Television Interview, ABC Afternoon Briefing

SUBJECTS: AUKUS; AFL; Iron ore exports; Australian Submarine Agency; Middle East conflict; Australia-Pacific relationship

MELISSA CLARKE, HOST: Defence Minister Richard Marles has just met with his New Zealand counterpart, Judith Collins, for bilateral talks about strengthening the defence alliance between the two countries. So, let’s bring in the Deputy Prime Minister, Richard Marles. Thanks very much for joining me on Afternoon Briefing.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Good afternoon, Mel, how are you?

CLARKE: Good, thanks. Let’s start with the talks that you’ve had with Judith Collins today. What did you discuss?

MARLES: Well, we’re really in a process with New Zealand about looking at how we can literally make our defence forces more ANZAC, which is to say, how can we really integrate the New Zealand Defence Force with the Australian Defence Force. And this is happening in a context where, you know, our government is engaging in the biggest increase in defence spending in Australia’s peacetime history. But the New Zealand government have also made a very historic announcement of effectively moving down the path of doubling their defence spending. And so, across the board, when you’re looking at how we can perhaps procure better together, and the New Zealand Defence Force have announced the procurement of Romeo helicopters, which is a capability that we use – how can we procure in a joint way, how can we operate in a joint way, how can we have higher-level embeds between our two defence forces, how can we effectively operate as one. Because the more that we do integrate together, the more we are greater than the sum of our parts. The first part of next year we’ll have our annual ANZMIN meeting. That’s our two plus two meeting with New Zealand. So, we’re very focused on that. And today was an opportunity to talk about how we can move forward, with a view to that really important meeting early next year.

CLARKE: That’s going to be interesting when you’re also looking at closer integration with Papua New Guinea’s Defence Force. Can you give us an update on where that Nakamal Security Treaty is up to?

MARLES: Well, so, Nakamal is what we’re doing with Vanuatu.

CLARKE: Sorry, I’ve got the mix up. The Pukpuk is the one I meant to refer to. Thank you.

MARLES: We have a few on the go at the moment. Well, firstly, just in terms of New Zealand, obviously New Zealand do have a real interest in engaging with the Pacific, and what we are trying to do is to really build a lattice of agreements and cooperation across the Pacific, and New Zealand is very much a part of that. So, they are very interested in what we’re doing with PNG and with Vanuatu specifically. In answer to your question in respect of PNG, I mean, you will have seen the communique that both Prime Ministers signed around the 16th or on the 17th of September, just the day after the 50th anniversary of PNG independence. I mean, it is a historic communique. It paves the way for, really, Australia’s third alliance relationship after the United States and New Zealand. And I’m confident that that communique will make its way into a signed treaty in the very near future.

CLARKE: Are we on track for that to be signed when James Marape visits Australia coming up?

MARLES: Well, look, I’m confident that we will be signing that in the very near future. Let me leave it at that. But that was very much the sentiment that was expressed on the part of both Prime Ministers when they signed the communique a couple of weeks ago. So, you know, this is imminent. And I mean, with the Nakamal agreement that we’re doing with Vanuatu, again, this is a transformative agreement between our two countries. It is a challenging and difficult agreement that we’re trying to put in place for both of us. We really are seeking to transform our relationship, but there is an enormous amount of goodwill on both sides. It’s going to take a bit of time to get that done, but again, in respect of that, I’m confident that that will happen as well.

CLARKE: You’re heading off to Fiji tomorrow. Has Australia been trying to lock in security deals with Pacific neighbours? So, is there more that we can be doing with Fiji? I know Fiji has recently been doing its own security deals with Solomon Islands. That patchwork seems quite extensive.

MARLES: Yeah, look, Fiji is obviously a really important country, very central in the Pacific, but also a country which runs a significant Defence Force. And I say that because most Pacific countries don’t. You know, beyond Australia and New Zealand, you’ve got Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Tonga who operate defence forces. So, in a defence and national security sense, the relationship with Fiji is really important. Look, we are very excited about taking that forward as well. And the centrepiece of my visit, really, to Fiji will be a bilateral meeting with my counterpart. And we are looking at how we can take that forward. We’re doing a lot of work in terms of supporting infrastructure in Fiji. So, I’ll also be opening the Maritime Essential Services Centre, which is a really important naval and other agency facility for the Fiji Defence Forces. But we are very confident about the prospects of progressing our defence relationship with Fiji.

CLARKE: All right, I want to rocket through a few other issues that are on the agenda today, including the Gaza peace plan. Do you think the decision of Australia and other countries as well to recognise a Palestinian state contributed to Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump putting this plan forward?

MARLES: Well, look, you know, in recognising the Palestinian state, we were fundamentally acting in accordance with what has been the position of governments of both persuasions in Australia over decades, which is supporting a two-state solution, and in that, recognising the legitimate aspiration of the Palestinian people towards statehood and understanding that if we’re going to have an enduring peace in the Middle East, then the only solution is to have the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people fulfilled in a context where Israel is guaranteed its own security. And so that’s why we walked down the path of recognition.

CLARKE: And do you think that that was part of the contributing factor to the move we’ve now seen, which is the peace plan being put forward?

MARLES: Well, I don’t want to speak for what the US is doing, but I would say that in recognising the Palestinian state right now, it is about acknowledging that, given all that we’ve seen over the last couple of years, we need to see an end to hostilities, we need to see a return of the hostages to their families in Israel, we need to see the beginning or the flow of humanitarian assistance into Gaza. And all of that was the backdrop for us making a decision, along with the UK and Canada and France, to take steps which are about an enduring peace. So, we very much feel that the step towards recognition in a broader sense is a step towards trying to promote peace in the Middle East. In terms of the specific proposal that has been put forward from the United States, which has been agreed to by Israel, we’ve made it clear that we welcome that. It does embody what I’ve just said in terms of seeing an end to hostilities, seeing a return of the hostages, seeing humanitarian aid flow into Gaza, but also acknowledging that in the governance of the Palestinian territories there can be no role for Hamas – and we welcome that as well.

CLARKE: All right, I want to turn to another issue. We've seen reports today that shipments of BHP iron ore have been paused while there's negotiations going on with China. At what point does the government need to become involved in this?

MARLES: Well, I simply, I guess echo what the Prime Minister has said today. Obviously we're looking at this carefully. You know, we do not want to see any hindering of the trade that is undertaken between our two countries- in general terms, but- specifically in relation to iron ore. And I think, you know, this will play out and we'll obviously monitor that. But fundamentally we do not want to see a hindering to what is a very important engagement in trade for the benefit of both of our countries.

CLARKE: Do you think it's just a contract gamesmanship at the moment?

MARLES: Look, I mean, obviously it does go to the question of contracts, so, you know, we are watching it and observing it carefully and we'll continue to do that, but do so in a context where we obviously don't want to see a hindering of that trade, which is the point that the Prime Minister made clearly today.

CLARKE: Is this a bit tricky for the government when the country that you're dealing with, with China, doesn't really make the same distinction between commercial operations and state benefits that we might in Australia? Does that make it a little trickier for a sense of when it might be appropriate for some diplomatic heft to be brought to this?

MARLES: Oh, look, I mean, you know, we obviously understand the terms on which the Chinese economy operates, and so this is something with which we are familiar and, you know, we want to allow commercial processes to play out and take their course, and that's appropriate. I think it's reasonable in that context to say that we obviously want to see trade continue in a way which is not hindered.

CLARKE: All right, we'll keep an eye on that. There has been some international reporting as well, suggesting that the Pentagon's review of AUKUS is going to get the green light. Now, it seems that that hasn't necessarily been given the tick off by the President, or at least not at this stage. How important is it to get the tick off not just from the Pentagon, but from the President himself?

MARLES: Well, AUKUS is a program which is underpinned by a trilateral treaty between our three countries. And the point I really want to make is AUKUS is happening on this day at a pace, on time, on schedule, very much to the benefit of all three countries, and all of that is happening. Now, the review that has been undertaken, as we've said repeatedly, is a review that we welcome. It's a very natural step for an incoming government to take. We did the same thing when we came to government as did the current British government, and it affords an opportunity for us all to look at how we can do AUKUS better, and that's how we're engaging with the review. I think the other point I would then say is that the US has actually been really good in terms of the process of the review, keeping us very much informed of that, allowing us to participate in it. Now, you know, the timing, it's still playing out obviously, and I'm not going to speculate about what's in, what the outcomes of that review are- that's a matter for the United States. And nor am I going to go into the timing of the review other than to say that the US has been very good in terms of communicating with us the timing of the review. But that, again, is a matter for them to talk about and we're engaging with it.

CLARKE: When it comes to– just on a related matter of submarines, we've seen that external contractors for the Australian Submarine Agency have been spending five times more than anticipated. What's going on here? Why are we needing to spend $12 million with one consulting firm about the Australian Submarine Agency?

MARLES: Well, I mean, the Australian Submarine Agency again, is an example of us moving ahead at a pace in relation to AUKUS. We have stood it up, it is starting from scratch doing a completely new task. It is really doing a great job. We have gone through a process of looking at how we can make sure that it is doing everything that is being asked of it and how it can– 

CLARKE: So, was it a bit of a miscalculation in the initial stage then, to think that the consulting that was required would cost, you know, one fifth of ultimately what it has cost?

MARLES: Well, I think you're going to see over the journey, you know, different numbers emerge. But at a macro level, we understand the funding demands in respect of the Australian Submarine Agency. It has a massive job to do that we've asked it to do in terms of standing up and really delivering the core of what we're trying to do in respect of AUKUS. And we're really pleased with how it's going. That said, it is really important that we continue to make sure that we are fine tuning it and making sure that it is fit for purpose in terms of all the challenges that it has to face, because this is an area where it must succeed, as difficult as the challenge that it's doing is.

CLARKE: Richard Marles, I can't let you go without asking you, as a very senior member of government, who is perhaps the biggest AFL fan in the government, what you think of the AFL getting rid of the centre bounce altogether. Do you welcome its demise or are you a traditionalist? Do you want to see the centre bounce stay?

MARLES: Well, look, this is a little bit of head versus heart. I mean, there is an emotional attachment to bouncing the ball and there are some iconic pictures, particularly at the beginning of grand finals, of that first bounce. And I would note that the very first bounce of this year's Grand Final was done perfectly by the umpire. But having said that, I actually think the rules of the game are very subtle, they've evolved, I think, really well over the last decade, such that as a spectacle, AFL is better today than it has ever been. To be honest, this is way above my pay grade, and I have an ultimate faith in terms of the AFL in making the decisions that it makes, and I can understand why it's moved down this path. And I actually do trust the direction that the AFL is taking the game, because it is a really fast, spectacular game, which, when you look at videos from the 1970s and my memory sort of doesn't match up with those videos, it is a much better game today than it was then.

CLARKE: All right, well we'll leave it with the higher powers that are clearly higher powers than the Deputy Prime Minister of the country. Richard Marles, thanks very much.

MARLES: Thanks, Mel.

ENDS