RADIO 3AW DRIVE WITH JACQUI FELGATE

E&OE TRANSCRIPT

SUBJECTS: Investing in Victorian Infrastructure; Immigration; Chinese Naval Vessels off the Coast of Australia; Peter Dutton’s Register of Interests; Importance of Women’s Sport in Australia.

JACQUI FELGATE, HOST: Well, they’re both in the studio today. Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister, Richard Marles, and Shadow Finance Minister, Liberal Senator Jane Hume. Welcome to you both.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Good to be here. Nice to be in the studio.

JANE HUME, SHADOW FINANCE MINISTER: It’s great to be in the studio together.

FELGATE: We’ve decided to sit down.

MARLES: We’ve seen that your method is to both sit and stand. So, we’ve gone with the sitting.

HUME: As long as one of us isn’t standing and the other one’s sitting. Otherwise, that would be a bit weird.

FELGATE: That’s a problem, isn’t it?

HUME: Yes, yes.

FELGATE: Now you’ve had, well, the Labor Party, the Prime Minister has had a very big day today in Melbourne and we’ve discovered that, yes, the roads here are a problem.

MARLES: Well, Melbourne is growing fast and parts of the outer ring of Melbourne, congestion is occurring as a result. So, what we announced today was a $2 billion spend in respect of the rail line to the airport, but in addition to that, a $1.2 billion spend in terms of outer metro roads, which really are about trying to make sure that infrastructure, road infrastructure keeps pace with the growth of Melbourne. You know, in various parts of Melbourne and indeed, I would say Geelong, we experience that. So, this will make a big difference.

FELGATE: This isn’t new, though, to Victorians and Melburnians, the problem with our infrastructure and our roads. And I do find it interesting as we come up to a federal election, all of a sudden there’s just this money tree that we can go out to and grab the billions of dollars off to fix it.

MARLES: I don’t think it’s just during an election, but I mean, elections are moments where you are talking to the people about what your agenda is. But you know, we’ve been investing in infrastructure throughout the last three years in relation to Victoria. And you know, this is a good thing in the sense that there are lots of people who want to live in Melbourne and Greater Melbourne, in places like Geelong, where I live, but infrastructure has to keep pace with it. And we are seeing real snarls out there in terms of traffic. And this $1.2 billion that we’ve committed today in terms of outer metro roads is going to go a long way towards that. As is the $2 billion to upgrade Sunshine Station as part of delivering the train line to Melbourne Airport. And I think one of the things with Melbourne Airport is, you know, there’s not many airports for major cities in the world which are not connected by a rail line. In that sense, Tullamarine is an outlier and this needs to be fixed.

FELGATE: Well, it’s embarrassing, isn’t it, when you come into Melbourne and we realise that we’re meant to be a major international destination and it still looks a bit like a tin shed.

HUME: It does. And look, I mean, I suppose I should reassure all of your listeners that no matter who you elect, you are going to get an airport rail link. The Coalition have been talking about this for many, many years. Our concern though is more that the infrastructure priorities, particularly for Victoria, have been wrong footed. I mean, you look at the Suburban Rail Loop, nobody wants this bloody thing. Nobody wants a Suburban Rail Loop and yet the federal government has put $2.2 billion into it. Why don’t we put that $2.2 billion into something more constructive? Because you’re right, our road system is crumbling and the reason why we’re growing so fast is because we’ve had a million new migrants into this country in just two years, which is just way too excessive. We simply cannot keep up. Our health care system can’t keep up. Our infrastructure can’t keep up. Our school system, education system can’t keep up. Which is why we need to take a big deep breath on our immigration policy.

FELGATE: So, if a Dutton government is elected, will you move that money that has been allocated from suburban rail and put it into something else?

HUME: We think Suburban Rail Loop is a boondoggle of the Allan Government. We’ve said that for a very long time. This is misplaced money. It is a poorly thought out project that was written up on the back of a napkin by the previous government, by the state government. This is not something that we’re going to support. We want to see infrastructure in Victoria. There is no doubt about it because this is a really important city, it’s a really important state, but unfortunately it’s been allowed to crumble. And can I say, Jacqui, when I travel around the country and Richard will be the same, the cost of living crisis that we have seen over the last three years is playing out far worse in Victoria than it is in any other state. This should be the canary in the coal mine for what bad Labor governments do when they economically mismanage a state.

MARLES: Well, firstly, I want to point out in terms of the $3.3 billion commitment that we made today, that’s not in relation to Suburban Rail Loop. I mean, our focus is roads in outer metro areas–

FELGATE: You have already contributed though the $2 billion already?

MARLES: Well, that was a commitment that was made at the last election, and the only thing that we’ve done recently is to release those funds as part of the first stage. But the focus in terms of what we’ve announced today going forward in the context of this election, is the rail line to the airport, which, as Jane said, is a real priority and we want to make this happen. And that builds on an already $5 billion commitment that we’ve made to the rail line to the airport. And then this $1.2 billion commitment to outer metro roads, because that’s where we feel the priority is. And just on the question of immigration, I mean, immigration is something that needs to be managed in the context of what we saw as really a disruption in our immigration patterns with the pandemic. The most significant thing you can do in terms of bringing down immigration is in relation to student visas, because that is a huge cohort of those who come in. And when we put in place student caps, those who opposed them were the Liberals. So, Liberals talk a big game about reducing immigration, but if you forget what they say and look at what they do, they’ve actually done nothing to help actually solve this problem.

HUME: Well, we agree with student caps. We just didn’t agree with the way you were going doing it.

MARLES: Well you voted against them.

HUME: We just didn’t agree with the way you were going about doing it–

MARLES: And worked with the Greens to vote against them.

HUME: So, we agree with student caps. There does need to be some direct consultation with universities, because regional universities don’t have problems with international students. It’s urban universities that do. That’s where that, you know, increasing pressure on housing and infrastructure is occurring. So, we wanted to see specifically changes on that. Moreover, there are other elements of the migration program that need adjusting too. For instance, our humanitarian intake. Now, humanitarian intake, we all agree that it’s important that we do take refugees, but there’s double the average number of refugees under a Labor government than there have been under previous governments. That’s a concern.

MARLES: But the humanitarian intake is a tiny proportion–

HUME: But it’s highly expensive and it costs the taxpayer more rather than adding to productivity.

MARLES: Well, the humanitarian program is like less than 10 per cent of those who come to Australia. So, if your fundamental argument is around the numbers of people who are actually coming here, if you want to make a difference to that, you’ve got to look at the big programs where people are coming in large number and students is the biggest one in which the federal–

HUME: And skills.

MARLES: Sure, but the one which–

HUME: Yoga instructors and dog walkers.

MARLES: Sure. The one where federal government has the biggest lever is in relation to students. And for all the talk, when we did something about it, the Liberals were voting against it. And they were doing that in combination with the Greens, which is an alliance that you wouldn’t expect to see.

HUME: I think what we’d really like to see is people coming in with skills in construction so that we can actually get the skills here to keep up with the infrastructure projects that we’ve got in place. And if we don’t have that, and let’s face it, the construction union, the CFMEU, have actually blocked that for years and years. That should– we should move past that. Now that the CFMEU is in administration, I’m afraid their wish list gets put to one side.

MARLES: And who’s the government that put them in administration? But the other point–

HUME: About time.

MARLES: Well, we’re the ones who took the step, and the Libs were in power for the better part of a decade. We’re also the ones investing in TAFE, which is how you build skills in construction and we’re making opportunities available for people to do that.

FELGATE: I do have a couple of issues I want to cover off too, the Chinese warships. Is it true that the first person to alert the Government to this was the Virgin pilot that saw it?

MARLES: Well, we became aware both through the broadcast that the Chinese made across the commercial networks or broadcasts, as well as the New Zealand frigate Te Kaha, which was working with us in shadowing the Task Group at that time. So to go back a step, you know, from the moment that this Task Group came near Australia, I authorised an unprecedented level of surveillance in relation to this Task Group. They are complying with international law, but we’ve got to right under international law to make sure that we have a close eye on them the whole way through. We’ve been doing that in a way which has never been done before. We’ve been doing that in combination with our ally in respect of New Zealand. Where this occurred, the live firing on Friday and Saturday, it was the New Zealand frigate that was doing the shadowing work at that time. So we both heard from New Zealand and from the commercial airlines around this. We have made clear though this; whilst, you know, technically there is a compliance with international law here, the kind of notice that was given by China really was not satisfactory. I mean, when we do live firing on the high seas, which is what they were doing, we typically give 12 to 24 hours notice. And the reason we do that is so that planes, before they take off, are able to plan a route around what we do. That issue we’ve raised with the Chinese, we’ve raised it both through our embassy in Canberra, through our embassy in Beijing and between our respective Foreign Ministers. And we, you know, to be frank, have not had a satisfactory answer from the Chinese–

FELGATE: What was the answer?

MARLES: Well, it’s not a satisfactory answer. I mean, there’s not really a satisfaction explanation–

FELGATE: Because it’s unnerving to Australians to see this and to hear this.

MARLES: So, I think it would have been very disconcerting for planes that were, as in commercial planes, that were already in the air to hear this broadcast and then need to make a decision in that moment. I mean, that’s our concern here –

FELGATE: It’s unacceptable.

MARLES: Well, it certainly is not how we– that’s not the standards that we live by. And we’ve made that clear to the Chinese and we want an explanation in relation to that. Live firing on the high seas is something that navies do. We do it, to be clear. And navies are in all sorts of parts of the world. I mean, most of our– the Royal Australian Navy’s activities really happen to our north in places like the South China Sea. So we understand the rights of navies to be on the high seas. But what matters is that interactions happen in a way which is professional and which enables, you know, civilian shipping or airlines to be able to get along with their business as well. And what happened on Friday particularly was deeply disconcerting.

FELGATE: Because what sort of impact does this set have on our relations as a whole?

HUME: Well, that’s a very good question, I think, Jacqui, because obviously Anthony Albanese has been very proud of the relationship that he has with the Chinese government. He’s met with Xi Jinping and I think Xi Jinping called him his handsome boy. If he’s such a handsome boy and such good mates with Xi Jinping, why can’t he just pick up a phone and say, hey, mate, this makes us feel a little nervous. What are you doing this for? Is there any chance that you could move it along or give us a bit more notice next time? Or, why is it outside Sydney Harbour and why now down in Tasmania, you know?

MARLES: Well, firstly, we have stabilised the relationship with China. Under the former government, we really watched the Liberals basically yelling at the world without any effect, whilst in fact, at the same time cutting defence spending surreptitiously, because that’s what really was going on.

HUME: Oh, nonsense.

MARLES: That’s absolutely true. You look at the Defence Strategic Review. And it absolutely bears out the cuts that were made to Defence in the years leading up to the last federal election. So, the result of that is that, you know, we lose $20 billion of trade with thousands of jobs as a result, and we are less safe as part of the bargain. I mean, that’s how things were being governed when the Liberals–

HUME: Are we seriously less safe with AUKUS? Is that what you’re saying? Surely not? Surely not?

MARLES: AUKUS, to be honest– what we inherited in respect to the Liberals from AUKUS was a thought bubble. AUKUS has been put into practice by this Government. I mean, AUKUS has been funded by this Government–

HUME: It was negotiated by Scott Morrison and the Coalition. I mean, come on.

MARLES: The Optimal Pathway which sees us getting submarines in the early 2030s was most definitely not negotiated by Scott Morrison–

HUME: I don’t think the Labor government would have been able to negotiate this. It’s great that you’re doing it. We’re thrilled that you’ve adopted it.

MARLES: That’s what we did do.

FELGATE: But do we need to now beef up our defence spending –

HUME: We do.

FELGATE: Particularly when we perhaps don’t need– we’re not going to be able to rely on America, our great friend in the future, to the way that we have in the past.

MARLES: One hundred per cent, which is why what you’ve seen over the last three years is arguably the biggest peacetime increase in defence spending that has happened by an Australian government. And to this point in time, we still don’t hear the Liberals committing to that defence spending. What the Liberals talk about is sticking to the envelope which they took to the last election, which is $50 billion less than what Labor has funded–

FELGATE: Will you commit to more?

MARLES: And when you talk about $350 billion of cuts, you can’t do that unless you go to Defence.

HUME: Well, of course we need to increase our defence spending. We’ve said that numerous times. We, most importantly though, we need to increase our defence capability. We had the ASC and ANI and all the, ONI, all estimates last night. You know, we still have six Collins class submarines that are essentially unusable.

MARLES: Well, that’s definitely not true.

HUME: This is crazy. It’s crazy.

MARLES: You shouldn’t say that. I mean, it is absolutely not true to say that we have–

HUME: How many of them are usable right now?

MARLES: Well, we have–

HUME: Is it two?

MARLES: We’re getting into the detail here. But the Coles Review, which happened about 13 years ago or 14 years ago, is about having two operational any point in time, which is world standard when you’ve got six. That’s how you maintain them. We absolutely have Collins which are usable. To suggest that six are unusable is just not right.

FELGATE: Ok. In the studio with me, the Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister, Richard Marles, and Shadow Finance Minister, Jane Hume. More after this.

[AD BREAK]

FELGATE: Right, I’m with the Deputy Prime Minister, Defence Minister Richard Marles, and Shadow Finance Minister Jane Hume. Now, Peter Dutton’s housing portfolio has been reported on a lot today. Are the optics bad here?

HUME: I’m still struggling to work out what the problem is with Peter Dutton owning houses. I mean, it’s pretty clear that he wasn’t born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He said that himself. He was a policeman and he worked really hard. He bought his first house at 19, which I think is extraordinary, and that’s because he had three jobs while he was still at school and he’s built a business, a really successful business since then, and then he’s decided to give back to his community by going into politics. But for some reason, this weird sort of politics of envy has come out. Now, the irony, of course, in all of this is there are so many Labor members that have multiple houses in their own portfolio.

FELGATE: The Prime Minister was criticised for buying the beach house.

MARLES: Yeah, look, I mean, there’s no problem with Peter Dutton owning houses and, you know, good luck to him in terms of how he’s gone there. I think the issue that’s being raised here is one of transparency. I mean, transparency in terms of what’s been declared in relation to what he’s bought and sold over the years and when those declarations have been made, and transparency in relation to his share purchases and particularly his bank share purchases.

HUME: Is anybody concerned with what he owns now and what he’s declared and what’s on the register? Because I just don’t think he could be any clearer. Everything has been done by the book.

MARLES: Well, I think there are questions in relation to the purchase of the bank shares, the timing of that, and I mean, it’s an unusual purchase at a particularly sensitive moment when Australians were doing it tough and where he did very well out of those transactions. And I think for somebody who is seeking to become the Prime Minister of the country, it’s important that they make clear at that moment what they knew when those.

HUME: Well, he has. Let’s be honest here, he has made a statement about this and said that there was absolutely no wrongdoing done and I have no reason to doubt his integrity. Let’s be honest, he was a member of the opposition at the time when this government decision was made. He was. And I’m a member of the opposition. When you guys make a decision, you don’t tell me what it is. I read the media release like everybody else.

MARLES: That’s not entirely right.

HUME: In a sense, that’s nonsense. Opposition’s the idea that he would know and then respond to something that the government was doing. They don’t tell the Opposition.

MARLES: Oppositions do get briefings and there was a briefing in relation to this and I think it’s.

HUME: He was not the relevant Minister at the time. Why wouldn’t he be briefed?

MARLES: There are opposition briefings on key moments and there was a briefing in relation to this campaign. This is just a question as to what he knew at that moment.

HUME: This is a smear campaign Jacqui.

FELGATE: You did say this morning that Labor are the grubbiest people.

HUME: Ah, you’re so grubby. And it’s like– and look, not you, Richard. I like you. I like you.

FELGATE: Are you grubby Richard?

HUME: I even said on the break he was handsome.

FELGATE: She did actually. She did say she likes sitting next to him on the plane.

HUME: But the problem is.

MARLES: Let’s get back to having an argument.

HUME: When a Labor Party runs out of policy, when it runs out of ideas, when it runs out of excuses, it goes the man every single time. And it is grubby. It’s revolting, it’s dirt politics. It’s no wonder people find politics frustrating. No wonder they switch off when that kind of behavior is tolerated.

FELGATE: Are you grubby?

MARLES: Well, no, but I think it is about simply saying that for somebody who is seeking to become the Prime Minister of the country, Australians have a right to understand. Well, firstly, to see transparency and in this instance, to understand what he knew at that moment. And I don’t think that’s an unfair question to ask. And I don’t think it’s grubby to ask. Well, I don’t think it’s grubby to ask the question and I think there should be an expectation of a full response.

HUME: My concern for you guys is every single time you sling mud at Peter Dutton, our votes go up.

MARLES: Well, seeking transparency in a moment like this is appropriate. And there’s nothing grubby about asking a question. And if there is nothing to hide, then there will be a full explanation which we’re yet to hear.

HUME: Well, I think you’re better than that, Richard.

FELGATE: I just want to finish today too. Just on the comments. I’m not sure if you heard them, just about women’s sport and the commentator, Marty Sheargold. And just we’ve had a really big discussion on the program today about misogyny, but also about how we treat women who do play sport. Did you hear the comments and what was your reaction?

HUME: I did. And of course, you know, I’ve got a daughter that played AFL. And, you know, she was built like a baby giraffe. I worried about her every time she went on the field, but I was really proud that she got out there and played AFL with her friends. I thought these comments were the comments of a buffoon. To tell you the truth, they were entirely inappropriate. I did hear that Anika Wells had, you know, really laid the boot in and so she bloody well should. To be honest, I would rather stab my eye out with a fork than listen to his radio show.

MARLES: Yeah, look, I haven’t heard the comments, but, I mean, sport generally is empowering and women’s sport is so empowering for young women. I have two daughters who are both sport mad. My youngest has taken up footy. It’s now one of her major sports. And as you said, Jane, it’s a joy to see that. And as I’ve watched my girls play netball, row now, playing footy, you see, I mean, you see all the things that come from sport. Teamwork, empowerment, a sense of satisfaction at being able to get good at something and execute your skills.

HUME: It’s great.

MARLES: It is. Totally right.

HUME: He should be encouraging us.

MARLES: Totally right.

HUME: He’s off the mark.

FELGATE: Well, great to see you both. I look forward to having you in next week.

HUME: Thanks.

MARLES: Looking forward to it.

 

ENDS