Topics: Alleged payments to people smugglers, dual citizenship legislation.
E&OE…
GILBERT
Joining me now, our regular panel, Labor frontbencher Andrew Leigh and Liberal frontbencher Scott Ryan – gentleman, good morning to you both. I want to ask you about some domestic politics, we started the show with the comments of the Prime Minister, he is not budging one bit, Scott Ryan, when it comes to his response to claims that Australian officials paid people smugglers. But we have frontbenchers Julie Bishop and Peter Dutton, just a few says ago ruling it out, rejecting any notion that our officials had paid people smugglers. Now it is back open as an issue, what has happened here, it does look a bit messy?
RYAN
It has been a long standing policy of the Government not to comment on operational matters, and not to comment on intelligence and security matters…
Interrupted
GILBERT
So it was a mistake of the Foreign Minister then?
RYAN
I’m not going to pass any comment on colleagues in any way like that, I wasn’t there, I didn’t see the comments. The point is, and we noticed last night that Bill Shorten is now saying that he doesn’t want to discuss these issues either. So, he spent yesterday in Parliament asking questions to which he wouldn’t answer himself.
GILBERT
That is a good point, because Tony Burke said yesterday that it all could be cleared up with a simple ‘no’. The same question could be asked of Labor: did Labor pay people smugglers at any time when in government?
LEIGH
Kieran we certainly never paid people smugglers to turn around boats on the high seas. What is clear here is when Scott says that it is a long standing policy to not comment on intelligence matters, it is actually a rather short standing policy, it dates from this week. Last week Ministers were categorically ruling out these payments, and then being unwilling to continue with that. As a taxpayer, I think I have a right to know how my Government is spending my resources and particularly so given that if payments were made, if 30 thousand US was indeed handed over, that could well be in breach of Australian laws.
GILBERT
You said that Labor when in government never paid people smugglers to turn around boats, but were they paid as part of other disruption activities?
LEIGH
Look, we – it is certainly clear that we didn’t pay to turn boats around on the high seas…
Interrupted
GILBERT
So, you can’t be more definitive on that. Is that because you don’t want to talk about the intelligence component of this?
LEIGH
It wouldn’t be responsible of me to go into the sort of details of this Kieran, but…
Interrupted
GILBERT
The same could be said of the Government then?
LEIGH
Well, the Government, I was saying, was willing to talk about this last week, unwilling to talk about it this week. It is certainly reasonable for Labor to seek information on statements that have been made in the Parliament.
RYAN
I was with the Prime Minister last week on Friday when he was asked, and he was very clear and he has been consistent in this, in not making comments on operational matters and not making comments on security and intelligence matters. It is ludicrous, Andrew, for you to assert that you will talk about some payments, and not others. Are you in a position to back up the statement you just made about what Labor did or did not do while in office? I know this is not my portfolio area, but one of the reasons that we have this policy is to protect the operations of people acting in Australia’s national interest. The truth is, so many people who are out there expressing outrage about this are the same people who have a longstanding opposition to this Coalition’s policies that have successfully protected our borders twice now. As a voter I have an interest in knowing: are you going to maintain these policies, or are you going to water them down like you did last time?
LEIGH
What we certainly won’t be doing is to be handing over wads of cash to people in boats. I mean that’s something…
Interrupted
RYAN
But you’ll do it elsewhere? Is that what you just said earlier? You opened this, you said that you can say categorically that Labor didn’t do this, but you won’t say if Labor did it anywhere else. We are saying that we are not commenting on these matters.
LEIGH
I very clearly said, Scott, Labor wouldn’t do this. You’re unable to say whether the Coalition is doing it and we have people like Bret Walker raising serious concerns over whether these payments took place if they were consistent with…
Interrupted
GILBERT
I’ll get back to Scott Ryan on that in a second, because it is worth pursuing, but Labor is a contradiction here because you are not willing to say definitively that no money changed hands when Labor was in Government with people smugglers. Bill Shorten hasn’t done it either and yet Tony Burke yesterday in Parliament comes out and says that a simple ‘no’ will clear this up, we haven’t had a simple ‘no’ from Labor.
LEIGH
We have been absolutely clear that payments of the kind that are currently being described didn’t occur under Labor. Now last week we had Ministers out there saying that these payments didn’t happen, and then we had the Prime Minister unwilling to answer that question. So they were willing to go to questions of national security – and this is an extremely serious issue Kieran if these payments have taken place, then potentially they are in breach of Australian law…
Interrupted
GILBERT
In breach of international law according to Don Rothwell from the ANU, Scott Ryan, he says it’s tantamount to people smuggling if these payments are being made. I know this has been a successful policy, no doubt, politically obviously successful as well, every time the Prime Minister talks about this issue it is not going to be a negative for him in a broader electoral sense, but morally isn’t it right that the Australian people know if our dollars are going into the pockets of people smugglers?
RYAN
I genuinely believe the Australian people have well over a decade now voted for policies that have stopped boats coming and have stopped illegal immigration, and stopped the people smuggling…
Interrupted
GILBERT
Whatever it takes?
RYAN
No, I think to be fair, these are very difficult issues and they entrust the Government to act in their interest and to act morally. As the Prime Minister made clear last week, we will do what is necessary within the bounds of being a decent and humane nation.
GILBERT
When it comes to ASIS though, our foreign spy agency, under their charter they can do most things even outside of the normal rule of law if it is within their remit.
RYAN
If I recall correctly, if you are acting within the charter of ASIS you are not subject to the standard forms of prosecution or court action to which people like you and I are, and that is not an uncommon provision I think it was put in place…
Interrupted
GILBERT
So if they spent the money…
Interrupted
RYAN
I think it was a provision put in place in a bipartisan way, because the truth is in international relations – by its nature is not something that is subject to the full glare of public opinion or court processes. Now…
Interrupted
GILBERT
So if they are the ones that forked out the money, it is not illegal?
RYAN
I don’t want to get into the hypotheticals, I am not in the position to answer them and if this was my portfolio area I would again restate my personal view which is it is not in Australia’s national interest to be discussing these issues in great detail publically. Now, despite all of the mock outrage we saw from the Labor Party yesterday, Bill Shorten went on TV last night and said: well, I’m not going to answer them either. It just shows how shallow this is.
GILBERT
So, ASIS, if it was the foreign intelligence agency that spent the money, Andrew – first of all is it right that the Government clarify that given that it is our intelligence apparatus that we are talking about and secondly, would it be illegal anyway given that they do have that broader charter that they are not necessarily going to be prosecuted, well they won’t be, under the normal rule of law in Australia?
LEIGH
Well Kieran, let’s get a clear answer from the government and then go to these deep questions of illegality, and questions as to whether this is effectively funding …
Interrupted
GILBERT
They can’t, because if it’s a spy agency then how can they start talking about that?
LEIGH
Well Government Ministers Julie Bishop and Peter Dutton, last week ruled out these payments, then the Prime Minister, when asked repeatedly to rule out the payments, refused to do so, and then in the parliament, suddenly the government turns around and says they can’t answer questions. They’re willing to provide more information in media interviews than they are to the Parliament of Australia; it’s the opposite of what you’d expect from parliamentary accountability.
GILBERT
Isn’t it correcting the position, though? Getting it back to what is should be: that you don’t comment on national security? And yet Labor’s encouraging them to be irresponsible in that sense?
LEIGH
The Australian people are demanding answers on whether their Government has been paying people smugglers, that’s a perfectly reasonable question for the Australian opposition to be asking.
RYAN
I haven’t had anyone call my office with that request.
GILBERT
Let’s take a break, back in just a moment.
(Advertisements)
This is AM Agenda. With me Liberal frontbencher Scott Ryan and Labor’s Shadow Assistant-Treasurer Andrew Leigh. Gentlemen, let’s look at this leaked ministerial briefing, Question Time briefing. The
Prime Minister’s made some comments on it, owning up to it, says it shows the Government’s serious on national security. Let’s have a listen.
(Audio of the Prime Minister)
Senator Ryan, the Prime Minister says it shows that the government’s serious about protecting the country but it’s not a great look, is it? To have another leak from presumably a number of ministers – it would have only gone to a few?
RYAN
A Question Time brief goes through a lot of hands, as I’m aware…
GILBERT
It’s not a Cabinet ministerial brief?
RYAN
I thought that it was a Question Time brief, the bit I saw on the website when it was posted yesterday, and look, Question Time’s an intensely political part of the parliamentary sitting day. I think the Prime Minister made the point there that this indicates how serious this government is about updating our citizenship laws to reflect that fact. It used to be, years ago, that people who attacked Australians wore the flag of a foreign army on their shoulder, now they might where the flag of someone like ISIS, and there’s no reason to not have our citizenship laws updated to reflect that. It’s very important we do so. It’s very important that we update our security laws, as we have in recent months, because we do face a new threat and sadly we’ve actually seen a couple of examples of that in the last 12 months in Melbourne and Sydney.
GILBERT
This document, though, showed that the government was keen on wedging Labor on this issue as well as that part of the…
Interrupted
RYAN
Well, ‘wedge’ is a word that I only hear in Canberra. The page that I saw actually highlights what the Prime Minister said. One of the things that I think’s been very important to this country over the last 12 months has been the fact that the Prime Minister has started talking about this threat months before it actually eventuated with Numan Haider in Melbourne and the tragedy in Sydney. And I think that the fact that we’ve had this national conversation, and we’ve consciously talked about how we do need to reconsider some of our laws, has underpinned how well Australia has handled these tragic circumstances.
GILBERT
The Labor Party, what’s your view on this Question Time brief? I guess it’s seen as an attempt to wedge Labor, but does it change your position at all in terms of this support of the principle of stripping citizenship of dual nationals?
LEIGH
Kieran, our main position is that we’d like to see legislation before we vote on it – old-fashioned, I know. But the government has been talking about this since February of last year, and yet still can’t bring legislation to the Parliament. They said a fortnight ago that it would be in Parliament in a fortnight, but it’s nowhere to be seen. We haven’t got a briefing on it…
Interrupted
GILBERT
So you’re wavering?
LEIGH
We’re not wavering in the least. We’ve said very clearly that there’s a provision that’s been there since 1948, that says: you fight for a foreign power against Australia, a court will strip your citizenship. If the proposal is that’s to be extended to people who fight for a non-state actor against Australia, then we’re certainly open to that. But we still don’t know, and I’d be interested if Scott willing to answer the question whether this will be the Minister or the court? What standard of proof it will be on? What appeal rights people will have? Do we have an answer on that, Scott?
GILBERT
And yet the Prime Minister, through defending that Question Time brief again today – through the nature of the brief I guess, saying that we want to niggle Labor, we’re going to nudge and niggle them on this issue to try and test them on whether or not they’re going to back the Government on this law. Why not try to bring the Parliament together on it?
RYAN
Well, I think to be fair that one doesn’t want to confuse strong advocacy for what political journalists might aspire that word ‘wedging’ that you only hear in Canberra. I think the point is that the Prime Minister and this government are very strongly committed to it, and that’s why it’s so strongly advocated. With respect to the legislation, I’m sure we will see it in coming days and, as I understand it, it’s already been indicated that that will go through the same process that all national security legislation in this Parliament has gone through, and that’s the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security. And up until now that has produced bipartisan support…
Interrupted
GILBERT
But should national security be used to win political points? That’s the question.
RYAN
Well no, I think national security is an issue that Australians are rightly concerned about. This Government’s very committed to protecting Australians here and overseas, and it’s up to Australians to judge whether or not there is a political difference between the two parties. We are strongly committed to it and we’re going to advocate strongly for it.
LEIGH
Will it be Peter Dutton or a court?
RYAN
Well, let’s see the legislation and it will go through the parliamentary committee process…
Interrupted
LEIGH
Will it be Peter Dutton or a court?
RYAN
Look, I’m in the education portfolio Andrew and I don’t want to mislead any of you here. The legislation, I’m certain, will be out in a number of days and will go through the same process that all security legislation goes through.
LEIGH
So Kieran, if Scott Ryan can’t answer that most simple question, whether it’s Peter Dutton or a court that’s making that decision, you can see why it’s pretty reasonable for Labor to wait and see the legislation.
GILBERT
Andrew Leigh, thanks so much and Scott Ryan, have a good day.
(ENDS)