Doorstop, Victoria Barracks Sydney

SUBJECTS: Defence Estate Audit; Perth Terrorism Charge; Social Cohesion; Australian War Graves; President Herzog Visit; AUKUS; Capital Gains Tax; Bondi Junction Coronial Inquest. 

RICHARD MARLES, ACTING PRIME MINISTER: Well, welcome everyone today to beautiful Victoria Barracks Sydney, and I'm here today with the Assistant Minister for Defence, Peter Khalil. This is an extraordinary site. But in the context of the Defence sites that we have around the country, this is not a large site in terms of personnel, but it is obviously one of the most iconic sites in Sydney. Today, this site is one-third empty in terms of the personnel that are using it. Over the course of the last five years, Defence has spent $50 million in relation to the maintenance of this site, and it's projected that over the next ten years to maintain the current operations here, we would be spending another $200 million. Now about two kilometers from here is Defence Plaza Sydney, a state of the art office building which has had $83 million invested in it, with all the latest connections. What is done here is predominantly administrative work, work which can be done in offices, work which is better suited to be done in offices. So we have Defence Plaza Sydney, which today is only 40 per cent occupied, 60 per cent vacant, with state of the art facilities which would enable the functions that are carried out here today. And we have a site here today which is one-third vacant, which is obviously an extraordinary place, but measured against the sites that we have across the country, is not large in terms of personnel who are based here. So to maintain operations here going forward simply doesn't make sense. 

Now, when we say that Australia today faces the most complex, in many ways, the most threatening strategic circumstances that we faced since the end of the Second World War, they're not lines- that is actually the reality of the world in which we live today. Our Defence Force has major challenges. We need to be orientating it to doing everything it can to defend our nation. Our Defence Force is not a heritage organisation, it is a Defence organisation. And what the Defence Estate Audit made clear is that in order for us to maintain buildings that we are not using, on the one hand, are incredible buildings like this which are not being used in the way that they are obviously built originally and are not fit for purpose, in terms of the modern use of the Defence Force, to continue using those buildings will cost $2 billion dollars over the next 25 years. Given the strategic circumstances that our nation faces today, Defence simply cannot continue to operate in ways which don't make sense. And it is obvious when you have a cursory glance at what this place costs, at what we need to do, at the functions that it supports, of what we have at Defence Plaza just two kilometers from here, the continued operation of the Defence Force here does not make sense. And that was very much the finding of Jan Mason and Jim Miller, who independently undertook the Defence Estate Audit. Now they also made clear that for a long time, Defence has been operating under the burden of decisions not having been made because these are difficult decisions to make, clearly. The Defence estate review cites a failure of political and organisational will to meet challenges as why we are now in a situation where we are spending millions upon millions of dollars on properties which do not contribute to Australia's Defence capability, and that has to stop. And so the Albanese Government in the announcement that we've made today, the most significant reform to Australia's Defence estate in our nation's history, is about garnering that political will so that we are focusing our Defence estate in a way which enables it to be the foundation that our Defence Forces needed. To be for them to do their job, to defend Australia. We are unapologetic in our determination to pursue that objective, because the circumstances of the moment, the circumstances of our time demand nothing less.

Now, we are clearly deeply cognisant of the enormous historical significance of Defence sites, and what we've got here behind us right now is a perfect example of that. Victoria Barracks Sydney dates back to 1840. What you see behind me is the longest sandstone building in the southern hemisphere. These are incredible buildings which have had so much to do with the history of our Defence Force. And we really understand that there are thousands upon thousands of members of the Australian Army of Defence Force personnel who have come through this site who have an understandable, deep emotional attachment to this place. We're really, really aware of that. And there are community organisations that operate from this site today, and we're aware of that too, and we will be working very closely with them in terms of the way in which we transition this site which will not happen overnight, we’ve got years to do this. But it is important to make the point that Defence is not a heritage organisation, it is a defence organisation. Right now we've got a situation where there is a museum here which is open for a few hours a week and I think every third Sunday. There's a tour which can be done once a week. In any reasonable sense, the buildings that you see behind me right now are not accessible to the people of Sydney and the people of Australia. And it's really important to observe that the heritage of this place, yes is part of the heritage of the Australian Army, and yes it is part of the heritage of the Australian Defence Force. But much, much more than that, it is a heritage that belongs to the nation, and the nation deserves the right to enjoy it. History is not about finding historic artifacts putting them in hermetically sealed boxes and putting them to one side. Heritage, the very idea of heritage is allowing those of us who walk the planet today to understand the lives of those who went before us. That is not the experience of this place right now. Fundamentally, this incredible building exists in a way which is inaccessible to the people of Sydney and to the people of Australia and that is not acceptable. Now, these buildings are overlaid by heritage listings, they are protected by law. They are not going anywhere. They will continue to exist as they should. But whatever is the future of this site will be one where we see thousands, if not millions, of Sydneysiders and Australians being able to enjoy and celebrate the historical significance of these buildings, and that's as it should be. And to seriously argue that it is a good heritage and historical outcome for these buildings to exist behind walls where the Australian public do not get to see them, does not make sense either. So from the perspective of ensuring that we get the best heritage outcome from these buildings, and from a Defence point of view, ensuring that we have a Defence estate which is actually focused on the Defence Force, being a defence organisation, being able to do its job, in a future sense, looking to the defence of this country, there really is only one answer in respect of this site, as there is in respect of a whole lot of sites around Australia. That is the answer that was recommended in the Defence estate review, and that is for these properties to be disposed of. Now, the process by which that will occur is over the next couple of years, these properties will be transferred into the hands of the Department of Finance- they are the asset manager specialists within the Commonwealth Government. And from there, whatever time is necessary, and I suspect in relation to a site like this, it will be very many years, that time will be taken in order to get the outcome right, so that this iconic place can have the best outcome for the people of Sydney and for the people of Australia. But we are determined to bring to bear the political will to start doing things that make sense in terms of focusing the Defence Force upon its principal job, its key job, and that is defending Australia.

PETER KHALIL, ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR DEFENCE: Well, thank you, Acting Prime Minister. This is the most significant reform of the Defence estate in the nation’s history, and these are tough decisions that the Government has made. They're not easy. They're difficult decisions. As the Acting Prime Minister has noted, there are many sites of immense historical value, and so we have made those tough decisions on the back of the excellent work of the Audit that was conducted by Jim Miller and Jan Mason and their recommendations. And whether it's sites across the country that were abandoned Defence sites or unused in which we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars, taxpayer dollars, to maintain and sustain, or whether it's beautiful sites like this with great historical significance but that don't meet the operational and capability requirements of our ADF, our men and women in uniform, we have made those tough decisions because that taxpayer dollars should be spent efficiently, and the Defence bases across this country should be meeting the operational and capability requirements of our current and our future force. And as the Acting Prime Minister mentioned, the heritage of these places is of great value to the Australian people. It should be accessible to the Australian people. And in fact, if you look across the country, there are some 130 museums with important collections, historically significant collections, which are barely seen by the Australian public. 80 per cent of which, I think, are not even accessible to the public at all. That's going to change with this reform. This is going to open up, as the Acting Prime Minister said, for the people of Sydney, the people of Australia, to enjoy. But most importantly, every cent that comes out of this reform will be reinvested in the infrastructure that the men and women in our Defence Forces need to do their job.

JOURNALIST: Minister Marles, when it comes to recruitment, do you think recruiting young Australians into the armed forces is something that they're keen to work in office, or something like this? Is it a more appealing and attractive way to bring people in, to make that decision? 

MARLES: I think to make an argument that it requires a place like this to have people join the Australian Defence Force is completely misguided. I mean, it's obviously misguided. And let's be really clear about recruitment. We've got more people showing an interest in joining the Australian Defence Force today than we ever have before. But it's not because we've been showing pictures of this place, it's because of what people in the Australian Defence Force do on the exquisite capabilities that we have being out in the field, in our Air Force planes, on our ships, on our training grounds, in terms of the Army, that's why people join the Australian Defence Force. It's not because of sites like this. And there is no one who does recruitment for the Australian Defence Force who would, for a moment, seriously make that argument. So I understand that argument is being made right now in the context of the decision over the last couple of days, but thinking about it for literally two seconds makes it clear that it is obviously a red herring. So in respect of recruitment and retention, more people are showing a desire to join the Australian Defence Force today than we've seen for years. In terms of retention, we've got separation rates below the historic average. When we came to government, we had a shrinking Defence Force- today, under the Albanese Labor Government, the Defence Force is growing again. We are deeply focused on recruitment and retention, and we have absolutely moved the needle in respect of that and turned the graph around but t it's got nothing to do with the retention of a sale like this.

JOURNALIST: Minister, the RSL is one of the bodies upset about this estate sell off. What are you going to do to ensure that developers honour the legacy of a site like Victoria Barracks?

MARLES: Well firstly, I very much understand the sense of attachment that people in the Defence Force have to the sites in which they serve, and very much a site like this- how could you not feel it when you look at the incredible site that is behind us right now. I noted in the RSL’s statement that they saw the strategic value of what we were trying to do. I think their phrase was that we needed to ‘tap the brakes’. The fact of the matter is, nothing's been done in respect of the consolidation of the Defence estate for decades. I mean, it's not like the brakes need to be tapped, the brakes have been absolutely fully locked for decades. We actually need to do something now. And that is the point that was clearly made by the Auditors who did the Defence Estate Audit. You know, right now we bear the legacy of past indecision- that's a quote from the Defence Estate Audit. We have been stymied by a lack of political and organisational will- another quote from the Defence Estate Audit. We need to actually bring that to bear, because we are spending millions upon millions of dollars on properties that we don't need. And the point I would really make to those who are giving commentary, everyone who joins the Australian Defence Force, everyone who makes the incredible decision to wear our nation's uniform, and I see this in the way in which I speak to our serving men and women around the country have one aim in mind, and that is to defend Australia. And everyone understands that the circumstances, the historic circumstances of this moment, like have a look out there- the world is in a pretty fragile place-  and we need to be fully focused on that job. And you can't be doing that when you're spending millions upon millions of dollars on properties that have no relationship to our capability at all. So it is actually time to make the difficult decisions, to garner the political will so that we have a defence estate, which is the foundation that our Defence Force needs, so that it can do its job to defend Australia, and that's what our serving men and women want.

JOURNALIST: Minister, you mentioned the nation deserves the right to enjoy this historical site. It's a prime piece of real estate. Are you open to the idea it could be purchased to build more inner city homes, though, and in that case, would it make it less accessible?

MARLES: Well, to take your last point, if we're really being frank, it's hard to see how it could be less accessible to the people of Sydney. I mean honestly. Like, this is an unbelievable building behind us, I don't think many Sydneysiders know it exists. We know about The Rocks, which get enjoyed each and every day. This is of a similar vintage. Look at it, I mean, it's the largest- longest sandstone building in the southern hemisphere- most Sydneysiders would not know that it exists. Now, the future of this site is something to be worked through and the mechanism that we've announced is to transfer this relatively quickly over the next two years to the Department of Finance, and they will then work through the future of this site, and take the time to work through the future of this site. If we talk about the Defence Estate Audit more broadly, there are going to be some sites which are able to be disposed of pretty quickly, indeed, of the 68 in fact, that were nominated by the Defence Estate Audit, three have already been sold but there are going to be some which take time and this clearly is one of them. And so, you know, that's a process to be worked through. That will be done in due course by the Department of Finance, but the outcome needs to be one which clearly retains these incredible buildings. They are protected by law and they will be retained, but which uses this site in a way which honours, in a sense, the iconic nature of this place in the context of Sydney and Australia.

JOURNALIST: Mr Marles, if I could ask about another topic for a second?

MARLES: Can we just- maybe just see if there are any more on this? I will take your question. 

JOURNALIST: Can I ask, you keep referring to this building, and it is extraordinary, is it the reason why it's extraordinary and it's preserved in such a way is the very reason that it's been locked away? Once you open these gates, allow everyone in, it's open slather in here. How are you going to protect that building? Won't it end up costing the Government more to protect this material?

MARLES: Well again, I totally reject that thesis. And it’s in a sense important that you put that thesis out there, because it really goes to the very nature of heritage. If the argument is that what should happen with historic buildings is, in fact, to put them in a hermetically sealed box, put them away so that people can't see them, because that's the way to protect them – I just simply don't accept that as a decent heritage outcome at all. I don't think that's what history and heritage is about. Actually, I think the whole point of history and heritage is about informing those of us who are alive today about what went before us. You don't do that by taking things off limits. You just don't. I think it's a completely misguided view of how heritage operates. More to the point, Defence is not a heritage organisation. You know, we're not set up to maintain a property of this kind. We are set up to defend Australia. I mean, what we do each and every day is to look at how we can procure the platforms necessary to defend our country. And that's what should happen. This is a site which has a proper heritage overlay on it, which should be open to the public in a much bigger way, and which should have that heritage maintained in a way which is done by experts. 

JOURNALIST: If the office, the plaza is a much better option, why is it only 40% occupancy? 

MARLES: Really good question. 

JOURNALIST: Well is that a failure of administration on the part of Defence?

MARLES: That is an excellent question, and that question, I think, is answered in the Defence Estate Audit, and it's the question that I've referred to today. It's been a prior lack of organisational and political will. And that's not my words, that's the words of the Estate Audit. Now your very questions evidence the fact that this is clearly a difficult decision. So the answer to your question is, people have found it too difficult to make this decision. But our view is that in the circumstances that our country faces today, we don't have a choice. We must make the decision. We can't keep doing things which don't make sense. And we understand that there will be people who have an attachment to these places, and that is totally understandable, and there is going to be a better heritage outcome. But it is fundamentally important that we actually have a Defence estate which is focused on what the Defence Force needs to do. And Defence Plaza Sydney is a state of the art office which has had tens of millions of dollars invested in it and is going to be a far better place to do the administrative work which is currently done here.

JOURNALIST: We just learned today that the oldest working wine cellar in Sydney is situated here. Is it currently exclusive, and what's going to happen to it?

MARLES: Well, I mean, you've got a wine cellar here, you've got a lawn bowls facility there. I mean, these– they are wonderful. The building behind us is wonderful. I stand here as the Minister for Defence responsible for (inaudible). 

JOURNALIST: (inaudible), isn't that a bargain basement amount in terms of these sites? Are you seriously undercutting the value?

MARLES: Firstly, all that is, is an estimate by the Auditors about what could be recovered across the entirety of the estate and to just– you know, those figures were actually a value of about $3 billion but there would need to be money spent on relocation, which is in the order of $1.2 [billion]. But we'll see what happens. I mean, this is not about establishing a sale price for any of these properties now. The mechanism that we will go through is transferring these to the Department of Finance, and then the Department of Finance will dispose of the properties from there in the time required to yield the maximum result for the Commonwealth. And so we definitely want to maximize the result for the Commonwealth, but that will obviously happen in a context where these beautiful buildings continue to be protected by law, and will have an outcome where many more Sydneysiders and many more Australians get to enjoy them. 

JOURNALIST: We've got some other questions.

JOURNALIST: So the Prime Minister yesterday, and you just mentioned that the world is a very fragile place, the Prime Minister yesterday explicitly labeled the attempted Perth bombing of the invasion day protest as a terrorist attack and said it was driven by racism and hatred. Obviously, just a month earlier, the Bondi shooting was also driven by antisemitism, which is another form of racism. Australia's Race Discrimination Commissioner has said a solution has been in front of the government for this whole time. It's been almost 450 days since the Human Rights Commission handed your Government the comprehensive Anti-Racism Framework. Why hasn't your Government responded to it or implemented a timeline for it? And will you expedite implementation, given that two racially driven attacks have happened in the last two months. And I'd also like to hear from Minister Khalil, by the way, given him Special Envoy for Social Cohesion.

MARLES: There's a lot in that question. I suppose the starting point is that it is very significant that the alleged perpetrator of the attack in Western Australia is to be charged with terrorism related offenses. And in acknowledging the significance of that, what is really important in this moment is to say that there is no place for racism, for prejudice within our country, and that we as a government, indeed, the entire nation stands with our First Nations people, with our Indigenous population. Indigenous Australians, First Nations Australians have the right to assemble peacefully and to do so with safety, as any other Australians do. And it is really important that we are doing everything in our power to ensure that that is the case. We continue to work through, in a range of ways, measures which seek to bring cohesion within our society, and measures which seek to eliminate racism from within our society. And the Government very much stands on its record in respect of that, and we will work through the specifics in respect of what you have asked. But, you look at what we have been doing as a Government, what we seek to do in terms of bringing this country together – not just in respect of the wake of the attack in Western Australia, but obviously in the aftermath of the Bondi attacks – we are focused very much on removing prejudice, removing bigotry, removing prejudice against First Nations, removing antisemitism, doing everything we can to remove hate speech, for example. And we would like to have done more obviously, with what we took to the Parliament, but the Coalition prevented us from doing that. But we will continue to take steps forward to move everything we can to eliminate prejudice and racism in our country.

KHALIL: Social cohesion, our social cohesion of our nation; the multi‑faith, multi‑ethnic, pluralistic society that is our liberal democracy, is predicated, is based fundamentally on our ability as citizens, all of you, to be able to engage with each other, even if we disagree. Even if we vehemently disagree with each other, to engage in a way that doesn't resort to the demonization or the dehumanization of another person that you disagree with or a group based on their ethnicity, or their faith, or their sexuality. It is predicated on the idea, and our society is predicated on the idea that we can engage in that space, in that public space, and in the space between us in a way that is respectful and that is tolerant of others, even if we disagree. When that starts to fall into a place of hatred, when people push hatred towards others, when they disagree, and worse, violence, then social cohesion starts to be impacted and breaks down. Now we, as parliamentarians, as a Government, we have responsibilities as lawmakers to pass laws, whether they be anti-vilification laws, anti-discrimination laws, hate speech laws, other laws that penalize the worst of that kind of behavior where it breaks down. But that's not everything, that leadership is also a responsibility of community leaders, faith leaders, community members. Putting forward that idea that we are a society that is pluralistic, that is multi‑faith, multi‑ethnic, and it works not because of a miracle. It works because of decades of commitment by Australians who have come from every part of the world. My parents came from Egypt and committed to the idea of a multicultural place where even if we disagree, we don't resort to hatred or violence of the other. That requires leadership across the board. Now we have passed a series of legislation, as the Acting Prime Minister said, some of that has been blocked by opposition parties and minor parties and the usual politics of Canberra trying to get laws through. But we actually have passed quite a lot of laws; hate speech laws, anti‑doxing in laws, there are anti‑vilification laws, racial discrimination laws as well, both at the state and territory level. But as I said at the start, that is just one part of this puzzle. Everyone is responsible, and we have to do our job and work together on that basis.

JOURNALIST: Minister Khalil just on that, do you think it's appropriate for Randa Abdel Fattah to speak at the Newcastle Writers’ Festival, and is it appropriate that the New South Wales Government had discussions about that? 

KHALIL: Well, I think with respect to that particular individual, or anyone, for that matter, who is going to a Writers’ Festival or some sort of public speaking event, it's a matter for the event organisers to make the correct determination about whether it's appropriate or not. As far as– everyone has a right to express themselves freely, but there are limits to freedom of expression when it crosses over into hate speech, as I said, when it crosses over into forms of discrimination against others based on their ethnicity or their faith. There are certain laws at the state and federal level that deal with that and they should be exercised if they're found to be in breach. But at the starting point, it is up to the organisers of festivals like that to make those determinations. And of course, as you know, people have all sorts of views about this. It is a free country. We have freedom of expression within the limits that I described.

JOURNALIST: Just while you’re there, sorry, what's your response to Israeli army bulldozing Australian soldiers’ graves in Gaza?

KHALIL: Do you want to– you’ve been briefed–

MARLES: So, look, we are– we're aware of that, and we're obviously very concerned about what has happened in respect of the Commonwealth War Grave in Gaza, and we do understand that a number of graves of Australian personnel have been damaged in respect of this. The Department of Veterans’ Affairs is closely monitoring this. We have clearly expressed our concern. As soon as the situation is one where we can safely repair those graves, obviously, we will do that, but that's clearly not what the situation is on this day. But we are deeply concerned about it. We've expressed that, and we will continue to monitor the situation.

JOURNALIST: Do you have any concerns about the Israeli President coming to Australia? Obviously, Sydney, some Sydney siders, including state and federal MPs, have said they're going to join rallies. Do you have any concerns about that?

MARLES: Look, the President of Israel is visiting Australia, having been invited by both the Governor General and the Prime Minister and he will be a welcome and honoured guest to our country. It is an important bilateral visit between– for Australia and Israel. But to have the President of Israel here, the equivalent of our Governor General, is really particularly significant for Australia's Jewish community in the aftermath of the Bondi massacre, and that's obviously the context in which the Israeli president is coming to Australia. It will be a very significant moment for the country, but particularly for Australia's Jewish community in the aftermath of Bondi, and he will be treated with all the dignity and respect that he deserves and as a guest of both the Prime Minister and the Governor General, he will be welcomed and honoured.

JOURNALIST: A new congressional report from the US has openly contemplated not selling nuclear subs to Australia. Can you still guarantee that Australia will receive the submarines promised under the AUKUS deal? 

MARLES: Well, I think this is a report coming out of the Congressional library. We've got the President of the United States on record describing the need to go full steam ahead. I've been working with my counterpart, the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, and we are going full steam ahead at the direction of the American President, in respect of Australia pursuing the optimal pathway by which we acquire nuclear submarine capability, and very central to that is the transfer of Virginia class submarines from the United States to Australia. So we are very confident about that. We are working very closely with the Trump administration. We couldn't be happier with what the Trump administration is saying in terms of its support for this. And in the immediate term, our focus is on ensuring that HMAS Stirling at Rockingham, south of Perth, is being readied for the beginning of the Submarine Rotational Force – West in 2027, and that's when we will start seeing US flagged Virginia class submarines operating from HMAS Stirling. 

JOURNALIST: Just quickly, the Greens have backed changes to the capital gains tax discount, meaning the Government looks like it does have the numbers to pass the changes. Do you agree that there is momentum for change in this process?

MARLES: Well look, all I would say is that the position of the Government in relation to our policy on housing, and also in relation to our policy about the tax arrangements which surround housing hasn't changed. It continues to be the same. And we do acknowledge that there is obviously housing affordability challenges, that there is questions of intergenerational fairness. At the heart of that, though, our strategy has and continues to be around supply. In other words, we need to be building more houses. We've got to see more houses built in Australia, and that's where the Commonwealth Government is focusing our attention. We're doing that through the Housing Australia Future Fund. We are building more houses. We are doing that, I might say, in the face of headwinds that have been put there by the Coalition. But our strategy is to be building more houses, and that is how we are meeting this challenge. 

JOURNALIST: Mr Khalil, in an interview earlier this week, the Race Discrimination Commissioner told us that social cohesion, the term, was being overused by all levels of government, by every major party, and as was being used as a code for assimilation and to get multicultural Australia to shed parts of themselves which don't fit in with a typical Australian mold. Do you think that other politicians such as yourself have overused the term? Would you like to see the racism framework implemented as soon as possible?

KHALIL: I've had good conversations, actually, with the Race Discrimination Commissioner and with respect, I said to him, I don't agree with his analysis of the way that he saw (inaudible) in that space. We did come to some agreement, I’ll let him speak for himself, around the fact that we do need, whether you call it social cohesion, whether you call it a type of tolerance and respect within our society in the way that we engage with each other, we agree that it is absolutely important for us as a nation and our citizenry to be able to engage in a way that doesn't fall down into hate towards the other, towards violence. Now the law can penalize when things get really extreme. I'm hoping that the work that we're doing as a Government and as a community will not allow us to even get to that stage. We need to bring that back so when we engage with communities, we bring communities together, and even communities that might disagree on various issues understand that they can have that conversation – they can have that engagement without attacking each other, without being hateful to each other, and certainly without resorting to violence each other. That takes work. We've seen it in interfaith dialog, for example. We've seen it with different communities that may have had old hatreds from their home countries. The fact is, when you come to Australia, you make that commitment to Australia. The ability to be able to engage with each other, regardless of our backgrounds, is a kind of a very unique factor in our multicultural society. It's what's made it quite successful. You can call it social cohesion. You can call it multiculturalism, at its best, the modern multiculturalism. Nick Bolkus, who just passed away recently, one of the fathers, the architects of our modern multicultural society, a Greek Australian, the first cabinet minister in the Hawke government from a Greek background. This is what it means for Australians who've come here to make that commitment. I don't mind what you call it, as long as we actually do the work necessary to be able to engage with each other in that way. 

JOURNALIST: Minister Marles, can I ask you about attending a function, apparently at the Opera House, it’s a question from Canberra, function event run by a PR firm with links to your Chief of Staff? Do you have anything to say about that?

MARLES: I'm not aware of what you're referring to. 

JOURNALIST: You’re not aware of the function at all?

MARLES: I'll need to take that offline, I'm not aware of what you're referring to.

JOURNALIST: Can I take you to questions about Bondi Junction? The Coroner handed down her findings into that mass stabbing attack yesterday. One of her recommendations was a campaign on how to survive tragedies like that mass stabbing, saying that the current advice of escape, hide, tell is not widely known amongst the public–

MARLES: That last bit again?

JOURNALIST: She said that the current advice of escape, hide, tell is not widely known amongst the public, and she's recommended an education campaign. Is that something that you would back? 

MARLES: Well look, we will– obviously the work that's been done here is very important in terms of understanding all that occurred prior to that event. We will look at all the recommendations that come forward in respect of that and look at how we can best implement them and we'll obviously do that in consultation with the New South Wales Government. 

JOURNALIST: Is it appropriate, though, that there is more awareness amongst the public generally about what to do in the event of an active armed offender attack, given that we've had the Bondi Junction mass stabbing and then the Hanukkah mass terror shooting?

MARLES: Look, I think it's an important insight and certainly we take that very seriously, about ensuring that there is appropriate public awareness and how we go about doing that is something that we need to work through. So, I mean, this is really important work that's been undertaken, and we really need to make sure that we learn every lesson possible from what happened at Bondi Junction, obviously, what happened at the Bondi massacre more recently, indeed, in every one of these events. And I think that is an important insight. But it's also important that we take the time to work this through, so that we're responding appropriately.

JOURNALIST: Just on Defence sites really quick, are you confident of breaking even, even after remediation, the remediation cost of a lot of these sites? Is there any remediation required for this one?

MARLES: We're very confident that ultimately there will be a return to the government from the disposal of these sites and amongst all the commentary that I've heard since we made the announcement, I haven't heard anyone suggest that the most cost effective way in which to proceed is for us to hang on to the sites that we currently have. No one's making that argument. But it is also the savings in not having to do the upkeep in respect of sites that we don't use. I mean Spectacle Island in Sydney Harbour, for example, we've spent $4 million on that in the last four years. There hasn't been a member of the Defence Force at that site since 2023. And we've spent a million dollars on the Penrith Training Depot in the last six years, that's a site that was vacated back in 2016. The Maribyrnong Defence Site, which has been vacant for decades, we spent $10 million there in 2022 to remediate the effects of a grass fire that went through the site. That's what's going on here. So I've got no doubt that this is the right thing for us to do in a financial sense, but it's also really important that we see this through the lens of our people. We need to be making sure that those who are doing important administrative functions here are supported by the best site, which is not here, which is Defence Plaza Sydney. There's a much better site there to enable people to do their work. And that's what is important to do given the circumstances that our country faces today. Thank you. 

ENDS