China sea conflict interested Labor senator Sam Dastyari

Sam Dastyari pressed bureaucrats to reveal advice on how Australia would ­respond to conflict in the South China Sea.

Sam Dastyari is facing questions over whether he was paid to take a pro-China stand on a sensitive foreign policy issue. Picture Kym Smith

Labor senator Sam Dastyari pressed senior Defence and Foreign Affairs officials to reveal ­internal advice on how Australia would ­respond to conflict in the South China Sea and probed the impact of buying submarines from Japan on the Australia-China relationship.

Senator Dastyari, who has been engulfed in a donations furore after a Chinese company paid a $1600 bill on his behalf, used 2014 and 2015 estimates hearings to probe Australia’s attitude to the South China Sea tensions, its ­obligations under the ANZUS Treaty with the US, movements at the north Asia desk in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, talks with Japan on the future submarines contract and its impact on the Australia-China relationship.

The estimates questions emerged as Senator Dastyari faced questions over whether he was paid to take a pro-China stand on a sensitive foreign policy issue.

INQUIRER: Why ‘Senator Everywhere’ should keep a low profile for a while

Malcolm Turnbull demanded Bill Shorten explain whether Labor’s position on the South China Sea was “for sale” as ­increasing pressure was piled on to Senator Dastyari for reportedly urging Australia to “remain ­neutral and respect” China in the dispute.

Attorney-General George Brandis called for a “full apology” and an account as to why Top ­Education Institute, a company with links to the Chinese government, picked up Senator ­Dastyari’s $1670 travel bill.

The Opposition Leader has counselled the senator for his conduct.

But colleagues defended Senator Dastyari and his estimates questions, pointing out that then defence minister David Johnston had raised the ANZUS Treaty issue days before the 2014 hearing and Senator Dastyari had been chairing a Senate economics committee inquiry into subs at the time he asked about the negotiations on the replacements for the Collins-class fleet.

Mr Turnbull said the payment to Senator Dastyari was “almost unprecedented”, while Labor ­tried to compare it with other foreign-sponsored travel that MPs on both sides have accepted.

“Did he put his hand in his pocket like anyone else would do and pay the bill? No. He used his influence as a senator to get that $1600 from a Chinese donor,” Mr Turnbull said on 3AW radio, later describing it as “cash money paid for his personal benefit”.

“At the same time as this was going on he took a completely different approach to the South China Sea issue both to the Australian government and the opposition, and said he supported China’s claims in the South China Sea and that Australia should support it. He’s got to explain why this is not cash for comment.”

Senator Dastyari responded by saying: “That is a disgraceful and ­offensive thing to say and has no truth to it whatsoever.”

He said Mr Turnbull had no grounds to talk about “buying ­influence”, given he poured $1 million of his own money into the Liberal Party election campaign.

Senator Dastyari also allowed Chinese company Yuhu to pay a $5000 settlement for a legal action after he was sued by Sydney company Diversified Communications in 2014.

He noted the payment in his political disclosure register as: “Support for settlement of outstanding legal matter provided by Yuhu Group.”

Yuhu, founded by businessman Huang Xiangmo, moved to Australia in 2011 and has became one of the nation’s biggest political ­donors.

Between 2012 and 2015 it made payments of $1.05m to the two main political parties: $460,000 to Labor in four payments and $545,000 to the Coalition, much of that to the NSW Liberal Party.

In Senate estimates in June 2014, Senator Dastyari probed ­Defence Department secretary Dennis Richardson on whether Australia was taking sides by participating in joint communiques with the US and Japan on the South China Sea issue.

He also asked whether Australia’s alliance treaties would be ­activated in the event of conflict. Mr Richardson: “That is a hypothetical which we do not go to.’’

Also in June 2014, Senator Dastyari asked DFAT secretary Peter Varghese whether his department had done any analysis on what Australia’s obligations would be under the ANZUS Treaty.

He later questioned Mr ­Varghese about Tony Abbott’s trip to Japan and his visit to its ­National Security Committee and talks on negotiations at the time for Japan to build Australia’s ­future submarines.

Additional reporting: Anthony Klan