Brisbane
HOST: Prime Minister Julia Gillard, good morning and welcome.
PM: Good morning Steve.
HOST: A couple of ephemeral or esoteric questions I wanted to ask you, first of all, are you a Marxist or a progressive social democrat as many on the centre-left describe themselves these days.
PM: I'm certainly a centre-left politician so in the social democratic tradition. We're a Labor Party. We started out with our links with organised labour and of course here in Queensland the Australian Workers Union and the birthplace in Barcaldine.
After all of these years, more than 100 years of existence, I'm in the mainstream of that Labor traditional. So it's about how you can grow your wealth, grow your nation's wealth but also share it fairly so you don't leave people behind.
HOST: Do you describe yourself as a ‘progressive' in inverted commas.
PM: I am certainly a progressive in the sense that I believe in progress, I believe in shaping the modern world. There is no point hankering for yesterday, whether you remember yesterday fondly or whether you didn't like your own personal past, however you remember yesterday, there is never any going back there so you've always got to be striving for progress and change and the shaping of change.
The future is going to happen. The only question is are we going to shape it or are we just going to let it happen to us.
HOST: I've always wanted to know what we are progressing towards when someone describes themselves as progressive. What are we progressing towards, what's the end point?
PM: For me there is never going to be an end point because, well I hope there is never an end to human progress.
Human beings will always strive for better, to do better tomorrow than they've done today. I think that that's deeply within us.
For me, therefore, that direction of change has to be how we can do things better, how we can be a wealthier country, how we can be a fairer country, how we can offer people the benefit of better jobs, how we can make sure all of our kids get included in the life of our nation by getting a truly great education. That for me is better.
You take your core values with you, so we'll always be driven by a love of country and a love of family, those things won't change. But the future will be different from the past so let's get out and make it rather than just drift into it.
HOST: We don't call it patriotism here, do we? We call it a love of country rather than, we don't like the term patriotism, do we?
PM: Well I would describe myself as a proud patriot.
HOST: Would you?
PM: Absolutely.
HOST: Really, okay.
PM: Yeah, I love this country and I would do everything within my power to defend it and keep it safe.
I don't think we are into the showy sort of patriotism that perhaps we associate with some American war films. We are not necessarily a hand on heart kind of patriotism, but I think we feel love of country very deeply.
HOST: Is it true that the Labor Party sees itself as sort of an Australian version of the US Democratic Party, is that accurate?
PM: We are sister political parties so at an organisational level, we exchange policies and views and ideas and young people come and go and have a turn with the Democrats, come here and have a turn with the Labor Party.
We are very different countries, though. Despite so much that binds us together with our American friends, culturally we are very different places and I think that shows in the political tradition of parties.
I've always thought when you look to Americans, fundamentally at base the American culture is one of individualism rather than collectivism.
Our culture at base I believe is one of mateship and fairness and solidarity.
HOST: So we're more collective?
PM: I think we are, I think we are. And it's a quote I have used often but I think it is just so summarising of the Australian outlook.
The great war historian Daws, who wrote about Changi, made the observation that right down to the absolute depths of starvation and death, in the camps people kept their national identities.
So the Americans were the great individualists. The British had the class structure hold and he said about the Australian men in those prisoner of war camps, that right down to the last they were trying to form male-bonded welfare states.
That is, they were trying to be mates and look after each other. I think that is the Australian identity.
And because that identity is different to the American identity, the way in which Labor, the Labor Party here comes at political issues is different to the way in which the Democrats do, even though we have a lot in common.
HOST: Is it true that the Labor Party here is trying to paint Tony Abbott as a Mitt Romney figure, a Mitt Romney type? In other words, an Australian Republican if you like.
PM: No, we're just trying to paint Tony Abbott as Tony Abbott. That's enough.
HOST: What does it mean to be Labor versus tribal Labor? We heard Paul Keating say this. I think he was talking about Kevin Rudd I think in that context.
He said he is Labor but not tribal Labor. What's the difference?
PM: Look, I'm not sure what Paul had in his mind and I wouldn't want to reinterpret his words.
For me, being a member of the Labor Party means you have not only publicly said, ‘I have this set of values and these are the values that drive me,' but it does mean that you've brought into a sense of belonging, a sense of history, a sense of collectivism which binds you together and which means that you will always be there barracking for your team, barracking for Labor.
I have been an active member of the Labor team since I was a very young person and-
HOST: I have all assumed that was tribal Labor in a sense.
PM: I think maybe the word 'tribal' is about how emotionally or deeply you feel those bonds.
I don't know how Paul meant it. But I think it's the sense that there is a lot of emotion and a lot of self in your belief in Labor values.
HOST: What principle or value would you die in a ditch for? I don't necessarily mean policy - not the NDIS, not the Gonski review - but a fundamental principle on which your life, your world view stands.
What will you die in a ditch for?
PM: I think that fundamental principle would be fairness. It offends me when people are treated unfairly, and it offends me if there is anything that says someone gets a lesser go, a lesser chance, because they come from more humble origins than someone else.
I am a believer in equality. I'm a believer in merit. I think you should get to shape your life.
I am not a believer in inherited privilege.
I don't think just because your mum and dad are wealthy people and they've been able to roll out advantages to you that you should get any better go in life than a kid that comes from the poorest home in the worst suburb in our nation.
HOST: Then let me ask you, what was the most important thing you learnt from your dad? He passed away last year, what did you learn from him, the most important thing?
PM: I think it was probably that. He too was offended by unfairness and he, in his life, had lived through unfairness.
He grew up in a coal mining village in a coal mining family. His father was injured so he had to work on the surface which was the less remunerated work.
He was one of the seven kids. He passed in the 11 plus exams as they had them then so highly that he was being offered a scholarship but his family couldn't afford not to have him working so at 14 he went out to work.
Now he had a great life, he built a great life for himself. He came to Australia. He loved the work that he did in this country. He got to raise his two daughters, me and my sister. He got to see his grandkids succeed. So he had a great life.
But he could have had a different life if he hadn't had that unfairness dealt to him and that was very burned into him.
Not a sense of bitterness about his own past, but that that was wrong and that shouldn't happen to anybody else and he was certainly damn sure it wasn't going to happen to me or my sister.
HOST: Was he the biggest influence on your thinking? It is often said that a father's relationship with his daughter is a really pivotal connection and really pivotal relationship. Was it for you?
PM: Absolutely. Both my parents are incredibly important to me.
My mother is in Adelaide, she is an older lady now, she just turned 85 and she is very, very precious to me. But in terms of shaping my ideas, I think dad played the biggest role.
He was someone who was always interested in current affairs in the world, would talk to you about it and it was a very, very strong bond and it continues in my heart to be one.
HOST: Now, he was a Baptist, you rejected that Protestant Christianity, why? What was it about it you have rejected?
PM: I think over time my father moved away from the Church too. The Church played a big role-
HOST: This is the Baptist Church.
PM: The Baptist Church, so yes, Welsh Baptists, so the defining belief of Baptists is the role of John the Baptist, the belief in adult baptism, that you should make a choice as an adult as to whether or not you want to be baptised. Baptists don't hold with drinking, that kind of thing.
You get very strict variations of Baptists that repudiate entertainment and amusement and dancing and that kind of thing. We weren't quite down that track!
But my parents were brought up that way. I think for them, the Church played the biggest role when we first migrated to Australia and it was a good place to go and find Australian friends.
They didn't know anybody except one family in Adelaide, and so church was the place they made connections. In their later lives, both of them have drifted away from that and in my younger life, in my - I would have said early 20s - I made an active decision that whilst the values meant a lot to me - and continue to mean a lot to me - the formal elements of religion didn't capture my heart, my soul, my mind.
HOST: Prime Minister Julia Gillard is my guest. Do you ever feel misunderstood?
PM: Oh yes.
HOST: When?
PM: By the media cycle that you refer to. I think there is a lot in this time of change in the media industry that pushes the cycle towards more schlock, more horror.
And I think we tend to look at this as if it's about us and about Australia and about today's politics here. Actually it's about a change across the world in the media industry.
So, more and more content, more and more things. Even you and I today, we've had a picture taken so you can tweet it. There is a TV camera here.
More and more content, more and more things, and that means you need more and more drama or you can't sustain it so even the simplest things get puffed up in a way that's really pretty absurd.
HOST: Is there a particular event that annoys you? Now is your chance. A particular event where you felt you'd been utterly misunderstood and you haven't been treated fairly. Is there a particular moment?
PM: How long have you got!
HOST: Just give me one.
PM: We'll be here all day. Look, the cabinet reshuffle. I thought the media reaction to that was absurd.
Two wonderfully competent ministers who have decided to go and do something else with their lives, seamlessly replaced by two fantastically competent ministers. And this is written as ‘crisis'. Like, excuse me?
I am sure every day at the ABC you hear about someone around the nation who has decided ‘I have loved my job at the ABC, I have been here ten, 15, 20 years, now I am going to do x, and guess what Sally's got the promotion'.
And you all go, ‘that's sad to lose Bill, but Sally will be fantastic'. And does anybody write up, ‘gee the ABC's in crisis, Bill's gone!'
HOST: We are always in crisis!
PM: Are we going to have one of those funding discussions now?
HOST: Please, yes!
PM: So that was complete silliness.
HOST: My guest is Prime Minister of Australia Julia Gillard. When the doors of the Cabinet close, there are no cameras there and everyone can speak freely.
Who is the intellectual in your Cabinet? Is there one?
PM: It depends what you mean by 'intellectual'. If you wanted to do I guess the well-read, understanding of the artistic world, understanding of the world in general, you would go Bob Carr, Simon Crean.
If you wanted to go a mastery of the law, you would go Mark Dreyfus.
If you wanted to talk about connection and touch with working people, Wayne Swan, Jenny Macklin, Bill Shorten, the list goes on.
People are different in their presentation.
HOST: You are being way too diplomatic, Prime Minister.
PM: No, but I genuinely value my colleagues a great deal. They are all different and bring a different perspective, and that's what's good about frank discussions around a Cabinet table.
I specifically say to my Cabinet colleagues I don't expect people to come in and just automatically agree with each other.
What I do expect is for them to give the best of themselves and to operate what I call a positive climate where if something is said, people don't go ‘oh that's stupid, that's ridiculous'.
They listen, think, take it in and then strive to have a positive conversation.
HOST: To you, is there a person in Cabinet who privately you sidle up to and say, mate, I need a reality check; in other words, a confidant. Someone that you feel particularly you can trust who will tell you as it is personally to you privately?
PM: I think because I am someone who welcomes honest discussions, lots of my colleagues come and have frank conversations.
HOST: We all have almost like - not a mentor - but a workplace, a sounding board you go to who just somehow gets you. Whether or not they even know you terribly well, but somehow gets you. Is there one of those people there?
PM: I wouldn't say there is one person there. I would say there are a number. And I do try and keep the door open to all of my colleagues, not just my Cabinet colleagues, but colleagues in the Labor team and the broader labour movement and community generally to come and pitch up an idea.
I always strive to treat people seriously and respectfully. I don't go ‘oh that's crazy' or ‘why are you wasting my time?'
HOST: Do you knit in Cabinet? We know you knit.
PM: No, no, no I don't knit in Cabinet!
HOST: Does anyone else knit?
PM: No, no, no-one knits in Cabinet.
HOST: You are the only knitter in Cabinet?
PM: Sorry, I don't believe anybody else knits in Cabinet in their spare time, and certainly no-one knits in the Cabinet room! We have got a few more things to do!
HOST: So if that happens, you need to tweet it. Take a photo and tweet it.
PM: Well you can't take a - because of the security arrangements - you can't have your mobile phone in the Cabinet room because it has all been swept and cleared and all the rest of it.
HOST: You tweet but I think reluctantly, don't you?
PM: I do tweet, no, not reluctantly. I think it has got its limits. I think it is a fantastic way of engaging people and getting quick information out there and giving insights into your day.
There are some things that are too serious and too weighty to be dealt with by Twitter. I joked with you before; you cannot put your whole strategy for the war in Afghanistan in 100-and-something characters.
Some things require bigger engagements than that.
But I think Twitter, those things, they're a new way - at their best - they are a new way of enlivening conversations in our democracy.
At their worst they are just terrible anonymous ways of putting vile things about people out in the public domain.
I hope it ends up that the good overwhelms it is bad.
HOST: I'm worried about the Freudian elements of Twitter, there's always the subconscious things that come out and I'm paranoid I will end up on the front page of some paper for saying something inappropriate, so I don't.
PM: I certainly thing that the old saying, my mum would say something like ‘if you are going to write a letter in anger, put it aside, read it again 24 hours later and then think about whether or not you want to put it in the post box'.
I think for the Twitter world, there is certainly is a tweet at haste, repent at leisure. Maybe if you are really steamed up, put it aside, come back to it later.
HOST: Wise woman. Which cartoonist in the country gets you right? All sorts of cartoonists draw you, who gets you right?
PM: I was always a fan of Mark Knight in the Herald Sun. I have actually got one of his cartoons of me in my office which is a profile, so of course it has got an extraordinarily large nose.
And people come into the office and just look a little bit bemused that I would have something like that up there but I've always thought it was a good cartoon representation.
Look, I wouldn't really pick one. There are lots of days the cartoons just don't grab me and then there will be one day when you say that has caught a moment in politics just incredibly well.
And I think that's the beauty of cartooning. It would be a great job. It would be the best job in politics if you could draw. Unfortunately I can't draw.
HOST: I'm getting the wind up but I want to squeeze something else in. When do you listen to Tim, your partner? When do you really listen to him, feedback-wise?
PM: I listen to him on - he has got a great emotional sense of how people are feeling. I think it probably comes from long days in the hairdressing business where some people will go to their hairdressers and just get their haircut; others will go spill out every trouble in their life.
So we will go to a function or an event and he'll come back and talk about the emotional state he thinks someone is in and be very incisive about it.
HOST: I have to let you go sadly. I have got some more personal questions I want to ask you, but another time. Prime Minister, thank you.
PM: Thank you very much.