I also rise to take note of the answers given to questions asked by Senators Wong, Gallagher, Keneally and Kitching today. And while members of the government have dismissed the saga surrounding the member for Chisholm as that of a conspiracy theory, senators on this side believe it is time that the inconsistencies that we keep getting are addressed head on.
As members and senators of parliament, elected to this place by the Australian people, we hold a unique responsibility to the people that we represent. It is a responsibility of trust and transparency in the work that we undertake. It is a heavy responsibility held by all of us, none more nor less than any other, because all of us are required to make decisions that are in the best interests of our communities, our states and our country most of all when these decisions include overseas or foreign influences. When inconsistencies regarding these matters emerge, it is fair for questions to be asked that seek clarification and explanation. That is all that my colleagues on this side of the chamber sought to do in question time today, and the suggestion that their questions have been motivated by anything other than that, I have to say, is deeply offensive and just ridiculous.
During the past few weeks we have heard, seen and read successive reports in the media, in the Senate and in the other place regarding the member for Chisholm. It has been well canvassed that on Tuesday night the member for Chisholm agreed to an interview with Andrew Bolt in an effort to clear her name on these issues. It's probably not the program that I would have chosen to go on but it was the program that she went on. I sympathise, as someone new to this profession, and as some of my colleagues have also said today, that early interviews can be quite challenging. But this wasn't just first interview nerves and it was more than a clumsy interview. It was a train wreck, because, during this interview, the member for Chisholm raised more questions in every answer that she gave. Indeed, the member for Chisholm couldn't explain her association with numerous organisations of concern, and on three occasions during the interview she failed to commit herself to the bipartisan position on the South China Sea. This is more than 'clumsy', and the Prime Minister and the government surely know it.
But you would not think so, because in question time on Wednesday last week the Prime Minister refused to assure Australians that the member for Chisholm was a fit and proper person to sit in the Australian parliament. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Payne, in Senate question time last Wednesday, refused to assure Australians that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to sit in the Australian parliament. And today we have heard continuing refusals from Senator Cormann to assure Australians that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to serve in the Australian parliament.
On Thursday last week, there were extraordinary reports that senior Liberals were warned by security agencies regarding concerns about the member for Chisholm and her links to the Chinese Communist Party. As Senator Keneally reminded Senator Cormann in a question today, one government MP is quoted as saying, 'There should have been concerns when she was being chosen to stand as a candidate, and I believe those concerns were ignored.' This raises very serious questions as to whether the Prime Minister and the Liberal Party put winning marginal seats ahead of Australia's national security.
All of this goes far beyond a clumsy interview, it goes to questions regarding the national interest. The Prime Minister needs to demonstrate to the Australian people what steps he took to ensure the member for Chisholm was a fit and proper person to sit in the Australian parliament. He should explain what he knew about these reports and when he knew it. It's time for answers, not more inconsistency from a saga that has been riddled with inconsistency after inconsistency. Because our responsibilities here as members of parliament and as representatives of the Australian people are rightly heavy responsibilities, Australians need to know that these responsibilities are being met, and the member for Chisholm has a responsibility to address the inconsistencies that keep rolling in, including to the other questions raised today about the double-checking process that she is reportedly going through. She should do that by making a full and complete statement in the Australian parliament. Again, this is about inconsistencies. Questions have been asked, they need to be addressed. It's time for answers from the member for Chisholm and from the Prime Minister. It's time for the inconsistencies to be cleared up.
