CHARLES WOOLEY
Andrew Bolt’s interview with the perhaps too conveniently forgetful and confused Liberal Member for Chisholm, Gladys Liu, was a reminder (even if you don’t subscribe to his politics) that Bolt is a very good journalist.
Here was a clear illustration that journalists can be from the right, left or centre and it doesn’t matter so long as they do their job capably and fairly.
Asking questions about Liu’s connections with the Chinese Communist Party was not unfair and certainly not racist.
It was political. It became more political as it went on with Liu claiming memory lapses about her links to CCP front organisations in Australia.
Then it got worse as Bolt led her into the minefield of Chinese territorial aggression in the South China Sea.
Bolt asked: “Do you support the Government’s position that China is stealing the South China Sea?”
Granted it was a leading question, but Liu’s answer was as wet as that contested piece of ocean. It was excruciating as she floundered trying to play both sides.
“My understanding is a lot of countries are trying to claim ownership ... I will always want to have a good relationship between Australia and China, and I will put Australia’s interests first,” she said.
And then worse. “Do you consider Xi [Jinping] a dictator?”
(In politics and journalism that is the “Is the Pope a Catholic?” question. And “Yes” is the only credible answer).
Liu then had to pretend she had been away from planet Earth for a long time. “Well, honestly, I have been focusing on serving the seat of Chisholm since the election. I only had one day off in the last three-and-a-half months. I don’t really …”
Bolt went for the blood in the water. He reminded her she was born in Hong Kong (just in case she had forgotten) where 1.7 million people were in the street demonstrating for freedom.
“Gladys, a simple question. Is Xi Jinping a dictator?”
Eventually the best Liu could manage in this awkward theatre of cruelty was a lame, “I do have an opinion, but I’m not going to use the word dictator. He is, in their system, an elected chairman or president as they call it for China.”
And that, frighteningly, was the extent of the Member for Chisholm’s understanding of modern comparative politics and the difference between bumbling democracy and totalitarian communism.
And this week’s question for your Political Science 101 exam, kiddies, is: “How do we elect such people?”
I suggest in your answer you are bipartisan enough to remember the name Sam Dastyari, the Labor senator who, like Liu, got selected by his party because he was so good at raising money but, as it turned out, too much of it from Chinese sources and some of it for his own use.
There is yet no reason to suggest Liu is a glad-hander of anything like Dastyari proportions.
So far what they share in common is an ability to embarrass their own side of politics.
And, like Liu, “Shanghai Sam”, as the Liberals liked to call him, also seemed to misunderstand the international laws regarding freedom of navigation in the South China Sea.
Perhaps they were both just going along with the Beijing Nomenclature Board which clearly asserts: “Just which part of the name South China Sea don’t you foreigners understand?”
You might remember how Bill Shorten fiercely defended Sam until he didn’t. In January last year Dastyari fell on his own sword and went off to work in realitytelevision. What more can you say?
At the risk of repeating this week’s essay topic, kiddies: “How do we elect such people?”
“If you sup with the Devil you need a long spoon,” my mum used to remind me. Sam’s chopsticks were clearly not long enough, and the question now is how long are Liu’s and, most importantly, how long is the patience of the conservative wing of the Liberal party?
It’s early days yet, but every media organisation in the nation is pursuing Liu’s connection to the CCP. Their sleuthing is sure to be more thorough than the Liberal Party candidate vetting-process.
A free press is a dangerous beast, and ScoMo might yet have cause to envy the Chinese regime which doesn’t have to suffer one.
This story has a long way yet to run.
It was surprising, then, that ScoMo played the so-called “race card” in Parliament denouncing Labor’s attack dogs as “xenophobic”.
The PM characterised Labor’s handling of the Liu Affair as an attack on “the Australian-Chinese community”.
But one of the leaders of the pack is ALP Senate leader Penny Wong. Her family has a Chinese Malay background and she is as far from a racist as it is possible to get.
The PM has indeed gone out on a long limb for the Member for Chisholm, when he could otherwise have left her defence to others.
Loyalty is a fine thing, but there is a reason why there is so little of it in politics.
Our PM is currently in the US for talks with President Donald Trump, along with Secretary of State Mike Pomeo and Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
You can bet China will be highest on the agenda but Liu, hopefully, won’t get a mention.