Asking questions is a journalist's job

but only provided that the questions are used for legitimate purposes - such as obtaining information or querying the accuracy of information. 

Asking questions (and then using the answers) to simply stir up trouble is not a legitimate purpose. The journalist who asked President Macron the question as to whether  he thought Prime Minister Morrison had lied to him was simply stirring up trouble. There were other ways the topic could have been approached but this was done deliberately. It was done to further criticise the Downunder Prime Minister and show him as being as incompetent as possible.

The reason for all this? The most likely reason for all this is that he is not doing what is expected of him or, if he is, he is not doing it in the way which is expected of him. He isn't demanding the immediate end of all coal fired power stations and banning all coal mining. Of course if he did do that then he would be accused of wrecking the economy and not supporting "poor" countries which rely on coal fired power stations.  The Prime Minister is in a situation where he cannot win.

I wonder though if the journalist who asked the question really thought about what he was doing. What he has done is put at risk the livelihoods of many other people in this country who need to trade with the rest of the world. By deliberately inflaming the situation he has put trade negotiations at risk. He has, perhaps irreparably, harmed the economy. It might get the journalist a few minutes of fame and a pat on the back from the news service which employs him but if other contracts are cancelled then it does no good at all. The economic harm done by the question is likely to be immense. Is it legitimate to deliberately choose to ask questions designed to do that?