Television Interview, Sky News Newsday

SUBJECTS: NRL PNG Chiefs; Appointment of new Defence Secretary; AUKUS; US Ambassador to Australia; Army’s long-range strike capability; Drones; Anzac Day.

KIERAN GILBERT, HOST: The Deputy Prime Minister joins me live in the studio. He's a fan of the PNG rugby league initiative too. He's with us. They've got their first signing. Alex Johnston's his name. You might not know, being a Geelong Cat, but Geelong Cats fan. Alex Johnston is one of the beloved Rabbitohs and prolific try scorer. His first signing by the PNG Chiefs.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Well, I'm really excited about that. I am going to be an absolute Chiefs fanatic as soon as they come into the NRL. I'm a little nervous about the Prime Minister's reaction to that, given that we're talking about going from the Rabbitohs.

GILBERT: But it's, but it's an important initiative. I know we could talk about it in a light sense about the sport, but the soft power element to this is they, they love rugby league, PNG.

MARLES: You know, PNG, they are crazy for rugby league. And that's why, you know, for a long time I felt that this will really transform the relationship in so many ways. I mean, this is a. It helps unify PNG, is one of the things to understand. I mean, PNG is a country which is very diverse, which, you know, from the Highlands to the coast to the islands like Manus or New Britain. But, but this team is going to be something that will really help unify the country. From an Australian point of view, I think it helps put PNG on the map. I mean, there's going to be a whole different set of Australians who will be, who follow rugby league, who will now look at the Chiefs and think, as they look at them, about the country from which they come.

GILBERT: Yeah, it's quite an extraordinary country, that's for sure, and so diverse. Let's talk – a lot to talk about with you today. The first female secretary of your department. She doesn't have a history in Defence. Is that deliberate?

MARLES: It's not deliberate, but I think it is an opportunity. I mean, Meghan Quinn is going to be fantastic. As we went through the process, she was just an excellent candidate. She's currently the Secretary of the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, which is a really big department, and it's really the experience that she brings to bear in terms of running a large department. Of course, Defence is the largest, which is why she was so attractive as a candidate. But also she's done such a great job in the Department of Industry. As you say, she's really, in public service terms, grown up in Treasury, having now done a number of years at the Department of Industry. And I think having a fresh set of eyes is an opportunity. It's not the reason she was chosen, but I think it's definitely an opportunity for Defence.

GILBERT: The Defence Department has been mired in lots of cost blowouts. You've had to try and navigate that over the time you've been in the job. One of the longest serving Defence Ministers actually in recent history now. Tell me, is this going to cause a few issues in Defence? Is it going to put a few noses out of joint?

MARLES: I don't think so. I mean, I feel that this will be a decision that will be embraced by Defence. I mean, Defence is going through a historic period of reform as we speak, with the establishment of the Defence Delivery Agency. And of course, we have the Australian Submarine Agency, which has now been in place for a couple of years. But there is a very significant change of leadership through the military leadership, which we announced a couple of weeks ago, through to the Department, but also now the National Armaments Director and the new Director-General of the ASA.

GILBERT: But this Secretary is not appointed because she's a woman.

MARLES: Of course not. I mean, she comes with such important experience in terms of running a large department and that's really what we wanted in terms of running Defence. And particularly through this period of time where we are going through significant reform, having somebody with, you know, experience of public administration of large organisations is going to be invaluable. And that's what Megan brings to the role. It is a significant moment, though, that we have the first female Secretary, and that's not something that we should pass over, but it's not the reason she was chosen.

GILBERT: The next ambassador from the United States appointed, David Brat. Do you know him?

MARLES: I don't know him.

GILBERT: A Tea Party conservative, you would have expected that sort of person – you can work with him.

MARLES: We can absolutely work with him. I think the point to make here is we welcome that there is an appointment. We understand in the American system, with the change of President, this takes time, but that we now have a name. You know, we look forward to his nomination being confirmed and Dave Brat being in the job as soon as possible.

GILBERT: So the 15‑month delay, you know, should we read anything into that?

MARLES: I don't think so. You know, I think there was a similar length of time taken when President Trump was elected the first time round. You know, the Chargé d’Affaires, Erica Olson, has been doing a great job, and so, you know, we've been able to work seamlessly with the embassy and as an important representative, obviously, or the important representative of the United States here. But it will be good to have a permanent ambassador in place and we look forward to Dave Brat taking up his role.

GILBERT: The parliamentary inquiry out of the UK says that AUKUS is facing a few issues, possibly a few cracks beginning to show. Is there any merit to that critique?

MARLES: Well, I mean, firstly, that review that was done in the UK was very supportive of AUKUS. That's the first point to make, and it emphasises the support that exists in all three countries for this program. That the program is put under constant scrutiny again in all three countries is an important thing to happen as well, and this is a part of that. I'm sure that the recommendations that it is making will be picked up by the UK Government, but what I would say is we're working really well with the UK Government at our end. We're really comfortable that AUKUS is on track, and that includes the component of it which is the building of SSN-AUKUS in Adelaide with BAE Systems. That part of the process is very much on track.

GILBERT: So investment's not faltering. Angus Taylor was on the program earlier saying that overall defence envelope in funding is – you're playing card tricks essentially and you're not delivering enough overall to do AUKUS and to boost defence more broadly.

MARLES: Well, firstly, I absolutely, completely disagree with what Angus Taylor is saying about Australia's defence spending. I think this committee was reflecting upon expenditure in the United Kingdom, and, you know, we're comfortable with how the UK is going about its investment in AUKUS. At our end, what Angus Taylor is saying is just completely wrong. I mean, we are definitely increasing our expenditure on the submarine program, and that's reflecting the fact that as we look at the 10 years from this National Defence Strategy going forward, we are entering, if you like, a meatier part of the phase of the program where more money needs to be spent. But it is consistent with the overall budget, the long-term budget that we've assessed for AUKUS, which is at about 0.15 per cent of GDP. And of course, you know, overall we're investing an additional $117 billion over the decade. That is 12 times as much in the last four years as what the former Coalition government did in nine in terms of increasing defence spending.

GILBERT: You've had your recent National Defence Strategy. Today another announcement – $2.3 billion on Precision Strike Missiles and HIMARS vehicles. Is this the capacity, or the capability of the future? Is this what our military is basically going to be founded upon? This ability to project with missiles, we're talking massive distances.

MARLES: Yeah, and absolutely is the answer your question. I mean, we have been speaking in terms of our strategic settings for the Defence Force that we need to engage in impactful projection. The national security– the geography of the national security of Australia is well beyond our coastline and we need to be able to get out there. And there are lots of elements to that including long‑range submarines, but longer range strike is a critical component of that and the announcement– 

GILBERT: Can we build these? Or will we be able to, is that your aim?

MARLES: This is acquiring the HIMARS units, the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System units– 

GILBERT: From Lockheed Martin.

MARLES: Indeed, and this is to establish the second long range fires regiment, which will be based at Edinburgh. The Precision Strike Missile is something that we are looking at as part of the missile manufacturing capability that we are developing in Australia. The HIMARS is able to shoot the PrSM, and PrSM has a range of 500 kilometres right now, in time we're hoping that we may see that double. But this dramatically increases the land based strike capability of the Australian Army and it very much fits in with the strategic setting that we put in place for the Defence Force.

GILBERT: Indeed, this focus on drones, on missiles, this is– we're learning these lessons, almost on a daily and more than weekly basis, looking at Iran and looking at Ukraine. Is that fair to say?

MARLES: Yes, it's absolutely fair to say. But it is a combination of understanding our own strategic landscape, our strategic threat and the kind of defence force we need to build for that. And that is all about, as we've said, impactful projection, being able to get out there, but then understanding the way in which war is changing. And we've, as you say, seen that in Ukraine, seen that in the Middle East and particularly with the rise of autonomous systems, with drones and the need to incorporate that into how we are building our Defence Force going forward. And that's really what the National Defence Strategy is doing.

GILBERT: Well, I'll let you go, the final thing is the RSL announcing a review of welcome to country at dawn service ceremonies. I mean, the booing is reprehensible. Do you think it's appropriate for the RSL to review, though, the welcome to country at those events?

MARLES: Well, I mean a lot of these events are run by the RSL, so it's a matter for the RSL. But I don't think there is an issue with welcome to country. I think welcome to countries are a respectful thing to do at the beginning of big public gatherings in this country and that's what happens on Anzac Day. You know, when I speak to people who go to these services, and I obviously go to a lot of them, I don't see any complaint around that. In fact, I think that you are engaging in respectful activity on Anzac Day feels completely in tune with what Anzac Day is about. And so I think a welcome to country is entirely appropriate. And obviously, as you say, the booing was completely disgraceful and we should focus on that. I mean that was utterly disrespectful and completely at odds with what Anzac Day is about.

GILBERT: Do you diminish the value of the welcome to country by having it on so many occasions and so many events? This is Angus Taylor's argument.

MARLES: I don't think so. I think it's a respectful thing to do in large public gatherings and Anzac Day is an example of that.

GILBERT: The one Anzac Day post– Andrew Hastie posted one, SAS captain himself, and the partner of Ben Roberts-Smith said you're a traitor in response. What did you make of that? Since deleted that post.

MARLES: Yeah, well look, I mean there’s a limit in what I can say given this matter, a whole lot of this is obviously before the courts. But I mean, let me be really clear: I know Andrew Hastie, I know his service. He's not a traitor.

GILBERT: Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, thanks.

MARLES: Thank you. 

ENDS