Radio interview, ABC Melbourne Drive

SUBJECTS: Melbourne protests; Closure of the Afghanistan Inquiry report.

ALI MOORE, HOST: Well, we've been talking about whether the cost of the Land Forces expo down at South Wharf has been worth it and also what it's done to the reputation of Melbourne. It was lauded as bringing tens of millions of dollars into the Victorian economy, the largest land defence conference in the Asia Pacific. It has, though, cost millions in extra police and also shutdowns of local businesses, as you were hearing earlier. At the same time today, Defence Minister Richard Marles has stripped distinguished service awards from a number of current and former defence personnel over alleged war crimes. This has been described as the final step of government action coming from the Brereton report, which concluded that there was credible information of unlawful conduct involving Australian Defence Force members. Richard Marles is the Minister for Defence and the Deputy Prime Minister. Richard Marles, welcome back to Drive.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: How are you, Ali?

MOORE: I'm good, thank you. Can we start with the Land Forces expo, your reaction to what happened in particular yesterday? 

MARLES: Well, I feel that the conduct of those who are protesting is absolutely disgraceful and that obviously has cost a lot of money in terms of the police that have needed to be put on duty in order to deal with this. But, I mean, I think everyone in Australia understands that we've got a right to express our view peacefully, but police and those going about their lawful business also have a right to do so safely and that safety has absolutely not been respected by those who have been protesting. I mean, at the end of the day, I think what people need to understand is the Land Forces conference – this is the 6th iteration of it, its first time in Melbourne, but it's been in Australia since 2014 – it's a really important event in terms of the land capabilities and industrial capabilities that exist within Australia. It is supported by the Australian Defence Force, and what goes along with it is a Chief of Army Symposium where the Chief of Army has had 11 of his counterparts from different armies around the region. That conference itself is actually really important in terms of building understandings between defence forces in the region and makes its own contribution to the maintenance of peace. That's actually what's happening here inside the convention centre in Melbourne. And these demonstrations pay no respect to that. They pay no respect to the people who wear our nation's uniform. They've effectively been undertaken in a way which has verged on disorder and violence and has cost an awful lot of public money. And I think it's a disgrace.

MOORE: As you said, it's not the first time it's been held in Australia. And in fact, last time it was held, which was prior to the Gaza war, there were protests. So, we know what this sort of conference attracts. Was it the right place to hold it, though, given the sensitivities of the time? And albeit those sensitivities maybe did not exist when this was first organised at the beginning of last year. But do you hold something like this, at a time like this, in a place like this, where we've got businesses who are worried about losing tens of millions of dollars simply because they're caught in the wrong place, and we've got a massive bill for extra police at a time when this state really can't afford it?

MARLES: Well, we're at a moment in Australia's journey where we face as complex and in some ways as threatening a set of strategic circumstances as have existed since the end of the Second World War. It is absolutely essential that we are engaging with countries within our region, and that is what is going on at this symposium. It is utterly essential that we are making sure that our soldiers, sailors and aviators have the equipment that they need to do their job and to keep them safe. That is more needed now than ever. And again, that is what Land Forces is about. And Melbourne is at the centre of Australian industry. So, I think that's why the Victorian Government would have felt this was exactly the right place to hold it. And I think defence industry plays a huge contribution, makes a huge contribution, not only to our economy, but to our national security. It fundamentally is about keeping Australians safe, and that includes Victorians and Melbournians. And I think Victorians and Melbournians understand that. That’s not what’s going on with these protestors–

MOORE: Will it bring $65 million into the economy as it was touted as being able to do?

MARLES: Well, I mean, defence industry is a very significant contribution to the economy. And you only need to look at the defence budget to understand the sums of money that are being spent in order to acquire cutting edge capabilities, which is what defence capabilities are, which are about keeping us safe. But none of this can be the fault of those who are going about their lawful business. None of this can be the fault of those who are about wearing our nation's uniform to defend the country, or indeed working in companies which supply our defence forces with the equipment they need to do this. The blame lies in people who are not exercising their right to engage in peaceful protests, but are doing this in a way which engages in violence. And that's what needs to be condemned. I mean, if where we get to in our logic is that we somehow take our eye off that and then blame people for doing the work which is about keeping Australians safe, the work that we actually acknowledge whenever we acknowledge the service of those who wear our nation's uniform, we're getting this all wrong. The protestors who have done what they have done have shown absolutely no regard for the people who make the incredible decision to engage in the service which comes with wearing our nation's uniform. It's obviously disrespectful to them, but it's disrespectful to every Australian. It is not engaging in a peaceful right of protest. It is the opposite. And that's where the condemnation lies.

MOORE: You're listening to the Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles on 774 ABC Radio Melbourne Drive this afternoon. Richard Marles, today you have announced an historic decision, I think, for Defence. You've stripped distinguished service awards from a number of current and former Defence personnel over alleged war crimes. Why has that happened now and how many current and former personnel have been affected?

MARLES: Well, I'm not– we haven't made public the precise number.

MOORE: Can I ask why not? I understand why you may not name them, but why not the quantum?

MARLES: Because it's a small number. I’ll say that. And for those who are in the space, as soon as we start talking about the precise small number, it really does walk us down a path of identifying the individuals, which is just not appropriate to do. But perhaps it is relevant then to say to you that we are talking about a small number. And I want to emphasise that what we're talking about here is people who were in the chain of command. This was an issue which was dealt with by Major General Brereton in his report, but who are not– there's no sense that they were responsible for this or knew about it, but they were in the chain of command under which these events or these incidents occurred. And in the report there is a detailed discussion of the responsibilities that come with command and there was, amongst 143 recommendations, two recommendations which went to the command accountability for people in these circumstances and whether or not medals that were awarded at the time can rightfully stand in the context of what we now know occurred. It's been a process which has taken some time, but we're unapologetic for that because we wanted to do this in a way which was completely thorough. But in now writing these letters and making these decisions, it does close off the last of the recommendations that is really within the purview of government, of executive government. And so the significance as well today was to really say that by virtue of this step, we are now at a point of closing off successive governments’ responses to the Brereton Report. And that is a very significant milestone in this journey.

MOORE: So, those who have been stripped of their distinguished service awards, you just said then that they're not responsible, but they are in the chain of command. Can I just play you a quick little bit of the Shadow Defence Minister, Andrew Hastie, who served in Afghanistan. This is him speaking today.

EXCERPT OF ANDREW HASTIE, SHADOW DEFENCE MINISTER: I believe that our troops were let down by a lack of moral courage that went up the chain of command all the way to Canberra, including in this House. I want to be clear: those who are alleged to have shed innocent blood are alone responsible for that. I do not say this to absolve or condemn anyone, but those in the chain of command who saw the post-mission slide decks with the kill counts and pictures of dead individuals had an obligation to ask questions.

MOORE: That's Andrew Hastie speaking today. Minister, are we essentially here talking about the same thing? The point that he is saying that the chain of command had an obligation to ask more questions than they asked. They are the people who have been affected by today's decision?

MARLES: We are talking about people who are in the chain of command. I mean, firstly, on this issue, I very much respect the role that has been played by the Shadow Minister in his time as having formerly served in the Australian Defence Force and indeed the SAS. I very much acknowledge that service and his first-hand experience in relation to this. He makes it clear in those comments that he has a different view to that of Major General Brereton. But where there is common ground is that we're talking about people who are in the chain of command. There's no sense that there's no question about whether or not they knew of what had occurred. There is no suggestion of that or a suggestion that they have any culpability in that regard. But there is a long discussion, as there should be, about the nature of command, about the collective responsibility that comes with command, about the way in which commanders, in some instances, receive the accolades of events that occur within the command, which may not be them directly, but commensurately. They take responsibility for what happens under their command as well. Now, this is– I hasten to make this point, Major General Paul Barton, who in his civilian life has been a judge and is now the head of the National Anti-Corruption Commission has approached this in a deeply judicial way. He and his team undertook hundreds of interviews in Australia and Afghanistan, have taken thousands of pages of testimony, and on the back of that have formed judgments which are very detailed and very considered and I think are deeply thoughtful. In making the decision that I've made, I've really followed the work of Major General Brereton to the letter. I haven't seen any reason to depart from the fine judgments that he's making about where accountability, as he would describe it, moral accountability, lies within the chain of command. And so that is why I've ultimately made the decisions that I've made. And it is a reflection of the esteem in which we hold the work of Major General Brereton.

MOORE: Just a final question. Will we get, I'm reading a text here, will we get charges? Will we get trials?

MARLES: Yeah, look, that's a very good question, and we pointed this out in today's statement as well. So, what happens from here is an office which has been created called the Office of the Special Investigator – which is a bit like, in this context, say, a department of public prosecutions or director of public prosecutions, an office of that kind which is at arm's length from government, which sits within the portfolio of the Attorney-General – now has in front of it a whole lot of information that comes from the Brereton Report. They will now do their work. And it is completely possible that prosecutions emanate from them. The OSI has the responsibility of taking any prosecutions forward, and if they do, obviously they will then end up in the courts. And so in that sense, the Office of the Special Investigator’s work will continue going forward and we may well see cases play out in our courts over the course of the next few years. So, all of that will continue, but that will very much continue now at arm's length from government, as would happen in any criminal justice case in Australia. The work though of executive government, of the government to the day, the Department of Defence, the ADF, really, that is what has now been closed off by the final steps that I've taken and the statement that I made at the Parliament today.

MOORE: Richard Marles, we appreciate your time. Thank you very much for joining us.

MARLES: Thanks, Ali.

ENDS