E&OE
CURTIS: Mr Rudd, welcome to PM.
PM: Thank you.
CURTIS: Have you picked up the phone to talk to anyone in China about the detention of Stern Hu?
PM: Can I say that the Australian Government, since this matter first broke, has made three sets of representations in Canberra by calling in the acting ambassador. Secondly, the embassy in Beijing and the Consulate-General in Shanghai has done the same with their Chinese counterparts there. On top of that, when the consular access was granted to Mr Hu, of course Australian officials did that -
CURTIS: But neither you nor the Foreign Affairs Minister have been willing to pick up the phone yourselves. Why not?
PM: Can I finish my answer to your question? When I was recently in Italy, I also raised this matter with the Chinese Vice-Foreign Minister, who was attending that conference. And I understand that the Foreign Minister is himself expecting to meet a Chinese Vice-Foreign Minister at the meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement, which he and the Chinese and others are attending at a conference in Egypt in the next 24 hours or so.
So on your proposition about not raising these matters, I don't think it holds particular water.
But the key question is this: while we're interested here in the individual concerned and how we deal with the complexities of this case, what it seems that Mr Turnbull, whose comments you've just relayed in your report just now, is interested in is simply in screaming headlines.
This is a complex case, we're working our way through it methodically. As I said recently, when I was abroad, we will take this up at whatever level of the Chinese Government is necessary, as facts in each level of this complex case come clear.
CURTIS: But what message do you take from the fact that despite all those representations you say are made, your Ministers, you, still can't get any more information than is available on public websites?
PM: Can I say, that is not the case. We are engaged with the Chinese on elements of this entire matter and there are further engagements with the Chinese to occur. This is a complex case. Cases like this in the past have also exhibited complexity as well. We work our way though each of these as we work our way though consular cases around the world.
In the last two days, since coming back from the G8+ summit in Italy, I've had rounds of discussion with officials here in Sydney yesterday, again today, working our way through these matters. They are complex, but again, our interest is the individual concerned - Mr Hu and his wellbeing. We're not interested in political grandstanding, which it seems to be what Mr Turnbull is about.
If I could add one point as well on that. The course of a responsible Opposition in these circumstances is to in fact request a briefing from the Australian Government on these delicate and sensitive matters. No such request has been forthcoming from Mr Turnbull, or, as I'm advised, by Mrs Bishop. I stand to be corrected on the latter if it's occurred.
What I'm saying loud and clear now is they should request such a briefing. We'll be providing such a briefing once the Foreign Minister returns to Australia. Then we would hope that the Opposition, full apprised of the complexities of this case, would rather than simply trying to score political points out of it would get on with the business of supporting the Government in our attempts to resolve this matter.
CURTIS: Have you been able to get any information from Chinese officials that is not publicly available about the reasons for Mr Hu's detention?
PM: I don't intend to go to the detail of those consular and diplomatic engagements at this stage. My interest is to advance the interests of the individual concerned and -
CURTIS: But even if you can't tell us publicly the details, can you get that information?
PM: Of course, we're working on a whole range of details on the case, and at multiple levels. That is what you do in these circumstances.
Mr Hu is like any other Australian citizen. We take his interests abroad when he finds himself in difficulty with governments abroad, and we are engaged in multiple consular chases around at any given time, many of which are very delicate, many of which are very complex, but our interest is the wellbeing of the Australian citizen concerned.
At the same time, can I just note this point - that the Premier of Western Australia has requested briefing from the Australian Government. As I understand, that's been provided. His comments on this matter have been entirely balanced.
Can I say also we've been in direct contact with the company, Mr Hu's employer, Rio, in this matter, and they've sought to engage this matter in a responsible way as well.
It's a difficult, complex case. We're working our way through it. And the sort of political grandstanding we're seeing on this matter, frankly, goes to the lack of judgment that we've seen from Mr Turnbull demonstrated on so many other events in recent times.
CURTIS: Does any concern about affecting the important economic relationship with China rate in your handling of this issue? Are you worried about antagonising the Chinese at all?
PM: Absolutely not. I mean let's just go to the essence of this: can I just say that this is a Government that in recent times has been criticised for, quote, ‘being anti-Chinese' when it released its Defence White Paper. Can I simply draw people's attention to the debate which surrounded that?
We took robust decisions in the national interest in terms of the Defence White Paper because we judged them to be right for this country's national security for the next 20 years. Nonetheless, that's the criticism which was levelled.
On a second matter, concerning the handling of the Chinalco-Rio matter, can I just say this as well: the Government, always, in that matter will be acting in the national interest. In the end, what you saw happen was the resolution of that particular matter on commercial grounds.
Can I just add one other point here? Mr Turnbull, as you know, was repeatedly, publicly in the Chinalco-China matter constantly saying that this particular takeover should not proceed.
Yet we have Mrs Bishop out there in the media today saying that the Hu matter has resulted from the fact that this particular acquisition did not proceed. You cannot have this both ways.
Again, what you have is a political Opposition, rather than being interested in the wellbeing of the individual, simply interested in political headlines.
We, the Government, have been hard at work the last two days up in Sydney, Kirribilli, working our way through these matters with officials in great complexity, in great detail, because we take the interest of any Australian citizen seriously.
And in your question of balancing the Chinese relationship, I would say this - Australia's national interest always and under every circumstance comes first. That means the wellbeing of any Australian citizen. They come first. We will handle each of the other elements of our relationship in our terms -
CURTIS: When then -
PM: - and that has been very clear about its preparedness to articulate clearly Australia's national interests in all of its relationships abroad, including that with China.
CURTIS: When, then, will you judge it to be the right time to raise it the matter directly with the Chinese President?
PM: We will work our way through this systematically and thoroughly, and once all relevant facts are established - as I have been seeking to do in recent meetings in the last 48 hours since getting off the plane yesterday morning from Italy - once we work our way through this, as I said in Italy when I was at the G8 summit, that we will raise it with whatever level of the Chinese leadership is appropriate.
We do, however, need to establish all relevant facts. If you are dealing with a case as complex as this, then it's important to have all relevant facts at your disposal in terms of what representations are made at any particular level.
Therefore, in terms of representations with whoever in the future, myself, the Foreign Minister and others will of course make those representations as appropriate at the right time because our interests are governed by one thing - that is the wellbeing of this Australian citizen.
That is what we are seeking to support, and again I would say to all concerned with this debate, that should be everyone's number one concern, not scoring cheap political headlines displaying a fundamental and continuing lack of judgment on sensitive matters, which we've come to associate with Mr Turnbull.
CURTIS: Is there a broader problem in this, though, that China appears to be willing to use the apparatus of the state to get its own way in business negotiations?
PM: Well, it's a continued concern for all of us engaged with the China economic relationship to make sure that the economic relationship is pursued in its own terms.
My view is that in the case of the Australian economic relationship, we need to conduct that within its own terms. At the same time, we will not shy away from making representations on behalf of individual Australian companies, on behalf of individual Australian citizens, or on the broader question of human rights concerns -
CURTIS: Are you concerned in this case, though, that China does -
PM: - Some people raised their eyebrows a year ago when I was in China in an address to Peking University raised the question of human rights in Tibet in a lecture to that university.
All these things should be addressed and articulated clearly in their own terms, whether it's the Defence White Paper, humans rights abuses in China, standing up for consular interests in China, advancing our commercial interest. We'll prosecute this relationship in a balanced and appropriate way, and that means standing up for the interests of Australian citizens who have been taken into custody in China for whatever grounds. We take each of those cases seriously, as we are with this one.
CURTIS: But if China is willing to, as it does seem to be in this case, willing to change the rules mid-negotiation, doesn't that make something like a Free Trade Agreement futile because trade is only as free as China is willing to tolerate?
PM: Well, you've raised the question of free trade negotiations. They were first launched by the Howard Government some years ago. There have been twists and turns in those negotiations over a long period of time, as there has been in the 18 months that this Government has been in office as well. All these negotiations are complex, as is the negotiation of the free trade agreements with other countries as well.
All I'm saying is that our responsibility as a Government is to prosecute a relationship as broad and as complex and as important with China in an appropriate and balanced way. But let me say this in absolute terms - when it comes to the wellbeing of any individual Australian citizen, we take those interests of that individual, as seriously as we take the interests of any Australian around the world. They are forefront in our mind and we will underpin those interests in the representations we make and the actions we do take with the Chinese authorities, and that will continue into the future.
CURTIS: Mr Rudd, Peter Garrett, your Environment Minister, has today approved the Four Mile uranium mine in South Australia. Is the Labor Party now the party of uranium mines?
PM: Now, can I say it was quite clear what we did, transparently and democratically at the Australian Labor Party National Conference in 2007, where in full view of the nation's audience and full view of the Australian Labor Party national conference we changed our policy. We couldn't be more transparent than that.
Furthermore, can I just simply say that this decision and the conditions which come with it demonstrate the Australian Government's commitment to world's best practice environmental standards for uranium mines. We think that's an appropriate way forward, but in terms of transparency in the matter which you seem to think is newsworthy, that was in fact a decision we took way back in 2007, in full view of everybody.
CURTIS: If you're willing to sanction uranium mining, why not go the next step and sanction the use of that uranium in Australia to run nuclear power plants as part of the strategy to reduce carbon emissions?
PM: Well, I think the whole question of climate change and what you do with greenhouse gas emissions is first and foremost best addressed by the Parliament passing a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme which establishes a price for carbon.
CURTIS: But why not consider uranium mining as part of your overall strategy, consider nuclear power as part of the strategy?
PM: Well, a price for carbon, again, answering your first question, goes to the relative pricing therefore of a range of alternative energy options.
That's why it's important for the Parliament to pass this matter - 30 days to go before Mr Turnbull is committed, for this matter to be voted on in the Australian Parliament. If we're serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, that must be where this debate is first and foremost resolved.
Secondly, as far as alternative energy sources are concerned, what we have done is proceeded on multiple fronts - a huge investment in energy renewables, solar energy. We've committed funds to build what will become the single largest solar power plant anywhere in the world, 1,000 megawatts equivalent. Secondly, a large, half-billion dollar investment in other renewable energy sources.
Thirdly, the announcement which I made globally most recently at the G8 summit in Italy for a Carbon Capture and Storage Institute which in Australia will see a further $2.5 billion invested in carbon capture and storage.
On the question of nuclear power generation, as we have said many times before, in Australia, we believe the other energy options available to us in the clean and green renewable energy space, together with the actions we're taking on CCS, are sufficient for the future.
CURTIS: Prime Minister, thank you very much for your time.
PM: Thanks for having me on the program.
(Ends)