Television Interview, Sky News

SUBJECTS: Defence Spending; Australia-United States Relationship; PLA-N Task Group; Trade; Los Angeles Protests; Big Freeze 11; Collingwood v Melbourne. 

KIERAN GILBERT, HOST: Let's return now to politics and in fact, we're going to go to the MCG live. The Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Richard Marles joins us where you're going to attend the footy but you're also there for the Big Freeze at The G in the fight against MND. I'll get to that in a moment, but we've got a lot to talk about on the defence front. I know you met with Pete Hegseth last week, your US counterpart. It really erupted, that debate about defence spending, off the back of that. Were you surprised the Pentagon released the number three and a half percent that they want us to spend? Three and a half percent of GDP. Were you surprised that that was released publicly?

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Well, we were– I mean we had a really good meeting with Pete Hegseth. Sorry, I think we're competing with the MCG now, so hopefully you can hear me all right. But we had a really good meeting together. I mean, as I said at the time, Pete Hegseth did talk about defence spending and increased spending. It's not so much about a particular number. Obviously, we are clearly willing to have the conversation with America. At the same time, you know, we will make this decision about what we spend on defence based on our own national interest and based on what it is that we need to– what capabilities and assets that we need to resource. And we will work it through from there and make sure that we do the appropriate defence spending based on meeting the strategic moment. The other point I would make and I made to Pete Hegseth is of course we've already increased our defence spending considerably. We've engaged in the biggest peacetime increase in defence spending in Australia's history. And that is a reflection of the very complex strategic circumstances that we face.

GILBERT: Now, you said last week it's a conversation that we're totally up for and then later in the week the tone seemed to shift a bit. You said that we will make the decision on our own strategic interests – that we've made clear, we've been very clear about that. Is there a difference between those two messages or are you still up for a chat? Totally up for the chat with the United States?

MARLES: I don't think there's any difference. I mean America is putting this proposition forward. Clearly we'll talk with them. But it's also completely self-evident that we will make the decision about defence spending based on our own national interest. I mean that is always going to be the case. And it's not about chasing a particular number. It's about chasing capability, making sure that we have what we need to meet the strategic moment and you resource that. So, I don't actually think there is a change in tone. I mean, we're seeking to respectfully engage with the United States, but we will always be making decisions about our defence spending based on our own national interest.

GILBERT: The British put a number on it, saying they're targeting three per cent. Clearly, the US puts a number on it. Do you not think it's important to say, okay, there's our figure, we are serious about defence spending? Or do you agree with the Prime Minister that no, you dictate what you spend after you decide what you're going to spend it on?

MARLES: I mean, the Prime Minister is absolutely right. What you do here, and this is what we've done from the get go, is we have gone through a process of assessing our strategic landscape, working out what is our strategic threat and what kind of a defence force do we need to build to meet that threat. From the moment that we came to office, we've been methodically working through that process. Now having worked out what capabilities we need, what kind of defence force we need, you then look to resource it. And that's the process we've gone through. Now in fact what that has yielded to date, as I say, is the biggest increase in peacetime defence spending that Australia has ever engaged in. So we are actually going through the process of spending more on defence. But the proper way to think this through is to think about the capabilities that you need and then to resource those capabilities.

GILBERT: Yeah. So, the Chief of the Defence Force, David Johnston at a summit when you were overseas last week – I'm sure you've been briefed on it because he was quite frank, he says “we are having to reconsider Australia as a homeland from which we will conduct combat operations. That's a very different way, almost since the Second World War of how we think of national resilience and preparedness. We might need to operate and conduct operations from this country”. Were you surprised at how frank he was, the CDF?

MARLES: Well, I think again those comments are consistent with what was in the Defence Strategic Review and what is in turn reflected in the National Defence Strategy. I mean, the Defence Strategic Review did talk about the need to think about this in a whole of government way – thinking about national resilience and national preparedness and to really consider that in a different way than we have for many, many decades. It also talked about the fact that what we need to be doing is building the capacity to project. This is not so much seeing the strategic threat around the coastline of our nation. It is being able to operate from Australia more than it is about on, if that makes sense. And so when you look at the northern bases, which were a focus of the Defence Strategic Review, which is a focus of the National Defence Strategy, all of that is about building a platform to project so that we can operate from the continent. And that's really what the Chief of the Defence Force was saying when he made those comments during the week. And I think those comments are entirely consistent with what we've seen in the DSR and what we've seen in the National Defence Strategy. And we have been very clear that the strategic landscape that we face is the most complex, in many respects the most threatening since the end of the Second World War, and it really does demand that we do more and that we're stepping up. And that's what you see reflected in the already increased defence spending that we put in place.

GILBERT: It's 12 o'clock eastern. It's just gone midday. We'll have our top stories, including the latest in LA and the riots there – I'll ask the Deputy Prime Minister about that in a moment. But Deputy PM still on defence, I noticed the comments made by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute head Justin Bassi recently. He said that that Chinese flotilla that circumnavigated Australia, he claimed that the Chinese flotilla was rehearsing strikes on Australian cities, infrastructure and military facilities. Is he right?

MARLES: Well, I'm not about to speculate on that and I don't think it serves for someone in my role to give commentary about that other than to say this: we surveilled that ship or that task group from the moment that came near Australia. We are very aware of what that task group was doing, the exercises that it was engaging in, what it was seeking to be able to demonstrate. Now, I'm not about to talk about that publicly. To do so, in a sense reveals our surveillance capabilities. But we are really clear about what was going on there. And Australians should know that this was an unprecedented level of surveillance that we engaged in around what that task group was doing. I don't think what that task group was seeking to demonstrate or rehearse was any breaking news for us. I mean, the capabilities that China have we are well aware of and this didn't really add to that. But we were very clear about what China was doing, or what that task group was doing and Australians should have a sense of confidence about that.

GILBERT: Okay, so people shouldn't be rattled by the sort of suggestion made by Mr Bassi?

MARLES: Look, I don't think so. And again, I think the point that we need to really remember here, which is a point I made during the time that this was occurring, the Australian Navy operates much more in the vicinity of China than the Chinese Navy operates in the vicinity of Australia. And what’s really– and we do that for good reason because that's where Australia's trade goes, that's where our shipping lines of communication are and we want to make sure that we are asserting freedom of navigation in relation to them. It's really important work that we are doing in places like the South China Sea and the East China Sea. It's a significant component of what our Navy does today. And so it's really important that we are not responding in a way to the Chinese Navy being in the vicinity of Australia which would in some way give rise to a standard that constrained the way in which we were operating in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. At the end of the day, the standard that we operate in accordance with is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. What are our international rights. That's the standard that we should be applying to the Chinese Navy. And everyone acknowledged that that task group throughout its entire period in Australian waters was operating in accordance with international law, and that included even the live firing.

GILBERT: All of this debate comes just ahead of the Prime Minister's visit to the G7. How important is it to get a face-to-face meeting with Donald Trump – the US our most significant security partner and ally?

MARLES: Well, obviously our relationship with the United States is profoundly important and we have many equities in respect of that. I mean, the Prime Minister has spoken with the President on a number of occasions. I'm sure at some point there will be a face-to face-meeting. Our engagement with America matters, though and that's very clear. And we will continue to make our arguments to America in relation to tariffs, for example, whilst also managing all the defence and security equities that we have with the United States, which we've been doing.

GILBERT: Is it a bad look if he can't get the meeting there? If it doesn't happen?

MARLES: Look, the Prime Minister has spoken with the President on a number of occasions now. We continue to manage our equities with the United States and as I've said on many occasions, you know, I am optimistic about the way in which we can manage our relationship with the Trump administration. And that's certainly the case in defence and security. And we'll continue to make the arguments that we do appropriately in respect of tariffs.

GILBERT: Is there more that we can put on the table in a military spending sense, when they do meet?

MARLES: Well, as I say, we are doing a lot with the United States. We're doing a lot in terms of what we are building with our own Defence Force. We're doing a lot in terms of an American presence in Australia; with the Marine rotation in Darwin, with the establishment of the Submarine Rotational Force – West in HMAS Stirling, south of Perth. A lot is going on with ourselves and the United States and we are working all of that through in a very cooperative way.

GILBERT: A couple of other ones before you go. On the trade front, it's a linked issue, obviously, something that could well be on the table when the Prime Minister discusses with Donald Trump. But is there a way to, say compromise on beef imports that doesn't risk our biosecurity?

MARLES: Well, our biosecurity is profoundly important and we will continue to put the biosecurity of this continent front and centre. I mean, it has to be the case. And there's not going to be any compromise on the biosecurity of Australia in circumstances where that goes a long way to determining the quality of the agricultural produce of this nation. As an island country, we are free from a lot of diseases that exist elsewhere in the world, and it's appropriate that we are doing everything we can in relation to that. More broadly, we will continue to make the argument in respect of tariffs. We are a trading island nation. An increasing proportion of our national prosperity comes from trade. We are advocates, have always been advocates for an open global trading system. We'll continue to make that argument at large, and we'll continue to make that argument to the United States.

GILBERT: How concerned are you by the violence and the clashes we're seeing right now in LA off the back of those immigration policies of the Trump administration? How worried are you that this is a tinderbox we're seeing, not just in LA but more broadly across the US? 

MARLES: Well look, I'm going to be reluctant to comment on a domestic American matter. At the end of the day, how America operates its own immigration system is really a matter for the United States, and how it manages its own internal law enforcement is a matter for the United States. So, I mean, that is really a matter for them and I wouldn't comment beyond that.

GILBERT: I just noticed a Channel Nine reporter has been hit with a rubber bullet, fired apparently by police there on the ground. She's sore, but otherwise okay, apparently. But it shows you the risks involved in covering that sort of issue. But it's a volatile moment right now there in LA. 

MARLES: Well look, I was unaware of that, but I'm glad to hear what you just said, that that reporter is okay. Again, we're all watching that on our screens and people obviously will be acting with appropriate care.

GILBERT: You're about to head into the MCG and for, as I said, it's a great cause – the Big Freeze. The fight against MND. And I know you've got commitments in there now, but it is a wonderful cause, isn't it, over many years now, Deputy Prime Minister?

MARLES: Well, this is Big Freeze 11. And I think all of us have been utterly inspired by the advocacy of Neale Daniher in respect of MND. He is a great Australian. He's a great person within the football community. But he's obviously transcended that now and is a great Australian who has done so much to advocate in respect of this terrible condition and to raise money for research so that we can do everything possible to ultimately combat this into the future. And we are very pleased to be a part of this and there'll be more said about it later in the day. But today is a fantastic event and it's really become one of the landmarks on the AFL's calendar. But again, I mean, Neale Daniher has just done an incredible job on behalf of campaigning for research funds for MND and everything he's done in respect of combating that disease.

GILBERT: Yeah, wonderful effort. A triumph of human spirit, no doubt about it. And I know this afternoon you don't have a cat in the fight, so to speak, at the MCG, but you're going to stay for the footy?

MARLES: I'll stay for the footy. And as any good Victorian would say, we will be barracking for anyone who is playing Collingwood.

GILBERT: Exactly right. Thanks, Deputy Prime Minister. We appreciate your time. We'll let you go get your blue beanie on for the fight against MND. Big Freeze number 11. Thanks. 

ENDS