I also rise to take note of answers given by ministers to questions asked by coalition senators in question time. In doing so, I want to associate myself very closely with the remarks of Senator Sterle, who was several speakers before me. As I've said many times in this chamber, those who seek to politicise our national security are engaging in a deeply risky business because how we talk about our national security has the potential to affect our national security. Indeed, how we talk about our national security can determine our national security. When we seek to politicise these issues and when senators in this chamber seek to engage in a style of rhetoric which has no place, I believe, in our national debate or in the Senate, that can negatively impact our national security, and that happens through the impact it has on social cohesion.

Every single member of this chamber knows that, in making decisions like the ones referred to in question time today, governments rely on the advice of our intelligence agencies. I don't think it should be the case that anyone in this chamber or outside should suggest that we don't. When it comes to issues like this, it is fully appropriate that our intelligence agencies are engaged and providing the advice and that we are listening to it, because this is important, considered work. It's not work for the debate of this chamber and not work for the political engagement and discussion of the day. This is work for our agencies really, really important work. That was the process the opposition followed when they were in government; it's the same process we are following now. If you want to start changing such processes on the fly because they suit your political narrative of the day, then I would say that is very, very dangerous business. That is a style of politics which could affect our national security.

I would urge caution in that, in the same way that I would urge caution in the other rhetoric being used in this chamber day after day. It does not just have the potential to impact our social cohesion; it is deliberately trying to upset social cohesion in Australia, which is, in my view, a very dangerous business and a very dangerous game which is causing a huge amount of hurt to people in our community. There are a lot of people in Australia suffering right now. There are many, many Australians with families in the Middle East, and there are many, many Australians who feel deeply hurt and saddened by the conflict in the Middle East. I believe the best thing we can do as a government is to support those communities by supporting a community and a society here in Australia which provides support and refuge to them and which doesn't seek to bring a conflict in the Middle East to the shores of Australia to serve someone's political advantage. That is a dangerous and toxic business. It is hurting our country and it is hurting people within it. It's hurting students on university campuses, children and many, many good people in our country who feel deeply on these issues.

None of those people, indeed no-one affected by the conflict in the Middle East, is served by games and politicking on the floor of this chamber. That will achieve nothing of meaning or substance in the Middle East, and it will only do what it is designed to do, and that is to undermine social cohesion in Australia. It is dangerous, risky business dangerous actions undermining social cohesion, which I don't believe have any place in this chamber or any place in Australia.

We all have a responsibility in the way we talk about national security because the way we talk about our nation's security affects our nation's security. The way we talk about national security can actually have an impact on our nation's security. Experts will tell you this. People from the intelligence community will tell you this as well. How we talk about these things matters. We should not dive back into playbooks of governments past which sought to politicise and seek an advantage from our national security, and we should not engage in this toxic rhetoric which seeks to undermine social cohesion in our country and is making people in our country less safe. Many, many people are hurting, and too many people in this chamber are playing a very dangerous game. The way we speak about national security matters; it impacts our national security. We should all be cautious in the way we engage with that in this chamber.