Treasurer says decision near, but Bill Shorten says Coalition should not rush sale to suit Mike Baird’s government

Scott Morrison says national security will be put first in decision on Ausgrid sale

Scott Morrison says national security is outranking everything in the Foreign Investment Review Board’s consideration of the sale of the New South Wales electricity distributor Ausgrid to a Chinese ­company.

The treasurer says authorities are in the final stages of that consideration and he understands why some Australians are concerned about the sale.

“Investment into [Australia] is critical to future jobs ... we need to ensure that we have that investment,” Morrison told 2GB radio Monday. “But, above and beyond all of that, national security outranks everything.

“My national security advice will be taken from the national security agencies, as you’d expect, because they’re the ones who have the detailed knowledge of all the technical issues here.”

The NSW government is planning to sell a 99-year lease on 50.4% of Ausgrid – the state’s major electricity distributor – as part of its poles and wires privatisation program. It hopes to raise more than $10bn from the sale.

Xenophon urges caution over possible Ausgrid sale to China's State Grid Read more

But the field of potential buyers has thinned to just two – the State Grid Corporation of China, which is China’s biggest state-owned company, and the privately owned, Hong Kong-listed Cheung Kong Infrastructure, controlled by the billionaire Li Ka-shing.

Federal MP Bob Katter has flagged a private member’s bill to stop the sale of Ausgrid to State Grid, given it is owned by the Chinese government.

Nick Xenophon has also warned Australia needs to think seriously about its national interest before it allows the sale to go ahead, particularly because it could be sold to China’s biggest state-owned company.

Last month Xenophon wrote to Morrison to ask if the Turnbull government had sought advice from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation and the Department of Defence about the sale.

He argued the NSW electricity network was nationally significant, given the structure of the national electricity market, and the sale of the network to a foreign, state-owned company should raise national security concerns.

He met with Morrison last week and they discussed the Ausgrid sale.

On Monday, Morrison told Sydney’s 2GB radio that national security would be the top priority for the government when it made its decision.

He said he put a former head of Asio, David Irvine, and a former managing director of Rio Tinto, David Peever, on the Foreign Investment Review Board because he thought the board needed “more skills and experience on national security.”

The bid process for Ausgrid closed on 25 July and the board and Morrison will have to approve the sale.

The Labor leader, Bill Shorten, warned on Monday the Coalition should not hurry the sale through to suit the political timetable of the NSW Coalition government.

“What we don’t need is for the Liberal party just to rush this through as they did with the Port of Darwin,” Shorten said.



“They need to take these matters seriously. They can’t dismiss concerns around jobs, around electricity prices and around national security, merely because premier Baird wants to try to get an inflated price before the next election for the sale of NSW electricity assets.”

Xenophon said on Monday – after Morrison’s radio interview – that there was a “world of difference” between the bids by State Grid, a state-owned company, and the privately owned Hong Kong-listed Cheung Kong Infrastructure.

“That distinction ought to be made,” he said, adding that the legislation said any level of investment in an asset like Ausgrid, by a state-owned enterprise, should trigger an inquiry by the Foreign Investment Review Board.

“In any other country in the world, if an Australian-government entity wanted to purchase key power assets in China or Japan or Thailand ... that would raise concerns from regulators in those countries,” Xenophon said.

“All I’m asking is that we have a clear and unambiguous national interest test, which we don’t seem to have at the moment. It’s incredibly vague.”