“The Prime Minister now has a choice. He can be bullied by billionaires or he can continue to stand up for Australian sovereignty and ordinary people by refusing to back down to these threats,” says political columnist MICHAEL MOORE. 

THE Morrison government has passed its first test in putting the people before big business. However, the second test is somewhat more challenging. 

Will the federal government stand up to the bullying tactics of China and the billionaires or will they put people first?

Calling for an independent international commission of inquiry to examine the origins of COVID-19 is a very sensible approach. This coronavirus had far-reaching consequences for all countries on earth and it is reasonable that a co-ordinated international effort be made to prevent a repeat. The first step is to identify the origins of the current virus.

Australia, along with most democracies, is familiar with independent commissions of inquiry in such circumstances. At first blush it seems clear that the style of government in China and some other countries is challenged by any inquiry that is not controlled by the state. 

However, it can also be challenging for democracies. It is not hard to imagine the resistance of Donald Trump to any attempt at an international inquiry into his handling of the virus.

In calling for the independent inquiry, Prime Minister Scott Morrison has put the ordinary people first. 

The reaction of China has been that of a bully. Do something we do not like and there will be serious consequences. For years China has been building its economic influence in the developing world as part of its “soft diplomacy”. 

What is clear, especially with the latest threats, is that it is hardening its approach and is also prepared to use economic threats with Australia.

Economic threats from China should be no surprise. In 2017 South Korea suffered a dramatic two thirds drop in visitors from China. The government in Beijing was not happy with the US Terminal High Altitude Area Defence system and orchestrated a boycott reported to cost billions of dollars. 

The reaction of Australia’s mining magnates and media moguls, such as “Twiggy” Forrest and Kerry Stokes, comes as no surprise. They believe they should be able to set the agenda – particularly for a conservative government. It is time for Morrison to put them in their place, to demonstrate that the government’s priority is with everyday Australians.

The leader of the Prime Minister’s COVID-19 Commission, Neville Power, also needs to be brought back into line. His support for Forrest is simply outrageous as was the behaviour of the mining billionaire himself. 

Bringing an uninvited Chinese official to a government press conference was simply appalling; it was rude, presumptuous, arrogant and bigheaded. 

The Chinese consul general in Melbourne ought to have understood how inappropriate it was to gatecrash the press conference with Health Minister Greg Hunt. What would have been the reaction of the Chinese government if an Australian diplomat had attempted the same stunt in Beijing?

The threats that Chinese people might boycott Australian exports by ambassador Jingye Cheng over the push for a coronavirus investigation is unprecedented. No wonder mining magnates who have concentrated on Chinese markets for decades are unnerved. This is exactly what China intends as the influence of the ultra-wealthy on government in Australia is well understood. 

The ambassador went further in an attempt to threaten a much broader section of Australian business with “maybe the ordinary people will say: ‘Why should we drink Australian wine? Eat Australian beef?’,” and ‘why should we go to such a country that is not so friendly to China?'”.

The Prime Minister now has a choice. 

He can be bullied by billionaires such as Forrest and Stokes (and no doubt many other more subtle persuaders). Alternatively, he can continue to stand up for Australian sovereignty and ordinary people by refusing to back down to these threats.

China may wish to resist an international independent inquiry as part of protecting its own sovereignty. As part of their “soft diplomacy”, it has made a great deal out of its willingness to assist others and to share what has been learnt from their experience. For their part, supporting such an inquiry would really show good faith with the rest of the world.