PATRICIA KARVELAS:
My first guest tonight is the Special Minister of State. He joins us from Canberra. Scott Ryan, welcome to the program.
SENATOR SCOTT RYAN:
Good evening Patricia.
KARVELAS:
If Labor announces it will block the plebiscite, which is inevitable, will you revisit this issue, do you have a plan B?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well Patricia, I think that’s jumping to conclusions, let’s take a step back. We took a commitment, an explicit one, to the election, to have a plebiscite to resolve this issue. The path forward now to resolve this issue – and for those who support change in the Marriage Act, as Bill Shorten and the Prime Minister do, as indeed I do – is to put this to the Australian people. People can campaign for their particular view, no one has criticised the question, or the mechanics of this particular plebiscite. I think this provides a path forward to address this issue in the short-term and have it dealt with in the first couple of months of next year. Now if Bill wants to continue to play politics and oppose a plebiscite that he himself said, only a few years ago, that he had no problem with, that shows he is more concerned with politics than the issue.
KARVELAS:
Either way, on Tuesday, Labor caucus looks set to decide to block the plebiscite. Sky has today reported that this is the case, Tony Burke has all-but confirmed it. What are the mechanics if that happens – they decide to block it, it means that you can’t get it through, will you still go through the motions of trying to get it through the Senate and seeing it defeated?
SENATOR RYAN:
I will expect we will take every step we can within the parliamentary process to see our election commitment legislated. We did that when Labor tried to block us from repealing the carbon tax, we did that when Labor tried to block us from repealing the mining tax. Just because the Labor Party takes an opportunistic stance and opposes a plebiscite that Bill Shorten said he had no problem with only a few years ago, doesn’t mean we are not going to prosecute the case for the mechanism we took to the election and gathered public support to resolve this issue.
KARVELAS:
So what? Do you keep trying to take it through the Parliament even though it gets rejected and rejected and rejected, which it inevitably will, given the positions all of these guys are taking which means you cannot get it through?
SENATOR RYAN:
We will seek to prosecute the case. We put a bill up, that will hopefully go through the House of Representatives and be put to the Senate in coming days and weeks. Just because Bill Shorten’s being opportunistic doesn’t mean that we are going to walk away from our election commitments.
KARVELAS:
Sure, but it will be blocked, what happens after it gets blocked?
SENATOR RYAN:
If Bill Shorten says he doesn’t want to deal with this issue, then quite frankly, there are lots of other priorities the Government took to the election. I myself have some in my portfolio, I will have made all good faith endeavours to implement this election commitment and I will move on to implementing my others.
KARVELAS:
Does that mean the issue is dead for the entire Parliament? Or is anyone entitled in the party room to raise changing the process to, perhaps, a conscience vote?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well I’ve always said I’m not going to try and predict the future, but the Government’s position was to resolve this issue by plebiscite. Just because Bill Shorten’s playing politics, it doesn’t mean that we are going to walk away from our election commitment. There are lots of aspects of our election plan that we have to implement over the next three years and if Bill Shorten wants to take this issue off the agenda and say ‘the people can’t have a vote, we are not going to let the Government implement its election promise’, then quite frankly, I’ve got other things to do as well.
KARVELAS:
On a few other issues, things that you might have to do, or be part of, not strictly in your portfolio: the Federal Government on Friday announced a banking tribunal to hear complaints from people who feel they’ve been ripped off. Can you explain how it will work?
SENATOR RYAN:
I understand this follows the announcements made before the election that referred to putting in place a one-stop shop to resolve issues that customers have with banking operations. We are focused on actually providing banking customers with a mechanism to access justice, to access it independently, and, where appropriate, to be granted some sort of compensation. What Australians want is a means to have their problems redressed, is the means to have the banks brought to account. The Royal Commission that Labor is proposing won’t actually see any of these measures put in place. We’re focused on putting those in place so that customers can get redress when they need to.
KARVELAS:
Does that mean there will be binding judgments or penalties against banks if complaints are upheld?
SENATOR RYAN:
As I understand it, the commitment to the one-stop shop involves work that is currently taken across a number of ombudsmen in the sectors and also the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal. Work on that has been underway since before the election, led by Ian Ramsay, one of the country’s leading experts in this. That works continues and is expected to be released in interim form later this year. The Government is committed to putting in place, what the Minister has called, the one-stop shop to allow customers to go somewhere, make a complaint, have that complaint assessed independently and have justice. A Royal Commission won’t do any of that.
KARVELAS:
The question is, will the banks have a right of appeal?
SENATOR RYAN:
They’re questions appropriately addressed to the Minister for Financial Services Kelly O’Dwyer. We’ve outlined the broad architecture of it, the detailed work is being done by Ian Ramsay, and as I understand, the interim report on those measures will be coming out later this year.
KARVELAS:
On a related issue, one of Australia’s biggest political donors, the National Australia Bank, really quietly announced it will stop giving money to political parties. What are the wider implications of this? What is your reaction to this? Because of course, you’re working on donations reform as well.
SENATOR RYAN:
It’s up to every Australia, whether they be a corporate or an individual, to determine whether or not they want to make a contribution to a political process via a political donation or some other contribution. I defend that, I think there is a place for that. I’ve made it clear I don’t think we should be having blanket bans on types of donations, that we need to ensure the political field is not unfair, and at the moment, when you have millions of dollars gathered through effectively the tax-free operations of unions directed to one side of politics, that actually does skew the political competition field. But I’m not going to make a judgment on National Australia Bank, I’m a customer of them, they’re entitled to make their own judgment, as every Australian should be.
KARVELAS:
Given you are embarking on a broader look at the donations system, the implications, and there are obviously, I think, the [Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters] is looking into this. You said a little earlier that if the plebiscite fails, if it doesn’t go ahead, you’ve got plenty of other things to do, is that the plenty of other things? Is that your priority then? Donations reform?
SENATOR RYAN:
The reference I gave the electoral matters committee, which allows participation from all members of both houses in Parliament, refers to the issue of foreign donations that have been in the media lately because there is no clarity about what a foreign donation is. Do we mean a foreign person, a foreign-owned, Australian-operating company, a foreign company? So there needs to be some clarity about what that exactly means. The legislation that the Labor Party claimed to have brought in on that wouldn’t have actually done anything to stop the foreign donations that have been in the media over the past couple of months, that’s one issue.
There is also the issue of ensuring that all electoral material is authorised. We can’t have another situation where one side of politics, like the Labor Party, sends out a text message that basically misrepresents itself and pretends it’s from Medicare. There are all these issues that flow from every election. And of course, one of the other issues that we’ve been asked to look at is, of course, the issue of donations more broadly and there has been a lot of work done on that in recent years. There is no particular commitment to an outcome. I think we need to determine the values that we want to underpin a system. In my view, fairness and allowing people to contribute to a political process are the two values we need to ensure are reflected in the law.
KARVELAS:
You say there is no commitment to an outcome on this, but I think there is a widespread appetite from Australian voters, from our democracy itself, that’s crying out for reform in this area.
Isn’t it getting to the point where you need to make a stronger commitment that you are very much prepared to do a root-and-branch to look at this, to really implement something that people feel genuinely comfortable with, that they don’t think money, particularly foreign money, is influencing our democracy and our electoral system?
SENATOR RYAN:
I should have said there, Patricia, that I don’t want to pre-judge the outcome of the election inquiry, that would have been a better form of words. But if we want to talk about influence of money, we have the legislation about the Country Fire Authority coming into the Senate this week. It is the union movement’s control – financial and otherwise over the Labor Party – that basically stands in the way of the interests of tens of thousands of volunteers being reflected, the sort of people that put their lives and safety on the line every bushfire season in Victoria. People might talk about foreign donations, but they’re a lot smaller than what the union movements throws in in ensuring the Labor Party does its bidding in Parliament.
KARVELAS:
So you say that particular bill is going to the Parliament this week. I know that One Nation has expressed concern, they’ve spent time with the firefighters’ union. Have you got them over the line? Do you have their support?
SENATOR RYAN:
I’m not going to make a claim about anyone’s support. That’s a matter for what occurs on the floor of the Senate, but the Government remains optimistic. What we have in place in Victoria is one of the world’s strongest volunteer public safety organisations and around the fringes of Melbourne and in country towns, even interstate when we send people to go and fight disasters in other states, it is often the volunteers who are able to travel and move to another part of Victoria, or that can protect the home front when other firefighters move. What we’ve seen in Victoria is that being put at risk; it is decades old, it is the social fabric in many of our country towns. We are very committed to ensuring the volunteers of our CFA are protected and in parliamentary inquiries at the state and federal levels, the volunteers have made clear that this union-dominated agreement poses a threat to that.
KARVELAS:
Just going to the Senate’s agenda, the Senate has been criticised the last time it sat for not having enough to do, are you much busier this time? Are you going to be very busy, what are your agenda items?
SENATOR RYAN:
This is the third week of Parliament. As is commonly the case, most legislation comes from the House of Representatives so I think that was an unfair criticism at the time. We do need to give the House of Representatives time to legislate the first stage of the Government’s agenda before it comes to the Senate. This week we have the Country Fire Authority protection legislation coming forward, we also have, I understand, the income tax cuts that we announced in the budget just prior to the election and we also have another tranche of anti-terrorism legislation, some of which refers to firearms trafficking to increase the penalties there. So it will be a very busy week in the Senate.
KARVELAS:
Just going to the US election. I know you mustn’t have missed it, because I don’t know anyone in the world who really could have missed this one. A 2005 recording has emerged in which Donald Trump boasts of how his fame has allowed him to impose himself on women and also, really, what many people are saying is he’s alluded to effectively forcing himself on women. It’s sexual assult – is he fit to be president?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well let me preface what I’m going to say Patricia with the following comments. It is important that the American political process be allowed to take its course. I’ve always had the point of view that as a Minister in a country with a very strong and deep alliance with the United States, it’s not appropriate that I make a comment about their election process. We will work with whomever the American people elect, and as we know the relations between our countries are much deeper than just the Lodge to the White House. What I will say though was that the comments were absolutely horrific, unjustifiable and I was appalled by them.
KARVELAS:
Well they were shocking. I mean how can this person lead the strongest country in the world, our strongest ally. I know that you’re trying to be diplomatic, but it’s got to a point now given that he’s been dis-endorsed left, right and center by Republicans, you can’t just be polite anymore, can we?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well again Patricia, while it might be tempting to make an observation, I’m a minister in a government that has an important relationship with the US. I find the comments themselves – words fail me in describing them. They are horrific, they are unjustifiable, they can’t be explained away. It is also important that we will work with whomever the American people elect and the relations between our countries are right across government, right across our community, right across business and academia and it’s not appropriate for a minister in a government, or a putative minister if they are in the Opposition in my view, to be making comments on the internal elections of other nations.
KARVELAS:
Scott Ryan, have a good week in parliament. Thank you so much for joining me tonight.
SENATOR RYAN:
Thanks Patricia.
(ENDS)