HOST: Prime Minister, good morning.
PM: Good morning, John.
HOST: No surprise that the legislation didn't pass, I suppose.
PM: I had worked hard with members of the House of Representatives in order to secure passage of this legislation, and I had worked hard, too, with the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbot, to try and convince him to do the right thing in the national interest and pass this legislation.
But it became clear in the last couple of days that Tony Abbott was not going to act in the national interest, that he was going to act to end offshore processing and that the legislation wouldn't succeed.
HOST: Could I ask you why you blame Tony Abbott for the failure of the Malaysia swap deal? I mean, the Greens also oppose the plan, but you don't seem to mention them too often.
PM: I've never asked Tony Abbott to support the Malaysia arrangement - our plan to transfer people who arrive here unauthorised by boat to Malaysia, and to take more genuine refugees from Malaysia who have been waiting there for years. I've never asked Tony Abbott to endorse that plan, even though all of the expert advice available to us is that that would have the biggest affect to smash people smuggling.
What I did ask Tony Abbott to do, and John, I did ask every Member of Parliament to do - Greens members, independent members, so I've asked everyone to do this - to vote for amendments which put this Government and governments in the future in the same position that governments in the past have been.
The High Court made a decision which was an unexpected decision and changed the migration law in this country. As a result, this Government and governments in the future don't, under current legislation, have the power effectively to have asylum seekers processed offshore.
I asked the Parliament, including Mr Abbott, to pass amendments which would have enabled this Government to implement the arrangement with Malaysia, and if he were ever prime minister to implement his plan for Nauru. So even though if he were ever Prime Minister he needs this legislation, he refused to pass it just because he wants to play politics with it.
HOST: Have you spoken to him since?
PM: Look, I spoke to him in the run up. John, I couldn't have done more. The High Court case happened, we offered Mr Abbott briefings from our legal advisers, we offered him briefings from the experts that have advised this Government on people smuggling and asylum seeker policy and advised the Howard Government. These are people the Howard Government relied on as well.
We made all of those briefings available to Mr Abbott so he had all of the information, including all of the information about the need to amend the law. I then sat down and spoke to him personally. He said he would consider the question and come back to me and the next thing I knew he was on the media saying ‘No, not going to pass the Government's laws', but because this is a circumstance where, whilst Tony Abbott frequently yells ‘stop the boats', those words are hollow.
HOST: So, you're telling me that Tony Abbot is simply being bloody minded?
PM: I think he is being very political, very, very political in this matter, and instead of acting in the national interest, which is to enable offshore processing, he has acted to destroy offshore processing because he thinks it's in his political interest to see more boats.
The problem with that John, of course, is that it effectively means Tony Abbott would rather see people put their lives at risk getting on leaky boats, than work with the Government to put this issue behind us.
HOST: So the more boats that come, the worse you look in his mind, is what you believe?
PM: I think that is exactly what is motivating Tony Abbott. It is certainly not the national interest, it is certainly not smashing people smuggling and it's certainly not keeping men and women and children off boats, where they could see their lives endangered.
HOST: What about the Greens?
PM: Look, I think the Greens have got the wrong perspective here too, absolutely.
HOST: What's their motive?
PM: They have always had a policy position of onshore processing for asylum seekers. So, they've always had that policy position. Why they have that policy position John, you'd need to ask them.
So, yes, I think the Greens have got the wrong approach here, but let's just be very clear about Tony Abbott's position and this is why I'm very focussed on it - Tony Abbott goes around saying to Australians ‘stop the boats', Tony Abbott goes round saying to Australians he supports offshore processing, and then, when his vote was needed to enable offshore processing in this parliament, he voted to end offshore processing.
It's that hypocrisy and action in his political interest that I am obviously putting a spotlight on.
HOST: OK, and I understand you putting a spotlight on it, but given that he's done this, I'd still like to know what you consider the motive for his actions might be. Just to be bloody minded?
PM: I think the motive for his action is entirely political. He believes, indeed, he wants to see more boats, because he thinks that that is politically bad for the Government. That is his motivation. He has not thought for one second of any day of this about the national interest.
HOST: Yeah, well, it's an extraordinary situation and Tony Abbott has been very vocal about it, he's called your Government shabby and miserable and divided and directionless. What's your-
PM: -Doesn't that tell you, we just talked about motivation, doesn't that tell you everything you need to know, John? All of those words, all of those words about the Government, him pursuing his political interests about the Government. What Tony Abbott can't say to you, John, is what he would actually do to stop the boats.
If he was on your show now he would say ‘Oh, I would have a processing centre in Nauru.' Well, he can't have that centre without legislation and he's determined to vote against the legislation that would make that possible.
HOST: So, all this has been done simply to make you and the Government look bad?
PM: I think the motivation is entirely political. Correct.
HOST: When you say that he should be perhaps looking at himself, would you call the Opposition shabby and miserable and divided and directionless?
PM: I would call them, as I just have to you, I would say they are being motivated by what they perceive to be their political interest, not the national interest. I would say that they are exercising their votes in the parliament against, at the end of the day, the policy they say they believe in.
They go round at say to Australians that they want to stop the boats, they go round and say to Australians that they want offshore processing, and then they determine to exercise their votes in the parliament to end offshore processing.
HOST: This Western Australian, Tony Crook, turned out to be just that, as far as you were concerned. He was really your last hope, wasn't he?
PM: I certainly wouldn't adopt that terminology about Tony Crook, and let's be clear-
HOST: -I'm not suggesting for a moment he is a crook, but you wouldn't be terribly happy with him at the moment.
PM: But let's be very clear, Tony Crook has got one vote in this parliament. He ended up on that position because of the decision that Tony Abbott took, and Mr Crook has pointed out, and it is right, there are 150 members of the House of Representatives, there are only two who say publicly that they are opposed to offshore processing. Mr Abbott says publicly he supports offshore processing, but he's not prepared to vote for it.
HOST: So, he's being deceitful?
PM: I certainly think when he said to Australians in the last election campaign that he believed in stopping the boats - well, if you say that, then you need to show how you are acting, and when action was called for by Mr Abbott in this parliament, he says ‘stop the boats', he says he believes in offshore processing, but he then determines to use his vote to end the ability of this country to process people offshore. That is what he's done.
HOST: Prime Minister, there will now be a risk that we'll see far more asylum seekers arriving here, I imagine. How will we-
PM: -I think there is a real risk that we'll see more boats, that's right.
HOST: How do we handle the increase?
PM: We will make appropriate preparations and plans, as the Minister for Immigration and I said yesterday.
HOST: So, does that mean building more detention centres?
PM: No, as the Minister for Immigration and I said yesterday, we have capacity in our detention system now. We have some capacity that can be used.
We do believe there is a very real risk that we will see more boats. We, consequently believe that there is a risk that there will be increased pressure on our detention system, and we will manage that so that we have mandatory detention, that people who arrive unauthorised are detained and have appropriate health, security and identity checks, and then we will use existing policy measures which are in the system, like community detention and bridging visas.
HOST: OK, but there's a possibility that you can't squeeze all these people into the detention centres that are there, so do you build more detention centres or do you reconsider Nauru? What do you do, because-
PM: It is not our intention to build more detention centres. We will manage the system just as I have explained-
HOST: -Well, if they won't fit they won't fit.
PM: Yeah, well I've just explained John that we have a range of measures available-
HOST: But you haven't told me what the measures are? What are the measures?
PM: Yes, I did I just mentioned before John, we've got a range of measures available to us, including community detention and the use of bridging visas after a period of mandatory detention for health, security and identity checking.
Then, on the question of, you've just said to me ‘would you use Nauru?', because Tony Abbott is determined to vote against the legislation it is not possible for this Government or any government in the future to have a centre outside of Australia. Tony Abbott's vote means that is not possible.
HOST: But aren't you the Government? I mean, aren't you running the place?
PM: Yes we are, John, and I am not the first Prime Minister to have problems getting legislation through Parliament. Prime Minister Howard went through that. Indeed he went directly through it in relation to migration legislation, where he could not secure through the Parliament a piece of legislation he wanted.
HOST: The statistics aren't good - one boat in 2002 during the Pacific Solution and more than 2700 people arriving in 2009. They're legitimate statistics.
PM: Absolutely, and that's why I'm very determined, and if Mr Abbott ceased playing politics and acted in the national interest and voted for the legislation, I would immediately implement the arrangement we have with Malaysia, which the same experts who advised the Howard Government have now told us is the best deterrence policy we have.
I think we need to be very clear, John, because there's a lot of false claims made in this debate. When the Howard Government determined to have the Pacific Solution, of course it sent a big shockwave up the people smuggling pipeline, but now people smugglers know for sure that if you have something like a detention centre in Nauru, then it is more likely than not the people who are found to be refugees will be resettled in Australia-
HOST: -They'll come right back here.
PM: Exactly, so people smugglers understand that now, because they saw what happened with Nauru last time. That is why the experts who advise Government say to us that having a centre in Nauru, for example, would not have the same deterrence effect now.
That is why those experts have been so enthusiastic about a new and innovative approach, like the arrangement with Malaysia where the message would be to people smugglers that if you represent people you can get them to Australia actually what you're doing is you are sending them to Malaysia.
That is what I wanted to do, and clearly Tony Abbott, for his own political reasons, has determined to stop the Government doing that. The great irony of this is in making that wrecking decision, he has also wrecked his ability, were he ever Prime Minister, to implement what he says is his preferred policy, having a centre in Nauru.
HOST: Well, he certainly couldn't do it now could he?
PM: He could not do it with the legislation unamended.
HOST: Community detention, is that putting them in the community even before they've been processed?
PM: No, people will be - sorry, we've got to be very clear here - mandatory detention will be there. People will be detained for health, security and identity checking.
We have community detention now. We have it particularly to meet the needs of children. You would recall John that under the Howard Government it was a matter of great community concern that children were held in high-security detention centres behind razor wire and that is why we have brought on-stream some community detention capacity where children are not held in circumstances like that.
HOST: But they would still be with their parents?
PM: Yes, John. We of course do everything we can to keep family groupings together.
HOST: OK, just quickly on a different subject, you've been very generous with your time as usual - what about Qantas? This dispute seems to be worse by the day. Have you got some plans in place in case it does get worse, and I think it will?
PM: Well, the dispute is at the stage where both Qantas and the relevant unions are saying that they want to negotiate a solution to the disputes. My words to them are get around a table and get it done, get the negotiation through. If disputes escalate, then the Government does have some abilities under the Fair Work Act.
HOST: OK, well, let's hope it doesn't get worse for the sake of Australia because it doesn't do our tourist trade a lot of good and doesn't do our reputation a lot of good either, does it?
PM: I think it's very important that people get round a table and get this sorted out. Both of the parties to the dispute are saying that they want to negotiate an outcome. Well, the best thing to do would be to get round a table and get it negotiated.
HOST: OK, a lot of people who listen to the program and subscribe to the program have been mentioning something I'm sure you don't want to mention - the kiss.
PM: Well, I mean John I'm here as Prime Minister of Australia focussing on the big issues for our nation, seizing a clean energy future, or ensuring we've got jobs in this phase of economic change. If people want to talk about that, John, then that's a matter for them.
HOST: Yes it's funny when we've got plenty of other problems that they're fascinated by the kiss. Was it awkward?
PM: Oh John, I'm not going to get involved in discussion about these very, very trivial matters compared with working out the things that I need to. We're undergoing a major economic transformation in this, the Asian century. I work on that.
I've always been motivated by making sure we improve education and give kids a genuine chance. I work on that. We're delivering the biggest health reform since Medicare. I work on that. We're delivering the technology change our nation needs today, the NBN, and of course this week we delivered a clean energy future, and now you and I are talking about profound matters associated with border security. That's my job as Prime Minister. I'll leave the trivia commentary to others.
HOST: Well, I think I will too, but it's something that for some extraordinary reason people want to talk about, and I've got to say to you that when you gave me a list the other day of the good things about Australia, I kept that list and I remind people of it frequently.
PM: Good, thank you. We live in a great country.
HOST: Yeah and I think it's important that, I mean not everybody's going to like the way the Government does things, but nonetheless in the overall scheme of things this is a pretty good country, best in the world, and we've got to thank somebody for that. It mightn't be totally this Government, it must be a series of governments, and I'm sure you would agree over a period of time that has made Australia what it is.
PM: I think this, we live in a wonderful nation. It's been built painstakingly by the work of generations of Australians and successive governments and what we've learned from all of that is you've always got to take active steps to shape the future.
Australians are an incredibly decent people and even in vexed and contested areas of policy, like policies involving refugees and asylum seekers ,I think at the end of the day our compassion shows, and I think that there is an important point to keep in mind in this debate - we are at real risk of seeing more boats, but if we do see more boats then we need to separate that problem of more boats arriving from what we think about the people on the boats, many of whom are genuine refugees that are fleeing torture and persecution.
HOST: Yeah, the people are more important than the boats, aren't they?
PM: When we know that more than 400 people have lost their lives in recent years trying to get to Australia by boat, we've got to keep at the forefront of our mind that this is about human beings. Yes, it's about a very evil trade, too - people smuggling and doing everything we can to smash up what people smugglers do and their business model and the trade that they try and ply - but it's also about human beings.
HOST: OK, Prime Minister thank you once again for your time. I appreciate it greatly and I know the people who listen to the program appreciate your generosity with your time.
PM: Thanks, John.