0:00

Is saving more and spending less is one of your

0:02

top goals for twenty twenty three. Why

0:04

are you still paying insane amounts of money

0:06

every month for your phone bill? Right now,

0:08

when you switch to mint mobile, you'll get their

0:10

unlimited plan for fifty

0:12

percent off. As the first company to sell

0:14

premium wireless service online only.

0:16

Mint mobile lets you order from home

0:19

and save a ton with phone plans starting

0:21

at just fifteen dollars a month. All plans

0:23

come with unlimited talk and text plus high

0:25

speed data delivered on the nation's largest

0:27

five g network. Cut your wireless bill

0:29

to fifteen bucks a month at mint mobile

0:32

dot com slash save. That submit

0:34

mobile dot com slash save.

0:36

Hurry. Offer ends January fifteenth.

0:42

This is the guardian. It

0:47

is an insecure world

0:51

in which we need to put

0:53

in place measures that increase peace

0:56

and security in our region. One

0:58

of the lessons of the pandemic is

1:01

in general we need to be more

1:03

self reliant. We need to be

1:05

less vulnerable to international

1:07

shocks, which might be a health

1:10

shock through a pandemic, it might

1:12

be a cyber, issue or it

1:14

might be military conflict.

1:18

Hello. Lovely people have podcasts. Welcome

1:20

to the show you are on Australian politics with Katherine

1:23

Murphy and Bizali.

1:24

This week, we are not in the pod cave.

1:27

We are in a secret location. You

1:29

are.

1:31

The prime minister's looking at me with a fair amount

1:33

of alarm at this point. Anyway, look, my guest.

1:36

Anthony Albanese, prime minister of Australia,

1:38

we're obviously having a chat because

1:41

the parliamentary year is about to

1:44

oh, God. Start

1:48

those bill you know, there's all bells on.

1:49

De Liberum.

1:51

No. But the parliamentary era

1:52

may. Obviously, obviously, politics never

1:54

stops but the parliamentary area is about to start.

1:57

And also, I

1:59

spoke on oh,

2:01

I can't remember how many occasions with

2:04

the PM. Before he was the PM on the podcast,

2:06

we used to have actually regular chats in

2:08

the olden times about all kinds of interesting

2:11

things. I don't think I've had you on

2:13

the part since you were PM.

2:14

You've rejected me, Catherine. Well, I don't

2:16

know about that. But anyway, I just think we've

2:18

got lots to talk about. And I want to

2:21

open the conversation, not by

2:23

plunging into a bunch of issues that we are gonna

2:25

plunge into in a little bit, but by

2:27

talking about leadership more generally.

2:30

Because I reckon there'll be a lot of listeners

2:32

who will be quite intrigued by

2:36

how you found the transition to

2:38

from being later in the opposition to being the prime

2:40

minister, what habits

2:42

you might have picked

2:45

up in order to help you manage

2:47

an obviously really difficult intense

2:50

job. And also,

2:53

I think I want to get into

2:56

the idea of ensemble leadership, which

2:58

I think is what you've been trying to demonstrate really

3:00

over the last six months and that's quite interesting.

3:02

So Let's start. Just

3:05

before we started recording, I

3:07

reminded the PM that there was

3:09

a great profile of Barrick Obama a

3:11

couple of years ago in vanity fair, which

3:13

went to a lot of questions about

3:15

how he managed the really

3:18

intense job of being president.

3:20

I just wanna throw you a quote to

3:22

start the conversation.

3:25

So he spoke about the first night

3:27

he slept in the White House. After he was

3:29

elected. So he said, the

3:31

first night you sleep in the White House, you think, oh,

3:33

okay. I'm here. I'm sleeping here.

3:36

Then in the middle of the night, you start all awake

3:38

and there's this sense of absurdity. There's

3:40

such an element of randomness in

3:43

who gets to do this job. Then

3:46

he says, you

3:48

basically he was he was a week into the presidency.

3:51

Like I took him about a week, and

3:53

then he felt his so his body caught

3:55

up with him that he'd arrived, that

3:57

he this is the presidency on here. This is

3:59

really happening. On we go.

4:02

So can you go back to the first night

4:05

that you occupied one of the official

4:07

residences and like what that was

4:09

like? That sort

4:10

of, oh my god, I won. I

4:13

think I had a big

4:16

advantage, which, of course, was not

4:18

planned by me. The

4:20

fact that the election was May

4:22

twenty one. On May twenty

4:24

three, I was sworn in at

4:27

nine AM as prime minister of

4:29

Australia.

4:29

Yeah. And by

4:32

twelve noon, I was in the air

4:34

on the way. Right. Yes. You were going to. Take

4:36

care -- Yep. -- in the prime

4:38

ministerial plane. So

4:41

the government plane has meeting

4:44

room on it, and I was briefed

4:47

all the way up and all the way back

4:50

from the head of defense,

4:52

foreign affairs, people from

4:54

the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet,

4:57

I had so much to

5:01

do in terms of briefings.

5:03

And that made, I

5:06

think, a short circuit the

5:08

transition. Mhmm. So

5:11

that on day

5:13

two, by the Tuesday morning, I was meeting

5:15

with president Biden, prime minister Kashida,

5:17

and prime minister Modi, I

5:19

was clearly on

5:22

the international stage

5:25

And that, I

5:27

think, really helped to concertina

5:30

--

5:30

Yeah. -- the transition. Right? Interesting.

5:33

Yeah. And I I think

5:35

both publicly as well. Normally,

5:38

there's this period of who's

5:40

going to do what job we had

5:42

swearing in of five

5:44

key ministers. Yep. That

5:46

first morning, that was a decision.

5:48

They hadn't been the normal

5:50

caucus processes and all

5:53

of that slow dynamic that

5:55

goes through. So

5:58

I got back on the Wednesday

6:01

evening and then back

6:03

down to to Cambria again, but

6:06

I think that really helped. And as well,

6:08

the public saw there's

6:11

been a change of government where you had

6:13

journalists with us, of course, on

6:15

that visit as well. So

6:18

that really fast tracked everything. I

6:21

kept staying at my

6:24

home in America for sometime

6:26

before I moved

6:28

into Kiribelli when I was

6:30

in Sydney, but I'm

6:33

got to go to the lodge probably two

6:35

weeks after the election, I think. And

6:40

the lodge I'd never been upstairs in the

6:42

lodge before. I

6:44

had no idea what to expect. There's

6:46

lots of little rooms of

6:49

two main corridors. There's like

6:51

two wings almost to it. It's

6:53

a lot bigger than my old house. Let me say

6:55

that. And there

6:58

are still elements when

7:01

I wake up there at

7:03

the the lodge and it

7:06

hits me. The the significant change,

7:09

which is there. The Curability,

7:12

of course, the Cooks River is

7:14

a beautiful river, but it's not quite -- No.

7:16

Not quite Sydney

7:17

Harbor. -- not

7:18

quite Sydney Harbor. So it it's

7:20

very different. That dynamic

7:22

plus the whole

7:24

dynamic of a

7:27

lot more is done for you

7:29

-- Yep. -- as the prime minister,

7:31

I'm I'm incredibly self

7:33

sufficient, Ray,

7:36

the way that my

7:38

home has always been. People get a

7:40

shock who visit me at home

7:42

and see everything being very neat

7:44

and --

7:45

Mhmm. -- in place. And

7:47

my world is very different now. And

7:51

that's something that Takes

7:52

for getting used to. It And

7:54

I hope in a way that I never

7:57

get used to it -- Yeah. -- because once

7:59

you get used to it, you're taking it for granted.

8:02

And a whole lot of things that make your

8:04

life easier, which are common

8:07

sense to make your life easier. Things

8:10

that other people spend a

8:12

lot of time organizing and

8:15

putting in place. The

8:17

security arrangements, the arrangements

8:20

to get me from a to b. You

8:23

don't fly commercially. In

8:25

partly course of security issues.

8:28

But it means you can get from

8:31

a to BETI flew on

8:33

Friday I flew from Devonport

8:35

to Bendigo. I don't know that

8:37

many planes have ever gone from Devonport

8:40

to Bendigo. No. It's not a conventional route.

8:42

No. That's certainly not a commercial

8:44

route that's about to open up. Yeah.

8:46

But that means you can get a lot

8:49

more

8:49

done. It's an efficiency mechanism

8:53

as well. Mhmm. And president

8:55

Obama said in this case that the thing that

8:57

he found that changed the most

9:00

for him was just

9:02

on your point, right, that that a lot is scheduled

9:04

for you, lot is done for you, in order

9:07

to keep you doing the job you need to do.

9:09

Right? He said that the big change

9:11

for him was sort of almost all

9:13

spontaneity left

9:15

life. You lost those opportunities

9:18

where, you know, you wake up,

9:20

you come to a ten ten PM and you

9:22

you need a magnum and you go

9:25

out to the seven eleven and you get it. Right?

9:27

And then you bump into someone and you hear a

9:29

story and and that sort of

9:31

set your evening on another path or sets

9:33

you thinking in another way. He said just

9:35

all of that from from life just

9:37

went and he found that

9:39

quite disorienting at a human

9:41

level. Is is it similar or different?

9:43

Oh, it is. I used to I'm one of those

9:46

people who would shop for

9:48

what they were cooking that

9:50

night. Yep. And now

9:53

I can't just drop into a

9:56

shop. If you need something

9:59

I I need a bike pump at the moment.

10:01

But well, if

10:02

anyone could send the prime minister a bike pump,

10:04

I'm sure it'd be very grateful. I have

10:08

for the the the bikes there at

10:10

the lodge. I look at it, but

10:12

I need to plan and

10:15

And there's to be an advanced

10:17

party in the black pump system.

10:19

No. No. Exactly.

10:20

See, it is much more

10:22

difficult. So I've done things like

10:25

I bought. It sounds

10:26

absurd, but I bought like enough

10:29

shampoo and vitamins

10:32

and that's This

10:33

does sound absurd. Knowing you,

10:35

this does not sound absurd. For,

10:37

like, at least six months -- Yep.

10:40

-- because going to the shop

10:42

is Just

10:44

requires a massive

10:44

You figure. Yeah. It requires benefit.

10:48

A major effort. Buying people Christmas

10:50

presents -- Mhmm. -- I can't just

10:52

go from shop to shop to shop in

10:55

the way that you would normally do.

10:57

You just wander around, but

11:00

it is something that can

11:03

be frustrating. You can't just drop

11:05

into the pub

11:07

as what I used to do. Mhmm. And

11:09

you would make people I

11:12

know people at various establishments around

11:14

the inner west where I could always find

11:17

someone to, hey, do you wanna drop

11:20

up a beer and a game of pool. Mhmm.

11:23

It's far more complex. Mhmm. These

11:25

days. And do that. And in terms of

11:27

obviously, it's necessary, right? And

11:30

which was sort of your point, it's

11:32

necessary, but it changes

11:34

your life in all sorts of ways. And

11:36

sort of like pivoting now to the style

11:38

of leadership that you're exhibiting in the first

11:41

several months of the government, which is I

11:43

think I use the word ensemble leadership.

11:45

Right? It's not just you. There's other there's other players

11:48

on the

11:48

stage. College.

11:49

There's a term that don't use.

11:50

Well, it's yeah. It's something sort of vaudvillian

11:52

about it though. But in a good way, But anyway,

11:56

so it's sort of like those things

11:58

need to change, but I suppose the risk for

12:00

you as prime minister particularly

12:02

a prime minister who has sort

12:05

of organically networked your entire

12:07

life. Right? The

12:09

job can cut you

12:11

off. The job can yeah.

12:14

Because people start lying to you. Right? Like, they

12:16

don't they don't want to offend the prime minister, so

12:18

they they lie. They don't necessarily tell you what

12:20

you need to know or what you need

12:22

to hear. They're self sensor. Do

12:26

you have any of that sense that people

12:29

are sort of changing around you

12:32

courtesy of the status of the office or

12:34

has have you not noticed much of that?

12:37

Look, there was a change in how people

12:40

who see one on the street address

12:42

you, obviously. You

12:44

go from some recognition

12:47

to a lot more

12:49

of recognition. But

12:52

people I think

12:54

part of the Australian character is

12:57

that people will just treat you

13:00

as who you

13:02

are and I'm the same person

13:05

and I try to stay

13:07

grounded. I have

13:09

very consciously though done

13:13

some things that

13:15

seem as though they'd be more difficult

13:18

than they actually are. What do you mean?

13:20

Like, I've I I continued to

13:22

play in the Sydney

13:24

based tennis comp. Last

13:26

year and I've enrolled

13:29

again this year.

13:31

Now I won't be able to pay every

13:34

week and I'm a reserve

13:37

comp guys for fourteen weeks, but

13:40

hanging out with people, I've

13:42

known, for years, at

13:45

America for long tennis club.

13:49

I'm just me there of, like, I'm not

13:51

treated any differently there

13:53

from how I was treated

13:55

beforehand. I've just come to

13:57

the club with additional friends these

14:00

days.

14:01

Yes. So friends from the good vocabulary. Yes.

14:04

Right. My my friend. Mhmm. So

14:07

I think that's really important. And

14:12

I have a bunch of people I go up

14:14

with who I still

14:16

keeping contact with and engaged with.

14:19

I spoke with my best

14:21

friend from school, from

14:23

primary school, I spoke

14:26

with last week. And

14:28

I think that engagement

14:31

with people who are

14:33

not part of the system

14:35

This this year. This life. Yeah.

14:38

It's really important that

14:41

you maintain those

14:43

connections. I

14:46

didn't make a lot of regular games

14:48

last year, but at SaaS,

14:51

I'm just the same person

14:55

I always was and hang with

14:57

the the same people I've hang with for

14:59

a long time -- Mhmm. --

15:01

there. I think you have

15:03

to make a conscious decision to

15:05

do that, and I I tried to

15:07

do that. It is difficult in

15:10

this job because some people

15:12

will who you meet with

15:15

will, I guess, hold their

15:17

fiery their their views on

15:19

things, but there's enough people

15:21

around me as well. I I have

15:24

a very strong core

15:27

of people, political

15:30

friends, who will tell

15:32

me exactly what they

15:34

think as well. Now some of those

15:37

work in this building but many of

15:39

them don't. Many of them

15:42

are just people who work

15:44

in private or public sector

15:46

jobs who I continue

15:49

to engage with and

15:52

catch up with not as much as I used to

15:54

because I'm busier. But I think

15:56

that's really important as well to

15:58

have people

15:59

that will tell you if they think that you've

16:01

got it wrong. Mhmm. And in

16:03

terms of the – I suppose you want

16:05

to name names, in terms of who's around

16:07

in your

16:08

orbit, who's been influential for you in the

16:10

transition. I think people

16:13

will see who they are and will know

16:15

who they are, read the the key members

16:18

of the government, but also

16:21

people like Tim

16:24

Godfrey and the people who

16:27

have worked with me -- Mhmm.

16:29

-- for a long

16:30

time of time. Yeah. And you brought people

16:32

back too. Yep. Yeah. And some

16:35

people came back who worked for me when

16:37

I was last a minister.

16:40

But there's a bunch of people

16:43

in this office who

16:46

I have been friends

16:49

with and engaged with

16:51

professionally as well for

16:54

a very long period of time.

16:56

There are three or four people

16:59

I went to university with and

17:01

was active in

17:04

young labor with in the nineteen

17:06

eighties. Nathan's

17:09

godfather works in

17:11

this office now. He had never worked for me

17:13

before. He agreed

17:16

to come and to bring his expertise

17:18

outside of this building for decades

17:21

into this office. And that

17:24

that brings me a sense of

17:26

trust, but as well that people will

17:28

tell me exactly what they

17:30

think as well. I

17:32

have tried to surround myself with

17:35

people who are not

17:37

just, yes people -- Mhmm. -- but

17:39

who have ideas and capacities and

17:43

part of that capacity is to be

17:46

honest about their views. And

17:49

one of the reasons why I doubt whether

17:51

there's anyone in this building who has as

17:53

many long term staff as

17:55

I do. I think

17:57

that says something about the culture

18:00

that I've always cultivated in

18:03

an office where I'm,

18:06

you know, my name's on the door, but

18:08

everyone has a responsibility to

18:12

making sure that the the output

18:14

--

18:14

Yeah. -- is as

18:15

good as possible.

18:16

Everybody everyone has some ownership,

18:18

but, again, brings us back to the ensemble

18:20

and this sort of retro return

18:23

of, you know, government by

18:25

cabinet, you know, your ministers are

18:28

more they appear to be. I don't know. Maybe there's

18:30

all kinds of fur flying behind the scenes and

18:32

foot stamping and everything else, but everybody

18:35

seems to be owning their own portfolios.

18:37

Running policy in their

18:40

areas, and you're not styling

18:42

yourself in messianic terms, at

18:44

least not yet like maybe maybe you will

18:46

grow so enormously fond of yourself

18:48

that you'll need to burst through and,

18:50

you know, be at the center

18:52

of everything. While you are clearly

18:54

running the show, all these other

18:57

people are out and about prosecuting

19:00

agendas, in a leadership

19:02

sense, like, how does that work? How

19:04

does how do you facilitate that?

19:07

Leadership isn't about thinking

19:10

that you always know best. Leadership

19:13

is about listening as

19:15

well as leading. And

19:18

the capacity of people in the ministry

19:22

that I have is just

19:24

exceptional. You have

19:27

a a bunch of people who

19:29

have served as senior

19:31

ministers in the government

19:35

past Penny Wong, Tony

19:38

Burke, Chris Balan, Katie

19:41

Gallagher as Chief Minister of

19:44

the ACT, people

19:47

who have not served

19:49

as ministers before, like Edmusic

19:52

and and Aileen and Christian McBean,

19:54

really serious people coming

19:56

through, and then an incredibly talented

19:59

back bench as well. And

20:01

I think the job of leadership is

20:04

to maximize the capacity of

20:07

the organization that you lead. And

20:09

you do that by having

20:12

faith in people, making

20:16

clear what the overall direction

20:19

of the government is going

20:22

to be, but also

20:24

recognizing that you can't

20:26

run a federal government from the PMO.

20:30

You have to have

20:32

faith not just in people

20:34

who are elected members of

20:37

the cabinet, the ministry, the caucus,

20:40

but also of the public service

20:43

-- Mhmm. -- maximizing the respect

20:45

that you give them. You'll get more out of

20:47

them. If they are focused

20:49

on achievement and they

20:52

know that they are valued on

20:54

staff as well, the same attitude

20:57

I have in the office

20:59

here as well. I encourage that

21:02

openness and engagement. From

21:05

offices across the

21:08

board. And when

21:10

we had the Christmas

21:12

party here at the end of last

21:15

year. We had just

21:18

one of the areas down there.

21:20

The the national portrait gallery, the

21:23

feeling in the room of

21:25

that sense of

21:27

In ideological terms, that

21:29

sense of collectivism

21:32

was sensual. You could feel it.

21:35

And that sense of being a part

21:38

of something big,

21:41

which being government provides you with

21:43

the opportunity to achieve. So

21:46

I made the very conscious decision that

21:48

I would when I became

21:51

opposition leader lead in

21:53

the way that I wanted to

21:56

lead in government because

21:58

I think that it it flows naturally

22:01

through. So Tony Abbott,

22:04

some people would argue it was a successful opposition

22:07

leader. So if we go back and find

22:09

a podcast, we would have discussed this in the

22:11

past. He was not my role

22:13

model because I think that the way that he acted

22:15

as opposition leader meant

22:18

that when he came into government. It

22:22

was impossible to just flick a switch

22:24

and go to governing because

22:27

it was AAA negative response.

22:30

Different I wanted to lead

22:33

in a positive way and

22:36

to encourage genuine discussion,

22:40

which I did in the Shadow

22:42

Cabinet, and the Cabinet, and

22:45

it processes the National security

22:47

committee, the expenditure review committee,

22:49

the other committees of cabinet, and

22:51

our processes are

22:53

working in a way in which areas they spirit

22:56

of cooperation, a spirit of respect.

22:58

You've got to enable people

23:01

to say something that

23:04

is inappropriate and

23:06

and not the best suggestion

23:10

without them being really

23:12

killed or having a gout at them.

23:15

You'll only get a good idea if people

23:17

are allowed to come up with a bad idea.

23:20

And and have a debate about it as

23:22

well, running everyone and being silent

23:24

and worried about

23:26

Yeah. Saying the wrong thing or whatever.

23:28

But also though, I mean, just as a,

23:30

you know, you're at the end of the queue. And

23:34

and you're right, there is this sort of sense

23:36

of spread a core

23:38

certainly in the government, but obviously long term

23:40

risk or not even the long term

23:42

risk given the wait time accelerates in

23:44

politics, right? It's sort of like

23:47

you've got to manage rivalries,

23:51

competitions between individuals

23:55

because everybody wants to advance, everyone

23:57

wants to succeed. So, you

23:59

know, how conscious of are you of

24:01

that? I mean, obviously, we're only six months

24:03

in, but it's a competitive business.

24:06

That's the truth. And that can often be

24:11

difficult for paper to manage

24:13

part of my management style

24:16

is to give everyone respect

24:19

for everyone to be

24:21

able to contribute not

24:23

to that it be just a

24:26

small inner circle who get to

24:28

dominate. Mhmm. And I think that

24:31

if you look at what people are saying

24:33

about the former

24:34

government, I mean, that it the

24:36

the absurdity of going

24:39

so internal

24:42

and so such

24:44

a concentration of power so that

24:47

the former prime minister chose to appoint

24:49

himself to the multiple ministries

24:52

as the opposite of

24:55

leadership from my perspective because

24:58

ministers clearly didn't even didn't

25:01

even know that. Was was going on.

25:04

So I'm pretty transparent

25:07

about the way that

25:09

we're doing things in the

25:12

cabinet. And and and it goes

25:14

back to twenty nineteen.

25:18

I read recently for someone

25:21

who's doing another task,

25:24

a book, read the

25:26

speech I gave on the day I became like a

25:28

leader. So that's kind of what we

25:31

put in place. That's the template. And

25:33

then the big speech I gave that

25:36

during twenty nineteen when we had the review

25:38

of, These are the four stages. This

25:41

is what we will do. And

25:44

we did that -- Mhmm. -- and

25:46

took people into our

25:48

confidence as well said that publicly.

25:51

I said, for example, we would have our twenty-thirty

25:53

target after Glasgow. Said

25:56

that well in advance.

25:58

That's a risk to do that Mhmm. -- because

26:01

people know what you're doing.

26:03

But here again, we're mapping

26:05

out for we'll get into

26:08

the policy stuff. But for two thousand

26:10

twenty three, we're mapped

26:12

out. We were doing national

26:15

security issues here in the first quarter,

26:17

the defense strategic review, other

26:19

activities. We

26:21

have other reform

26:24

agendas that we're taking through

26:26

in the lead up to the

26:28

budget in May. And then

26:31

in the second half of the year, we will have

26:34

the referendum saying well in

26:36

advance of what the

26:38

timetable of that will be.

26:41

And the processes leading up to

26:43

that. We've got the –

26:45

what we'll get into those as

26:47

well. But I think

26:50

doing that gives people the

26:52

confidence that they're valued,

26:56

that their ideas are

26:58

worth putting the effort into,

27:01

and there are no ministers.

27:05

That are not performing

27:08

in my view. And that's extraordinary

27:11

that thirty people Many of

27:13

whom have never done this job before and

27:15

many of whom have different jobs than they've ever

27:17

done before are managing

27:19

to deliver outcomes

27:23

and change

27:26

and do positive

27:28

things for the country, you

27:30

would expect that If you pick

27:32

thirty

27:33

people, then there's gonna

27:35

be --

27:35

Yeah. -- ups and downs or ups and downs. Spectrum.

27:38

But there's no one that I

27:40

I look at, and I've I've gone through

27:43

with all thirty. You've

27:44

done performance reviews. What? The

27:47

Well, what the plans are for

27:49

charter letters this year? Yeah. And

27:51

what the plans are, what it looks like

27:54

in two thousand twenty five as well.

27:57

And that I find I

27:59

get a great deal of satisfaction for

28:03

how the government has begun. You

28:06

know, on the front foot and

28:08

and I think people are

28:10

responding in that really

28:13

positive way. Okay. Well, let's

28:15

do some issues now. And I think you've basically

28:17

identified the ones that I wanna talk to you about.

28:19

I wanna talk to you about the voice. I wanna talk

28:21

to you about the defense strategic review

28:23

because I'm not sure the Australian community

28:26

really has their head around that yet and how big that

28:28

that is potentially. And

28:30

also just, anyway, we'll get into some

28:32

other issues. But let's just start with the

28:34

voice. Right? Can you win this thing

28:36

if paired it up and says no?

28:38

Well, I think that the question's wrong,

28:40

and that's the the first thing. It's not a

28:42

matter of you as

28:44

in May. So, yeah, this is

28:46

an opportunity for Australians.

28:49

So I have the same boat that you do that

28:51

every person listening has podcast us.

28:54

This isn't something is my idea. It's

28:56

something that was first mentioned in the

28:58

nineteen nineties came

29:01

together this current process really beginning

29:03

two thousand twelve. There was

29:05

a five year process leading up

29:08

to Hulu and then since

29:10

then. This has

29:12

come from the bottom up from

29:14

meetings of aboriginal to Australian peoples

29:18

saying, One,

29:20

the what is recognition

29:23

in the constitution. The how

29:26

is through a voice -- Mhmm. --

29:28

to parliament is what they

29:30

want and they want that to be

29:32

constitutionally enshrined. Now

29:34

something that I'm strongly strongly

29:37

support evolving are are incredibly

29:40

committed to. And

29:44

have faith that

29:46

the Australian people when

29:49

they go into a ballot box

29:52

will vote yes.

29:55

Is is there any universe?

29:57

And I don't I don't I'm sorry to sort of

29:59

ask two negative questions to to start

30:01

with because it's sort of in a way it's

30:03

the wrong

30:04

tone, but these are really essential

30:06

points. Right? Peter Dutton may say

30:08

no. And Well, absolutely. And

30:11

I think there are internal

30:13

dynamics in the national party,

30:15

in the liberal party, and in

30:17

the Greens Party. In part,

30:20

what we're seeing is is their

30:22

internal mechanisms

30:24

playing out? So, I mean, you're right

30:26

to chip me and say, I,

30:28

Anthony Albinazia, I'm not single winner

30:30

or loser of

30:31

this, you know, of this process,

30:33

you're right, to chip me. Well, that's important. I

30:35

don't I don't do it out of any

30:37

gratuitous means. It's important that

30:41

Australians know that, and this

30:43

is what gives me optimism. It's

30:46

about showing respect for

30:49

aboriginal and torres strait islander peoples.

30:51

And the wording, the draft wording

30:53

that I've got out there says in recognition of

30:56

average on Taistra islanders as

30:58

Australia's first peoples. That's how

31:00

it begins a recognition. So

31:03

it's respect for them but it's also about

31:05

how we perceive ourselves as Australians.

31:08

I think Australians will get. A

31:11

great deal of satisfaction by

31:15

celebrating the fact that we do

31:17

share this great land with

31:19

the oldest continuous culture on earth

31:22

and that that will be a positive thing

31:25

for people to

31:27

embrace. And thirdly,

31:29

of course, it's also about the way that the world

31:31

sees us as

31:32

well, whether we're a mature nation,

31:34

whether we're prepared to acknowledge.

31:37

Our history. Of course. But the point

31:39

you know, rather like

31:41

the marriage equality debate, I mean, obviously

31:43

quantifiably different, but but analogous

31:45

in this sense. Right. In the marriage

31:48

equality debate, the majority decides

31:50

the rights of the minority. We're

31:52

going through another process now where the majority

31:55

decides the right to the minority. And

31:57

because of the history of the country, what

32:00

I'm trying to say is, in the event

32:02

that paid it up and says no and decides

32:04

to make an issue of this, decides to

32:07

blow this up. We are you've

32:09

got accountants the possibility that

32:11

the referendum fails because that's what

32:14

history tells

32:14

us. Of

32:15

course, referendums have historically

32:17

failed and they've been successful.

32:20

Exactly. So can I ask you these? Because

32:22

obviously, US prime minister have to

32:25

obviously try and move the country

32:27

forward, but you also have

32:29

a responsibility to the citizens of the

32:31

country, including to First Nations Paymore.

32:34

Is there a universe in which you would

32:36

countenance stepping back from

32:39

the referendum

32:40

If you judged it was not going to be successful.

32:43

Do not hold the referendum is to

32:45

ensure that it's not successful.

32:48

So is the so is the answer? No.

32:50

But the answer? No. No is

32:51

the answer. Because it,

32:54

of course, is a risk. To

32:56

hold a referendum where

33:00

particularly where, at

33:02

the moment, it is only the Labour

33:05

Party that is

33:07

saying that they

33:09

are committed to a

33:12

yes vote. But

33:15

it's like worrying about winning

33:18

a grand final. So

33:20

therefore, you don't run on the field and forfeit.

33:23

And that's essentially what it is. It

33:25

would be forfeiting the opportunity for

33:29

recognition

33:30

in the form in which aboriginal

33:33

and Thai state all under people are

33:35

asking for. So so this process

33:37

is locked and loaded. When when

33:39

do we lock to see the referendum. I mean, you're

33:41

not obviously going to tell me the date today

33:44

that the campaign starts, but when

33:46

do we expect it?

33:47

Well,

33:47

the timetable is can

33:49

be worked out pretty easily because you

33:54

have the machinery

33:56

of reference them. There's legislation

33:59

at the moment. There's a

34:01

committee report will come down

34:03

in the next week or so when

34:06

parliament resumes and then that

34:08

will be debated and carried,

34:13

I would hope, because we haven't

34:15

had a had a referendum this century.

34:17

So that's got to be

34:18

updated.

34:18

Yeah. So that's the first process. Then

34:22

the process of Refriger and Working Group

34:24

is meeting in a couple

34:26

of days' time. It's

34:28

continued to work through along

34:30

with that. It's a constitutional advisory

34:33

group of eminent lawyers, former

34:35

high court justice, and and others

34:37

working those issues

34:39

through. And

34:39

they're they're looking at the wording of They're looking

34:41

at the wording. They're looking at all of that.

34:43

Yeah. You all have legislation

34:46

introduced during this

34:49

period of

34:51

settings So before the

34:53

end of March, there will be legislation introduced

34:56

to the parliament that will have in it.

34:59

The draft wording to

35:01

be debated. There will be a

35:03

parliamentary inquiry in which people

35:06

can make submissions to it. Which

35:08

will go for at least six

35:11

weeks. Yep. And then during

35:13

the budget sessions that begin

35:15

in May and then June, you

35:18

all have that debated

35:21

and voted on and hopefully pass.

35:24

No. It needs to pass. Yes.

35:27

In order of

35:27

choice,

35:28

it's a precursor of the referendum in

35:30

order to have a vote. Yes. So the

35:32

parliament will have a say, and every parliamentarian

35:35

will have a say, and there will

35:37

be a parliamentary process of a committee

35:40

report leading leading up to that as

35:42

well. So that takes you up to June.

35:44

Yeah. And then once the legislation

35:47

passes, it has to,

35:49

according to the act, be

35:52

at least two months and

35:54

thirty three days. Don't ask me

35:56

why that particular figures in there

35:58

because that makes no sense to

36:00

me. Well,

36:00

it's not three months, but anyway, it's two months

36:02

and thirty three days. Yep. I

36:04

guess, bit like the thirty three days for

36:06

a federal

36:07

election. That's why -- Mhmm. --

36:09

has to be between that period

36:12

and six months. So

36:15

then it's then it's sort of September,

36:17

isn't it? Thereabouts. Thereabouts.

36:19

August Between September and December.

36:21

Yeah. Between September and

36:23

December. So that's that's the time

36:25

frame. Okay. Which is which

36:27

is there. But it's also

36:30

the process. This is

36:32

that is one of the furfish

36:35

that's out there is that

36:37

somehow there's not enough information

36:40

there is this whole process and

36:43

the danger of of

36:45

this as well is that people get you

36:47

know, overlaid it with information and,

36:49

you

36:50

know, there's going to be an opportunity

36:53

for that to occur.

36:56

What what's interesting is that I

36:58

put forward the draft wording in July

37:01

of last year at the Ghana Festival that's

37:04

what people are actually going to vote on.

37:07

I haven't had any member of parliament

37:10

yet. Yeah. Come up with Come up with

37:12

a single change of any

37:14

word that's been put

37:16

forward. What about just

37:18

on the sovereignty question? Because the

37:20

grain senator Lydia Sorpers raised this

37:22

and we saw in the Australian Day

37:25

marches, invasion day marches around

37:27

the country. There was a fair bit of purchase about

37:29

this point at the grassroots. Level.

37:32

She's concerned that saying

37:35

yes, the voice is tantamount to indigenous

37:37

peoples earning sovereignty. Does

37:39

the government I could see I'll just

37:41

tell you everybody, Lister, you should see

37:43

the prime minister's face. Look, there's a specific

37:45

question. Do you have legal advice from the listed

37:48

a general or imminent legal minds

37:51

that basically can guide the government on this

37:53

question. Is there any risk that sovereignty

37:55

has ceded?

37:56

No. Of course, we have a

37:58

legal advice about

38:01

the whole range of questions. And and

38:03

indeed, the wording itself that's

38:06

put up isn't words that, you know,

38:08

I sat down in a room -- Oh.

38:10

-- and and and then came up with -- So

38:12

-- -- obvious -- -- all of all of

38:14

these issues, people looking for

38:16

a distraction is

38:20

is probably the the wrong word.

38:22

But there there are some people who

38:25

either when they are of a

38:28

hard right position or a hard

38:30

left position come to

38:34

the same conclusion and

38:36

are clearly cooperating of

38:39

not providing support for what is

38:42

being proposed overwhelmingly by

38:45

you can call it the mainstream, call it

38:47

the overwhelming majority. Of

38:50

aboriginal and to Australian peoples

38:53

in the lead up to Illuru and

38:55

and ever since -- Mhmm. -- the

38:58

the remarkable thing

39:00

that has occurred in

39:02

the stages of

39:04

this process has

39:07

been that Average

39:09

on Tyreshow and the peoples who haven't

39:11

always agreed on a range of issues

39:13

are on the same

39:14

page. But

39:15

it's not No. No. No. Not every not

39:17

not everyone is on the

39:19

same page. This is not a

39:22

radical proposition. And

39:24

I said the other day, it's not a radical

39:26

proposition. It's not surprising that

39:29

some people who are on the radical

39:32

positionary, you

39:34

have also a range

39:36

of positions being

39:39

put forward

39:40

which also won't be advanced

39:44

by this. This isn't going

39:46

to mean

39:47

that power of veto or or that's

39:49

all of that. It won't have power of veto.

39:52

It won't be a funding body. It

39:55

won't run programs. It

39:58

won't also mean

40:01

that people's backyards

40:03

is is threatened.

40:06

And so you will have

40:09

people from opposite starting

40:11

points, but they end up the same

40:13

point. Yeah. And and that

40:15

isn't unusual in

40:18

civil politics. No. No. That's right. And

40:20

look, and some people obviously will oppose this

40:22

because they are opposed to it and we'll

40:24

find whatever means of injecting

40:26

that opposition. Right? But these are basic

40:28

questions. I just want to go just again to

40:30

sovereignty just so that we're

40:31

clear. Well, this is This isn't

40:34

about that. This isn't about that, Katherine.

40:36

So you can you can go down rabbit

40:38

holes. I'm not gonna assist you. No. No.

40:40

No. It's Well well, no. No. But it's

40:42

not in this sense. Right? I think that

40:45

there will be people in the community who hear that

40:47

message, who hear that that the voice

40:49

means we accept the white man's constitution.

40:52

But but history has One

40:54

of the things that Noel Pearson speaks about

40:56

very powerfully is

40:59

that there are three

41:01

parts if you like to Australia's

41:03

history. And all of

41:05

them can't be just erased.

41:09

One is indigenous ownership

41:13

of this land for sixty

41:15

five thousand

41:16

years.

41:17

Oh, aren't you ever seen? The second is

41:20

the fact that the first fleet arrived

41:22

in seventeen eighty eight and

41:25

that changed our history. And

41:27

yes, there are some negative things with that,

41:29

but there are also incredibly positive things

41:32

with that as well. And

41:34

that is important to acknowledge

41:39

as well. And the third

41:41

is that particularly in the post war

41:43

period, the multicultural

41:47

development of the modern multicultural diverse

41:49

society which we have here.

41:52

Now there are some

41:54

people who want

41:57

everything post seventeen

42:00

eighty eight to be raised.

42:03

That is not my position. Mhmm. That

42:05

is not the government's position. That

42:08

is not something either which

42:10

in my view has is

42:12

a constructive way to

42:15

move the nation forward. International.

42:18

We we share this continent. Everyone

42:21

has a place in this continent. And

42:24

some of the debates that

42:27

take place put

42:31

forward views that

42:33

I don't share. And

42:36

that is why some of the the

42:38

debates that people are looking for,

42:40

whether they be in some

42:43

of the views

42:45

that we'll put forward on

42:48

Australia. You

42:51

know, I I don't think that Lydia Forbes

42:53

views are representative of

42:57

a majority of aboriginal and homeless homeless homeless

42:59

homeless homeless peoples, and I don't think they're

43:02

representative. Of

43:04

a majority of Greens voters. Sure.

43:06

Sure. But just in terms of just

43:08

one more and then we will move off this. But

43:11

I agree with you that that the sovereignty

43:13

point in the voice are two separate propositions.

43:15

It's sort of like ships in the night. But

43:18

the point is, you know, it's a

43:20

reasonable question to ask, what is the impact

43:22

of the voice on this sovereignty

43:25

question? Because obviously, indigenous people will

43:27

say sovereignty was never seen

43:28

it. Is there anything associated with

43:30

the voice that obviates that point?

43:33

It's

43:33

about our history and it's about

43:35

what it's about. And and

43:39

the sort of argument that

43:41

is taking place is a

43:44

bit like some of the debate

43:46

from others as well saying,

43:49

what is the impact on definition

43:52

of abnormality? There are a

43:55

whole range of questions, which was

43:57

one of the questions that that

43:59

Peter Dutton was putting forward.

44:01

There are a range of questions, Katherine, which

44:03

are not what this referendum

44:06

is about. And

44:09

one of the the the tactics

44:11

to defeat the referendum is

44:14

asking so called questions

44:18

which have nothing to do with

44:20

what this referendum is about. This

44:23

referendum is about two things:

44:25

recognition and consultation. That's

44:28

what it's about. Recognizing indigenous

44:30

people in our constitution who

44:33

currently aren't recognized And

44:36

secondly, that aboriginal people

44:38

enter straight on to people should be consulted

44:41

about matters that affect

44:43

Okay. That is what is about. All

44:45

right. Let me move on to unhelpful

44:48

questions on defense. No,

44:50

I'm joking. No. Obviously, the

44:52

defense strategic review is

44:55

coming. Listen, just can we start with

44:57

a conceptual question and then I've got some specifics

45:00

How do you see the threat environment at

45:02

this point in time?

45:04

We live in an

45:06

insecure world. We have

45:09

a land war taking

45:11

place in Europe where

45:14

a large country has

45:17

invaded a much smaller,

45:19

less powerful country, which

45:22

has sovereign borders which has a

45:24

democratically elected government and

45:27

is attempting to change

45:31

the circumstances there

45:34

through brute force, through an illegal

45:36

invasion. We have

45:41

a strategic competition

45:43

in our own region with

45:46

two great powers. Now the United

45:48

States and peoples Republic

45:51

of China

45:52

with competition in

45:55

the region. Mhmm.

45:57

dangerous is that

45:58

if you had to

45:59

if you had to describe it in a word. III

46:02

don't think that one of the things

46:04

that the Biden administration said

46:07

when Joe Biden became

46:09

president, and and my

46:11

government has reflected as well as

46:13

try not to reduce foreign and

46:15

international -- So I -- just a single

46:17

word.

46:17

No. No. Of course. But, like, it is

46:20

it it is an insecure

46:23

world in which we need

46:25

to put in place measures

46:27

that increase

46:29

pace and security in our region.

46:31

Well, just picking up on that point.

46:34

Do you think that Australia needs to think more

46:37

seriously than we have in the past about

46:39

self defense.

46:41

Yes. Put simply, yes, we

46:43

do. And and so what does that

46:45

mean? What that means is

46:48

the reason why we're having the defense

46:50

strategic review run

46:52

by Angus Houston and Stephen

46:55

Smith was what

46:57

are the assets

47:00

that Australia needs

47:03

to defend ourselves or

47:05

to deter any

47:08

action against ourselves. Where

47:12

should they be located? And

47:15

how is that best

47:20

dealt with in terms of our capacity.

47:23

Yep. So it's not necessarily just

47:25

about, you know, what was spent so

47:27

many dollars was that

47:29

the best use of

47:30

every dollar? What are we spending the dollars on

47:32

and It is Someone is

47:34

a a change from the

47:37

former government who had massive

47:39

blowouts and and a failure

47:41

to deliver in many cases

47:44

what was committed

47:45

to. So will this require this

47:47

enhanced soft defense? Will this require

47:50

more defense spending in

47:53

total? I mean, look, because obviously in a budget,

47:55

you spend money, you save money, right?

47:58

In terms of defense spending, what are we looking at?

48:00

Are we looking at more defense spending

48:02

with not many offsets? Or what are we

48:05

looking

48:05

at? Well, I won't get through the budget process

48:07

with you on your podcast. Here,

48:09

Katherine, but I think it's

48:12

fair to say that there certainly won't be less.

48:14

But we also looking

48:18

at appropriate value and

48:21

making sure that

48:24

our capacity is increased.

48:26

So what that means is that

48:28

some projects may be advanced, but maybe others

48:31

are terminated or Well,

48:33

that we're working through those

48:35

issues, but it just means

48:37

that when you're

48:40

spending a dollar. Is

48:42

it going to the right place?

48:44

Yep. Is obviously what

48:46

a defense strategic review is.

48:49

And we know that there's been a

48:51

change in the

48:54

the warning times if you like or

48:56

when conflict might occur as well. And

48:58

that changes some of the

48:59

dynamic. It was thought you

49:01

You made it. It registered faster than

49:03

Yeah. You would have a ten year window of

49:06

of conflict that not necessarily

49:09

the case -- Mhmm. -- anymore indeed.

49:11

Well, it it's not the advice.

49:13

No. So we need to make

49:15

sure that We

49:18

have the right assets. We're

49:21

examining that. We're working

49:23

through the orcas arrangements

49:25

with the United Kingdom and the United

49:27

States. But we're also

49:30

looking at our capacity in

49:33

general here as well. Yeah.

49:35

And I'd put it in a

49:37

framework which is even

49:39

broader than the the one that you started

49:41

with. Which is that one of the lessons

49:44

of the pandemic

49:45

is, in general, we need to

49:47

be more self reliant. We need

49:49

to be less vulnerable to international

49:52

shocks

49:52

-- Yeah. -- which might be a health shock

49:55

through a pandemic. It might be

49:57

a cyber issue it

49:59

might be a

50:01

supply chain issue or

50:03

it might be military

50:06

or it might be unreliable or

50:08

alliance partners if if we think

50:10

about the United States, is Joe Biden going to

50:12

be there after the next

50:13

election? Well, that of course is a matter

50:15

for the people of the United States. But

50:19

if you look at our interdependency

50:22

in a whole range of areas, the

50:25

pandemic should

50:28

have given Everybody a

50:30

wake up call. A wake up call. In

50:33

the United States, the Inflation

50:35

Reduction Act is

50:37

a major major reform that

50:39

will see the U. S. more

50:42

self reliant if

50:44

you look at the range of areas including

50:46

the transition to renewables. You

50:49

know, we need to make more things

50:51

here. Mhmm. When you look at

50:53

access to pharmaceuticals, we need

50:56

to make more things here. When you look at

50:58

heavy manufacturing, we need to make

51:00

more things

51:00

here. Defense

51:01

capability feeds into that. And defense

51:03

capability is a part of

51:06

advanced manufacturing that has spin

51:09

offs as

51:09

well. Can I ask you a question that I have always

51:11

wanted to ask you and I've forgotten to

51:13

ask you on a number of occasions just

51:16

with Orchids which you mentioned a minute ago? Obviously,

51:18

it's pretty important eventuality.

51:20

Let's call it that. Would labor

51:22

have pursued orcas if

51:25

Scott Morrison hadn't, in essence,

51:28

walked down that path and

51:30

committed Australia to nuclear

51:33

submarines from the U. S. Like, if if you

51:36

Ocus. Ocus is not

51:38

just about nuclear

51:41

subgroups. Sure. That's important. Yeah.

51:43

It's about our defense arrangements.

51:47

It's about interoperability. It's

51:50

it to me seems when we had

51:53

the decision to make and I

51:56

was labor leader.

51:59

Were surprised by some

52:01

of the analysis,

52:04

which seemed

52:06

to forget that there's nothing, if

52:08

you take a step back. There's nothing

52:10

terribly surprising by us having

52:12

relations with the United States and the United

52:15

Kingdom. So the United States alliance

52:18

was forged during

52:20

World War two, really, by

52:22

Cooten who turned to

52:24

America in nine

52:27

in forty one when it was so critical.

52:30

And then the alliance formally

52:32

grew out of that over period of time

52:34

in the United

52:35

Kingdom, of course, A

52:38

very important part of our history.

52:41

Hang on. Hang on. But my question though isn't

52:43

you know, just labor want to do something with our

52:45

alliance

52:46

partners. That's not my question. My question

52:48

is, would you have done orcas?

52:50

Well, we weren't. That's a hypothetical question.

52:52

Yeah.

52:53

But it's interesting, isn't it? Because it's

52:55

a sliding door moment. So do you think

52:57

that No. I think that there would have been

52:59

what Your question leaves

53:01

out, I guess, it sees

53:04

orcas as being in a range of between

53:06

politicians. Orcus

53:08

is an arrangement between nations

53:10

-- Mhmm.

53:11

-- who are friends, whoever was

53:13

in government would have had

53:16

similar. So

53:17

you think you would have got there anyway? Defense,

53:19

similar defense, department, defense,

53:22

personnel, foreign affairs, advice,

53:25

And that's why relationship

53:30

with both those nations has

53:34

been

53:36

pretty consistent over

53:38

a considerable period of time

53:41

regardless of who

53:43

has been in office

53:44

at any particular time. No. No. Sure. And

53:46

it and it's Yeah. It's not a trick or a trap

53:48

question. I'm just genuinely interested.

53:51

You you think you would have got there

53:53

anyway. I I think I mean,

53:55

we obviously weren't party

53:58

to the arrangements, and that

54:00

was a decision that

54:03

the former prime minister took.

54:05

Even though he was

54:07

asked to --

54:09

Yes. I can talk more widely. -- the

54:11

the opposition in it, but he chose

54:14

not to do so. That

54:16

says something about the United States

54:18

as well and its understanding of

54:21

the relationship between our

54:23

two nations that it wasn't a relationship

54:26

between

54:27

two parties. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It

54:29

was much deeper than that.

54:31

And that's

54:34

why

54:35

the relationship is, I think, is

54:38

so important. What's our interim

54:40

solution because, obviously, these submarines

54:43

and and we've made the point in this bit of the conversation.

54:45

We see that, you know, the defense

54:48

reviews about more Norcus, obviously. So

54:50

Yeah. Right. So we're working through.

54:52

What's the interim solution? We're working through. You

54:54

could share it now with them. We'll be happy

54:56

to help you with an instance. Yes. When

54:59

given appropriate processes --

55:01

Yes. -- that will work through. So you haven't

55:03

decided yet? Cabinet. You

55:04

haven't decided yet what the interim solution

55:06

is we've decided a whole range

55:08

of things, but one of the things that I've decided

55:11

even more significant than that

55:14

is the way that this government will operate.

55:17

Which is that we operate properly.

55:19

We have proper processes. We'll

55:22

go through all of that. The cabinet

55:24

will confirm decisions

55:27

that are made, but the National Security Committee

55:30

has been meeting regularly. We've been

55:32

meeting already this year. And

55:35

we'll continue to engage.

55:37

We have our foreign minister and defense

55:40

minister as we

55:40

speak.

55:41

Yes. In gay pari, overseas.

55:44

Meeting with their French counterparts

55:47

and then the United Kingdom counterparts

55:50

as well. Will be having

55:52

a discussion and there's already been

55:55

significant discussions

55:57

with our friends in

55:59

the United States. And but

56:01

timing, like, approximately, obviously,

56:03

I've done it. I'm deeply disappointed for the record

56:05

that you're not gonna unveil the Orchards interim

56:08

solution. Unfiled everything

56:09

up on the part. We'll probably

56:11

do it in a bit. A

56:14

broader

56:15

a broader

56:16

forum and perhaps in consultation

56:19

with the allies. Sure. But what's

56:21

the timing? Well, we've said in

56:24

the first quarter of this year. But as

56:26

it works we've said in the first

56:28

quarter. So I'm getting nowhere with these

56:30

quarters. What's a of twelve, Katherine?

56:33

That's right.

56:33

Yes. Yeah. I know. Well, it's our next

56:36

emails. Isn't it? In the last day

56:38

of January. Okay. So therefore

56:40

okay. It's not the end. We'll look there yet. Another

56:43

couple of months. Okay. Some at some point

56:45

in the next couple of months, will you either go

56:47

to Washington or Beijing this

56:48

year, do you think?

56:49

I

56:50

fully expect it. Well, I will be

56:52

going to the United States this year --

56:54

Mhmm. -- when?

56:55

On at least one occasion, and we'll

56:57

make that announcement at an appropriate

56:59

time. I'm less hopeless.

57:01

Because that is well,

57:03

I will be going to

57:06

the APAC meeting as being held

57:08

--

57:08

Yes. In the US. That's right. -- United States.

57:10

Yep. In October. San Francisco

57:13

in either October or November. Mhmm.

57:15

They haven't finalized the date

57:17

yet.

57:17

Yep. So perhaps

57:19

you can Yes. You will be going to

57:21

don't know them,

57:21

ma'am. Yeah. If you're a lot Sure. Sure. You you

57:23

you will be going to APEC, but I'm talking about But

57:25

I will be going to

57:26

see notice say it before then.

57:28

Okay. Be before I pick.

57:30

Before then.

57:31

Interesting. Okay. And Beijing?

57:32

What the president? Well, I I don't

57:35

have

57:35

What must be important is meeting. Yes.

57:37

There are president Biden has invited

57:39

me to the United States, and president

57:41

Biden will be here in

57:43

Australia. As well this

57:45

year, of course, at the Quad

57:46

level of this meeting -- Of course. Yeah. Yeah.

57:49

-- with Prime Minister Quesida and

57:51

Prime Minister Modi. Yes. And

57:53

I have extended to the

57:55

president and

57:56

address

57:57

the protection when he comes to address

57:59

the politics.

57:59

Is that likely? Do you think? Well, we're

58:01

hopeful it depends upon diaries,

58:04

and we haven't finalized the

58:06

arrangements for the Quad latest

58:08

meeting yet, that timetable. That

58:11

will be done as soon as

58:13

possible. There are a range

58:15

of logistics.

58:16

Sure. I'll go. No. I don't.

58:18

Which I kind of that that would be unfathomable

58:20

-- We say extraordinary. --

58:23

we have a draft

58:25

provisions are in place -- Wow. -- of

58:27

a venue and timing

58:29

as well. We'll wait and watch this

58:31

space. See

58:32

confirmation. No. Of course.

58:34

And I I'm very conscious. You've been generous

58:36

with your time and I pray at it and we must be absolutely

58:39

on the clock by

58:39

now. Just budget, just a couple

58:41

of things. Obviously There will be one. Yeah.

58:45

Well, no, not only one. There'll be two.

58:47

There'll be two. You did one in October

58:49

and one in May. There will

58:51

be two in the same financial year.

58:54

Because, you know, this government is government

58:56

for

58:56

punishments. Anyway, no. Obviously,

58:58

they

58:58

will Gotta give you something to talk about. Sure.

59:00

Now I'm totally up for the budget. I'm pumped. So

59:03

obviously, that's in May.

59:05

Now there will be obviously,

59:08

well, two things. Obviously energy

59:11

rebates because of high energy prices will

59:13

be a feature of that budget given the agreement

59:15

you made over December in terms of

59:17

rolling that out with the states. So

59:19

there's a cost of living component in the budget.

59:22

But there will also be, I'm sure you're acutely

59:24

conscious, and I can't wait for you to roll your eyes

59:26

at the question. A drumbeat amongst

59:30

well meaning NGOs and

59:32

others about the Stage three

59:34

tax cuts. We had this debate in October. We

59:37

had a precursor debate about whether or

59:39

not this was the most appropriate. I

59:42

know you're aware of the debate. The question's

59:44

coming. In May, is there

59:46

any universe where the government adjusts?

59:49

Because you're not talking about scrapping them. I've never

59:51

heard anyone talking about scrapping them. Is there

59:53

any universe where that package

59:55

gets adjusted in

59:57

May.

59:57

We have not changed our position. Yeah. But

59:59

that doesn't actually answer the question. But it

1:00:01

does actually. Well, when can you express

1:00:04

it more affirmatively? Because we haven't changed

1:00:06

our position. Exactly what

1:00:08

we said last time. And

1:00:10

So is the answer no?

1:00:12

Nothing has changed. Is

1:00:13

the answer no? There's no debate going

1:00:15

on about changing

1:00:18

any arrangements for

1:00:21

those things in

1:00:23

May. And

1:00:26

we have not changed our position. Oh,

1:00:29

yeah. Is

1:00:29

the answer? No. Is the answer?

1:00:32

But then you get into Katherine asking

1:00:35

hypotheticals about a range of things

1:00:37

on the budget. And you know you've been

1:00:39

around for a long time. Look,

1:00:41

I'm I'm different. And you know --

1:00:42

Yes. -- people do not respond.

1:00:44

No. Two budget questions. No. No.

1:00:46

No. Sure. That way, so

1:00:48

people can go and

1:00:51

speculate

1:00:51

to their heart speculate to their heart to contain.

1:00:54

Not very to speculation

1:00:55

if you've got no intention. What's the last time?

1:00:57

No. And it won't be this time. It won't be in

1:00:59

May.

1:01:00

Well, I haven't changed

1:01:03

our position. Right. We have not changed

1:01:05

our position. Right. Is there

1:01:07

any universe where the position

1:01:10

You can actually change the same question

1:01:12

in a different way, but you'll get you'll get

1:01:14

the same

1:01:15

answer. No. Sure. But but the persistence isn't

1:01:17

madness. The persistence just reflects

1:01:20

the fact that the location is slightly open

1:01:22

ended. You basically say we haven't changed

1:01:24

our position, which

1:01:26

doesn't preclude changing your position

1:01:28

if you feel differently at a weak start?

1:01:31

Well, Katherine, you

1:01:34

know, this is No. All

1:01:36

I I I've noted that

1:01:38

the coalition are out there running

1:01:40

a campaign, one way, and

1:01:43

some other people will be out there running a

1:01:45

campaign the other way. And this

1:01:47

is all about something of which

1:01:49

a decision in May will have

1:01:51

zero impact

1:01:52

right. Oh,

1:01:53

well, that's as definitive as I think we

1:01:55

can get

1:01:55

on that point. But we have

1:01:57

not changed our position. Okay.

1:02:01

In the budget apart from obviously

1:02:04

the energy

1:02:05

rebates. Cost of living is a problem

1:02:07

more generally obviously for people.

1:02:09

Seven percent or whatever that dreadful inflation

1:02:12

figure was the other day. More

1:02:14

interest rates rises coming down the part.

1:02:16

Obviously, the government has been concerned

1:02:18

about overheating the economy by putting

1:02:20

more cash handouts or whatever in the

1:02:22

mix. But what is most

1:02:24

front of mind for you? Our cost of

1:02:26

living is a

1:02:29

big issue, which is why we designed

1:02:31

the energy policy the way that we have

1:02:33

in a way that would take pressure off inflation,

1:02:37

but also the fiscal

1:02:39

position of the budget

1:02:42

that we inherited with the trillion dollars of

1:02:44

debt and not not much to show for

1:02:46

it. It's something that requires

1:02:49

discipline, it requires a responsible budget,

1:02:51

which is what we delivered in October.

1:02:54

And we'll deliver that.

1:02:57

More savings. More. Again, in

1:02:59

May, there are enormous pressures,

1:03:02

spending pressures on the

1:03:03

budget. One of them we've

1:03:05

discussed is defense.

1:03:07

Yeah. And now there is the NDIS.

1:03:10

Yep.

1:03:11

And now there is health care,

1:03:14

health issues. There

1:03:16

are other pressures on

1:03:20

expenditure. And one of the pressures

1:03:22

on expenditure on the budget

1:03:25

is debt that we inherited where

1:03:28

the increase in interest rates impact

1:03:31

how much has to be paid on the debt,

1:03:33

which is there as well. So that places

1:03:36

increased pressure as well.

1:03:40

So we are conscious about

1:03:42

that, but we'll continue to

1:03:44

to work. The ERC is doing

1:03:46

its work We

1:03:49

met this week. We met

1:03:51

last week. We'll meet next

1:03:53

week. Continuing to

1:03:55

do the the work of of

1:03:58

getting a policy agenda,

1:04:01

which one of the things about the Labour Party

1:04:03

is there's lots of ministers

1:04:05

with lots of ideas. We

1:04:07

can't do everything that we would like to

1:04:09

do in our first year.

1:04:12

We've been in government for seven months. We

1:04:15

have done what we said we would do

1:04:17

plus some additional reforms like

1:04:20

paid parental leave expansion of

1:04:22

that was in addition

1:04:24

that came out of the Jobs and Skills Summit.

1:04:27

But we will be responsible in

1:04:30

how we do it because to do otherwise

1:04:32

is to be counterproductive. Mhmm. Because

1:04:35

if it's not a responsible budget, it

1:04:38

could place more

1:04:38

pressure. Because

1:04:41

Yeah. Well, it overheates

1:04:44

the economy, etcetera. Yep. So

1:04:46

it's counterproductive. So we're

1:04:48

very conscious about that,

1:04:50

but conscious as well of concentrating

1:04:55

on the areas of productive

1:04:57

investment that lead

1:04:59

to a stronger economy

1:05:02

down the track. So structure

1:05:04

investment, the national reconstruction funding

1:05:06

new industries and jobs, free

1:05:08

free tariff, child care,

1:05:11

is an economic participation

1:05:13

and productivity measure as well.

1:05:16

So we're looking at those productive

1:05:19

areas in the economy as well, how we drive

1:05:21

productivity

1:05:22

will be one of the themes of the

1:05:24

budget.

1:05:25

Okay. We might have conversation sometime

1:05:27

after the budget. And I'm

1:05:29

sure we would See see where the sum

1:05:31

of human knowledge