is not correct,” he said.

“That tells me you lied to this committee.”

The committee’s chairman, Liberal Eric Abetz, berated him for his choice of words.

“I know TV cameras are in here-” said Mr Abetz.

“It’s not about TV cameras, this is a serious issue, chair! A very serious issue,” Mr Patrick said. He said he was “happy to ground in evidence” his use of the word “lied”.

Mr Abetz told him he could talk about officials providing “unhelpful” or “misleading” evidence, but to say someone lied was “a direct imputation I’m sure you yourself would withdraw”.

“On the basis of evidence that has been provided to this committee in the past-” Mr Patrick began.

“Would you please withdraw the term lie?” Mr Abetz interjected.

“No I’m not going to withdraw that term, chair. And I’m happy to substantiate it,” said Mr Patrick. So Mr Abetz gave the call to another senator.

Senator Rex Patrick grilling the Defence officials.

Hostilities kicked off again a few minutes later.

“You said, ‘We are still meeting the same performance requirements in terms of range and speed.’ There’s a report here that says that is not the case!” said Mr Patrick.

“Let’s go back to your evidence there.”

“Allow the witness to finish her answer please,” Mr Abetz told him.

“At the time, when we were only two months into the review, there had been modelling done indicating there was no impact on speed and range-” Ms Lutz began.

Mr Patrick tried to interrupt again.

“Senator Patrick, allow the witness to finish,” an increasingly exasperated Mr Abetz said.

“The report was signed in November. This was in June. And the initial modelling that had been done had demonstrated that. Since then, there have been nine deep dives conducted over the system review to look at different areas of the modelling,” said Ms Lutz.

She said the evidence Defence previously provided was valid “at the time”.

“There were weight margin reports you received prior to that,” Mr Patrick protested.

“I don’t like being snow jobbed, OK?” he added, as Mr Abetz again implored him not to interrupt the witness.
“You’ve got a heavier ship, that places greater load on the propulsion system, it causes greater acoustic signatures, and basically you said everything was OK. It was not,” he told Ms Lutz.

“At that time, the initial modelling had shown that we were going to meet the same speed and range at the top level,” she replied.

“We’ve now progressed six months later, done the detailed analysis, and now understand what the mission system requirements are, and we have set those requirements.”

In a nutshell: the initial modelling was too optimistic, problems were identified, and according to the Defence officials those problems are now being addressed.

Another MP tests positive to Covid

Labor MP Pat Conroy is the latest member of parliament to test positive for Covid, following the initial diagnosis of his colleague Anika Wells yesterday.

This brings the total number to four, I believe.

Yesterday afternoon, in Canberra for Parliament, I took a PCR test on advice from Parliamentary Officials. This test has come back positive for COVID.

I am double vaxxed with booster and will follow the ACT Health directions.

Please stay safe.

— Pat Conroy MP (@PatConroy1) February 16, 2022

PM meets with Boris Johnson

Scott Morrison met virtually with his British counterpart, Boris Johnson, this morning.

They have released a joint statement with the usual diplomatic niceties stressing our nations’ “unique relationship”, “deep bonds” and “shared values”.

There’s a line in there alluding to China, with the two leaders reiterating their “commitment to support a rules-based international order free from coercion”. Mr Morrison and Mr Johnson also mentioned their “grave concerns” about China’s human rights violations in Xinjiang, where it has been persecuting the Uighur ethnic minority for years.

And they expressed “unwavering commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity”, stressing the need for “de-escalation”.

‘Only serves China’: Former ASIO boss blasts PM’s rhetoric

Dennis Richardson, a former ASIO director general, US ambassador and secretary of both the Defence and Foreign Affairs departments, appeared on News Breakfast this morning.

He was asked “how unusual” it was for current ASIO boss Mike Burgess to appear on national television last night (you can find details on that in the posts below).

“That doesn’t happen every day of the week,” Mr Richardson said.

“I think Mr Burgess was doing his job very professionally.”

He moved on to an appraisal of the government’s rhetoric on national security.

“First of all, I don’t have an issue with the government’s approach to national security generally. I think it has a very good record in that area. Others would disagree but that is my own view,” Mr Richardson stressed.

“Secondly, differences between the political parties on matters of national security are perfectly proper in a liberal democracy.

“What is unusual in this case is that the government is seeking to create the perception of a difference between it and the opposition on a critical national security issue – China – seeking to create the perception of a difference where none in practice exists.

“That is not in the national interest. That only serves the interest of one country, and that country is China.”

Mr Richardson said it was the “democratic right” of Scott Morrison, Peter Dutton and other members of the government to make the argument, but again stressed it did not serve the national interest.

“Seeking to create the perception of a difference when none in practice exists, for straight out party political purposes, is something that we have not seen an Australian government do for decades, and it does not serve the national interest by any objective standard,” he said.

“It only serves the interests of one country, and that is China. The national interest is served by our body politic having a unified position on an issue as critical as China.”

Mr Richardson also spoke to Patricia Karvelas on ABC radio, where he made similar remarks, warning that China would seek to use the government’s rhetoric against Australia.

‘It’s not on’: Labor reacts to MP’s powerful speech

Fair warning, we are going to be talking about China a lot today.

Labor frontbencher Clare O’Neil was on the ABC this morning to have a go at the government’s rhetoric on national security.

“I think it’s really a bit sad and pathetic when you see a Coalition government doing something like this,” she said.

“They’re obviously feeling under an enormous amount of pressure and, of course, when that happens they go straight to the personality politics - the sort of base thing that I think the Australian people absolutely hate - which is trying to attempt a character assassination on the Leader of the Opposition.

“I think it’s really disappionting but the Australian people are really smart and I think they see through these things and understand them for what they are.”

She said there was a “bipartisan approach to managing China” in Canberra.

Ms O’Neil was also asked about outgoing Liberal MP Nicole Flint’s valedictory speech yesterday, in which she revealed the extent of sexist and misogynist abuse she’d copped from “left wing men” during her time in politics.

Ms Flint accused Labor, and specifically Anthony Albanese, of doing too little to stamp out that behaviour.

“I thought she gave a cracking speech, and I’d encourage your viewers to have a look on the internet and watch it,” said Ms O’Neil.

“Of course, I didn’t agree with a lot of the things she said, but the experience of any woman in public life is valuable and important to me. No Australian woman should be harassed, sexualised or abused in the course of doing her job ... it's not on.

“I have to say that if she has experienced that abuse from people who describe themselves as left wing or trade unionists, they are not a part of the movement that I’m in. Because the Labor movement and the Labor Party are about equality for all.

“Those people need to take a good, hard look at themselves and question whether they’re living up to the values they profess.”

Nicolle Flint during her valedictory speech yesterday. Picture: Gabriel Polychronis

ASIO boss’s unusual public intervention

Last night the Director General of ASIO, Mike Burgess, took the unusual step of appearing on national television to warn against the politicisation of national security.

“The (foreign) interference doesn’t go after one party or the other, so it’s equal opportunity in that regard,” he said, alluding to China..

“In terms of what politicians do, I won’t comment on what politicians do. ASIO is apolitical. My staff are apolitical. They put their lives on the line to actually protect Australians from threats of security.

“I will leave the politics to the politicians. But I’m very clear with everyone that I need to be, that that is not helpful for us.”

“The foreign interference is against all members of parliament. So it doesn't go after one particular party or the other. It's kind of equal opportunity in that regards.” - @MikePBurgess, @ASIOGovAu. #abc730#auspolpic.twitter.com/BmvXliA5qX

— abc730 (@abc730) February 16, 2022

This public intervention from the ASIO boss came after days of escalating rhetoric from the government, with Prime Minister Scott Morrison trying to paint Labor as weak on national security and unwilling to stand up to Australia’s adversaries.

During Question Time yesterday he went so far as to call Labor’s deputy leader, Richard Marles, a “Manchurian candidate”. The term refers to a politician who is the puppet of a foreign enemy.

Mr Morrison withdrew the remark after an uproar from the opposition benches, though that didn’t stop him from insisting moments later that the Chinese government had “picked their horse” for the election, pointing at Labor.

This rhetoric on China has been a core focus of the government for a week now.

“They know who their candidate is in this election. It’s the leader of the Labor Party,” Mr Morrison said last Thursday, again referring to the Chinese Communist Party.

Defence Minister Peter Dutton made similar remarks.

“We now see evidence that the CCP has also made a decision about who they’re going to back in the next federal election ... and that is open and obvious,” said Mr Dutton.

“And they have picked this bloke (Anthony Albanese) as their candidate.”

And so on. Mr Dutton’s comment was later ruled out of order by the Speaker.