PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Turnbull, Malcolm

Period of Service: 15/09/2015 - 24/08/2018
Release Date:
25/08/2017
Release Type:
Transcript
Transcript ID:
41132
Subject(s):
  • Citizenship; Election promises; Same-sex marriage; Parliamentary votes; Historical monuments; Australia Day; The burqa; ISIS activity in the Philippines
Radio interview with Neil Mitchell, 3AW

NEIL MITCHELL:

The Prime Minister, Mr Turnbull. Good morning.

PRIME MINISTER:

Good morning Neil, good morning.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Two years until the next election, do you think you can get through it without going to an early election?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well absolutely, yes. Indeed, I expect the next election to be in the middle of 2019, on or around the due date.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Do you not see a possibility that this uncertainty about dual citizenship and the legitimacy of the Parliament, could force an election?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well Neil I am very, very confident that the High Court will confirm that Barnaby Joyce and indeed the other members who are actually in fact senators, who are involved in this citizenship by descent issue, I’m very confident that the court will find they are all qualified to sit in the Parliament.

NEIL MITCHELL:

And if it doesn’t, what situation are we in?

PRIME MINISTER:

I’m not going to speculate on that Neil. But I’m very confident that they will.

Just for the benefit of everyone, this is essentially the proposition. What we believe the court will conclude – obviously the court has got to make its own decision but this is the advice we have – we expect them to conclude that where a person is an Australian citizen by reason of being born here, they are not disqualified from sitting in the Parliament, because they have had conferred on them by a foreign law, citizenship by descent and they haven’t taken any steps to acknowledge it or recognise it.

You can see the importance of that, because what this constitutional section is designed to do, is to prevent people from having conflicts of interests and split allegiances.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Yeah.

PRIME MINISTER:

How can you have a split allegiance to a country you’re not even aware you’re a citizen of, let alone have pledged allegiance to?

NEIL MITCHELL:

I’m certain, well, I hope you’re right. But what’s Plan B? If the High Court doesn’t rule that way, what’s Plan B?

PRIME MINISTER:

I’m not going to get into the speculation, but clearly -

NEIL MITCHELL:

Well with respect, you just have, because you’ve said it’s going go your way.

PRIME MINISTER:

Neil, if Barnaby Joyce were found not to be eligible to sit in the Parliament – and I have no doubt that he will be found to be eligible to sit in the Parliament – then there’d be a by-election for New England. So that’s the answer.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Are you confident the legislation that’s been passed with these people who may turn out to be legitimate, is secure?

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh yes, absolutely. The legislation, you know, from time to time members and senators have been found to be ineligible. We’ve had two senators already Culleton and Day, who were found to be ineligible to sit in the Parliament, but the legitimacy or the validity of the Parliament’s actions are based on the fact that the decisions are taken at the time. So there’s no sort of, retrospective unpicking or looking back into laws passed long ago on the basis of what might have been the case, whether someone should or should not have been there.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Is it acceptable - I know they’re a law unto themselves – but is it acceptable that the High Court is going to take so long? It’s not even listed until October. That’s-

PRIME MINISTER:

We would have preferred the matter to be, we submitted that the matter should be dealt with in mid-September. They’ve set it down for, I think the 10th to the 12th of October, which by the standards of litigation is still very rapid. So I think we’ve got to acknowledge that. But obviously the sooner the better. There are two sitting weeks, two more sitting weeks before the matter will be resolved, which is the two weeks beginning, I think, on the 4th of September. So -

NEIL MITCHELL:

But this could go on to the end of the year, couldn’t it, really? By the time they decide?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well look Neil, theoretically that’s true, they could reserve the judgement. But I think the Chief Justice recognized there was an element of urgency in the matter. So we look forward, the court’s got to make its own deliberations, you know. All I can do is express my opinion, as everyone is entitled to have, an opinion based on the advice I’ve got. But we’d obviously welcome an early decision as I think all Australians would.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Yeah I agree. I think people are thoroughly sick of it and I think too few, with respect -

PRIME MINISTER:

Look the idea that Nick Xenophon is an Englishman Neil, is ridiculous, right? So the idea that Barnaby Joyce is a New Zealander… I mean I’ve been out and about this week, I’ve been down in Tumut, I’ve been in Albury, I was in a pub in Albury yesterday talking to some of the locals. I tell you, they’re focused on energy prices, they’re focused on national security, they’re focused on the inland rail, you know?

There’s an eye-roll when you talk about the citizenship issue.

NEIL MITCHELL:

But this is part of the problem, I put to you that people are sick of politicians too. I’ve never seen the level of trust in politicians so low. How do you regain the trust of the people? Or don’t you accept that it’s at that level?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well what you have to do is deliver on what you’ve promised. I mean, here’s an interesting thing. No-one is accusing me of breaking any election promises. How many previous Prime Ministers and governments, they’ve always been said: “You’ve broken this promise, you failed to do this, you’ve failed to do that.” We are steadfastly, steadily getting more and more of our election commitments through the Parliament.

You know, you read the media and they say: “Oh the Parliament’s in chaos, the Government is paralysed.”

Complete rubbish.

We are legislating. Only in the last two weeks, we got important laws, contentious laws through the Parliament to ban secret and corrupt payments from business to unions. Bill Shorten, who of course is not a role model on the matter of transparency in any regard, he opposed that tooth and nail.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Yeah.

PRIME MINISTER:

He wants to be able for the AWU to continue to be getting secret payments from business. Well, we’ve put a stop to that. If businesses want to pay money to unions, it’s got to be disclosed and it’s got to be for a legitimate purpose. We also got important changes to competition law through that will create a more level playing field for small businesses. So the Parliament, we are getting on, the Government is getting on with the job of delivering.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Didn’t you promise a plebiscite on gay marriage?

PRIME MINISTER:

We certainly did, we absolutely gave that -

NEIL MITCHELL:

I know, I know you were frustrated but there’s a promise gone.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well we’re having a postal vote. I mean -

NEIL MITCHELL:

Well, it’s not a plebiscite though is it? It’s an opinion poll.

PRIME MINISTER:

That’s not true, no.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Well, it’s not binding and it’s not compulsory. Even the pollsters say it’s a joke scientifically.

PRIME MINISTER:

No Neil, look. That’s wrong. Let’s be very clear. What we said in the election is that we would not facilitate a private member’s bill on same-sex marriage, until the Australian people had had their say. We proposed to do that by way of a plebiscite -

NEIL MITCHELL:

But you promised a plebiscite.

PRIME MINISTER:

… which would have been a compulsory attendance ballot, exactly. Now we couldn’t get that through the Senate so we’ve come back with the next best option which is to have a postal vote, which will be voluntary, but it’s interesting you know; every Australian on the roll will get a ballot paper, but it’s interesting when you look at the polls – and I suppose we all do look at the polls, though we don’t know how accurate they are – it indicates a very, very high percentage of Australians saying they’re going to vote. You know, up in the 70- to-80 per cent. Now I tell you, I’d be very, very impressed if you got that kind of turnout. I’ll predict it’s going to be above 50 per cent.

NEIL MITCHELL:

And you’d want it to be above 50 to be legitimate?

PRIME MINISTER:

Any level is legitimate because it’s legitimate for somebody to say: “I don’t want to vote.”

I mean we have compulsory voting in Australia Neil, but there’s a very good, legitimate argument against compulsory voting. I don’t buy it myself, I prefer compulsory voting, but most countries don’t have it, as you know.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Some other things. Tony Abbott says he was too drunk to vote. I think you were Leader at the time?

PRIME MINISTER:

I was, yeah.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Were you aware that he was too drunk to get into the Parliament?

PRIME MINISTER:

Yes, I was, yes.

NEIL MITCHELL:

What did you do about it?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well there’s nothing we could do. The Whips, as Tony acknowledged, the Whips tried to rouse him to get him down into the Chamber to vote, but they were unable to move him.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Is that acceptable behaviour?

PRIME MINISTER:

It was a pretty important vote too, it was, see that was actually, that was the beginning, that was Rudd’s big cash splash after the GFC. You remember?

NEIL MITCHELL:

Yes.

PRIME MINISTER:

When Rudd spent far too much money and I was arguing that we didn’t need to spend that much money, that quickly. That was really the beginning of the reckless spending that started, built the foundations of the mountain of debt that we’re now trying to whittle down.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Well, you must have been pretty annoyed with him?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I was disappointed, but you’ve got to move on with these things. I mean -

NEIL MITCHELL:

Well do you? Is it acceptable behavior? Is it acceptable behavior for a Member of Parliament to do that?

PRIME MINISTER:

Look the good thing is Neil, let’s -

NEIL MITCHELL:

I mean you and I have seen it happen many times, or similar I suppose.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I can’t remember anyone else missing a vote because they were too drunk to get into the chamber. But the fact is Tony has ‘fessed up to it. He knows it was an error, or whatever. He’s acknowledged it and that’s good. But you know it’s clearly, it’s clearly not acceptable or admirable in any way.

NEIL MITCHELL:

So you wouldn’t tolerate it now?

PRIME MINISTER:

We expect members to attend every vote and particularly now, with a one seat majority. So sometimes people do miss divisions, sometimes they get -

NEIL MITCHELL:

They get on a plane early.

PRIME MINISTER:

They get caught at the other end of the Parliament?

NEIL MITCHELL:

Well, they get on a plane home too early.

PRIME MINISTER:

Yes, we did have that, we had that example too, yep. That’s true.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Another thing, the Department of Finance figures revealed today show millions of dollars going on social media marketing. Sam Dastyari, $20,000 in one day. Tim Wilson, your own Tim Wilson, $25,000 on a website. Adam Bandt, $9,000 on Facebook videos. Now, it might be within the rules but have we got to tighten the rules here? This is pretty extreme spending.

PRIME MINISTER:

The way it works is members and senators have an annual budget, I can’t recall the exact figure now, to spend on communications. Historically, they’ve obviously spent that on newsletters and items sent through the post, but plainly they are now spending it on Facebook and social media and reaching people through electronic means through their smart phones, as everyone else does by the way.

NEIL MITCHELL:

So that’s acceptable? That’s quite acceptable?

PRIME MINISTER:

Yes, well if it’s within the rule. I mean, if the rules say you can spend ‘x’ thousand dollars on communications, how you spend it, I suppose, is really a matter for you. One member might say: “Oh, I’ll send out a hard copy newsletter.” Another might spend it on digital advertising. I guess, I think neither is good or bad, they’re both means of reaching the electorate and that is what we’re meant to do. That’s what I’ve been doing this week. I’ll be heading down to Moruya later today and I’ve been getting around the countryside talking to people, but most importantly listening.

NEIL MITCHELL:

A couple of social policy areas I suppose. Do you agree with Stan Grant? We should edit statues like the Captain Cook statue?

PRIME MINISTER:

Absolutely not. Look, I’m an admirer of Stan’s but he is dead wrong here. Trying to edit our history is wrong.

Now all of those statues, all of those monuments are part of our history and we should respect them and preserve them and by all means, put up other monuments, put up other statues and signs and sites that explain our history. We have a rich history and that’s why I’ve defended so strongly, Australia Day.

I mean look, I don’t think this has got much momentum. I think this is very much the Labor-Left-Green, sort of, fringe. I think the vast majority of Australians are as horrified as you and I are at the thought that we’re going to go around rewriting history, editing statues, the inscriptions on statues, deleting Australia Day. I mean, what are these people thinking?

This is the greatest country in the world. Our achievement is so remarkable. We should be so proud of Australia and its history and on Australia Day we celebrate all of our achievements Neil. Every Australia Day ceremony you go to, begins with a recognition of our First Australians. Begins with a Welcome to Country, a recognition of the oldest continuous human civilization on earth. And it ends with a baby in the arms of a migrant mother becoming an Australian citizen. How good is that! So we celebrate all of our history in all of its diversity and all of its challenges and controversies, we celebrate it as Australians and we should be proud of it.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Okay.

PRIME MINISTER:

Those people who want to rewrite our history, I say, you don’t rewrite history by editing stuff out. If you want write a new chapter to our history, if you want to challenge assumptions in the past, by all means do so. But we can’t get into this, sort of Stalinist exercise of trying to white-out or obliterate or blank-out parts of our history.

NEIL MITCHELL:

The other social issue, I notice a ReachTEL poll today says 57 per cent of Australians want to ban the burqa as Pauline Hanson suggested. Will you revisit this?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well Neil, look, I am not an admirer of the burqa. I worry that it is used as a means of oppressing women. That’s my reservation about the burqa. Having said that, in this country we don’t tell people what to wear.

NEIL MITCHELL:

So you won’t revisit it?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, it’s not an issue, it’s frankly not something the Commonwealth Parliament has the power to do.

But I think people in Australia are entitled to wear basically whatever they like.

They obviously have to show their face when the law requires it for identity, whether they’re in court or a police officer requires to check identification or something like that.

But I do worry that the burqa, the full covering is a, it does appear to me to be a means of oppressing women. So that’s what troubles me about it, but I know there are arguments, you hear arguments to the contrary, made to the contrary. But fundamentally we are a free society. People can wear, within limits, what they like.

NEIL MITCHELL:

We have question – go ahead:

CALLER:

Good morning sir. I’d just like to ask why is that Mr Joyce Barnaby is not suspended, or step aside, considering that he is breaching the law like any other people?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well he’s not breaching the law. Barnaby is entitled to be a member of the House of Representatives. The issue is going to the High Court, but we’re very, very confident.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Sorry, why is he not breaching the law if he’s a dual citizen? Breaching the Constitution?

PRIME MINISTER:

Because for precisely the reasons I said earlier Neil, that he is an Australian citizen, born in Australia -

NEIL MITCHELL:

But that hasn’t been ruled on yet.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well there’s no doubt that he’s an Australian citizen, born in Australia. He was born in Tamworth. But the -

NEIL MITCHELL:

But his eligibility has been ruled out and a lot of people are asking this question: “Why isn’t he out like the Greens senators?”

PRIME MINISTER:

Neil, he is eligible to sit in the House of Representatives until the court finds he is not. We are very, very confident the court will not find that he’s disqualified.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Okay, something else -

PRIME MINISTER:

Just because, you know, there is no question he is a member of the House of Representatives. He’s entitled to sit in the House and vote and if he is a member of the House of Representatives he’s entitled to be a minister.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Yeah but you’ve had one man step out of Cabinet because of it.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well Matt Canavan chose to do that at a time when the matter blew up into the media. I think as George Brandis has described, it blew up in the media at a time when Matt didn’t know the facts of the matter or the law, the Italian law. You know, there was a lot of confusion at the time.

NEIL MITCHELL:

But he’s now saying he was an Italian citizen since the age of 2, that it wasn’t his mother after all.

PRIME MINISTER:

Yeah well that’s the point. It blew up into the media at a time when the facts were not known. Now with Barnaby and Fiona Nash and Nick Xenophon, it is very clear what the facts are. They were born in Australia. They became Australian citizens by reason of their birth here. According to the law of a foreign country, they’re also apparently, were apparently a citizen of that other foreign country.

We are very confident that the court will find, consistent with previous writings of the court in citizenship cases that they will find that none of those people, including Canavan for that matter, are disqualified from sitting in the Parliament.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Something else. Are you concerned by the level of ISIS activity in the Philippines? We’ve had the head of ASIS -

PRIME MINISTER:

Extremely concerned.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Is it a direct threat to this country?

PRIME MINISTER:

Yes, it is potentially. It is certainly a threat to this country, yes. I mean I’m not sure what you mean by direct.

NEIL MITCHELL:

I guess, is it a staging post in the Philippines to attack Australia?

PRIME MINISTER:

Look, it is vitally important that the ISIL insurrection in the southern Philippines is defeated. We are providing assistance to the Philippines to do so. Marawi - this is the city where this insurrection is going on - is drawing in foreign fighters from, you know, outside of the Philippines. All of that potentially is a threat to the stability of the region and hence a threat to Australia. So that’s why we’re providing support, surveillance support through the P3s to the Philippines Government.

NEIL MITCHELL:

The President of the Philippines has got a fairly brutal regime himself - 12,000 people have died in 14 months, children as young as 3. We’ve got the ASIS, our premium overseas agency, spy agency photographed with him. You comfortable with that?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, firstly we deplore the extrajudicial killings in the Philippines. Naturally we urge the Government of the Philippines and all governments to comply with the rule of law in the management of their own internal affairs.

We are providing assistance to the Philippines however in the battle against ISIL in the southern Philippines. We all have a vested interest in doing so. Look, we do not want Marawi to become, you know, the Raqqa of South East Asia. So it is critically important, as I said, I gave a speech about this in Singapore a few months back about the importance of it. It is vitally important that all of us provide as much assistance as we can and the Philippines is happy to accept, to ensure that that insurrection is defeated.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Prime Minister, thank you for your time.

PRIME MINISTER:

Thanks so much.

[ENDS]

41132