Let’s be clear about what the deafening silence over Xioalong Zhu’s engagement with the Queensland University of Technology and CSIRO actually means.
It is not about a clever 30-something Chinese man trying to secure a handy postgraduate degree and potentially his future in this country.
It’s not even about what he may have done to be flagged by Australia’s national security agencies, via the foreign minister, as a person “whose presence in Australia may be directly or indirectly associated with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction”.
The real story here is bigger than Zhu, outweighing the well-founded concern over Beijing’s industrial-scale effort to steal the crown jewels of university research in Australia and across the Western world.
It’s about us.
That’s because we don’t know enough about this strange, four-year saga to understand the bare basics of how Zhu continues to be defended by QUT, despite the bombshell finding against him.
The Weekend Australian put 17 questions to the leading Brisbane university. Here’s a selection:
Did QUT take any action to investigate the finding of Zhu’s potential association with WMD proliferation?
If so, what did the usual suspects – ASIO, ASIS, AFP – have to say?
As for Zhu, was he asked for an explanation?
If not, why not?
This is what we received in response: “The student is currently a lawful non-citizen of Australia with study rights and is continuing in their PhD project. Visa matters are handled by the Department of Home Affairs.”
CSIRO’s Data61 division, having awarded Zhu scholarships worth at least $75,000, refused to say what due diligence, if any, was carried out following the bombshell finding that the young man had been implicated in proliferating WMD four years ago.
Sorry, that’s not good enough.
We live in a free country. We are told that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done. Zhu has never been told what he’s been accused of doing in relation to proliferating WMD and we, the public, are none the wiser, either.
Does that sound like a fair go?
Might as well close it: Chalmers’ big call leaves fund without a future
It’s Jim Chalmers’ big chance to put his loopy ideas about ‘reinventing capitalism’ to become a ‘values-driven’ system into practice. Labor has never really liked the Future Fund because it’s a reminder of Peter Costello’s success.
Chalmers’ $230bn Future Funnel for favoured projects
Jim Chalmers is overhauling the investment mandate of the Future Fund to drive capital into Labor’s agenda, in a major shift in the role of the sovereign wealth fund established by the Howard government.