Subjects: The Coalition’s Operation Sovereign Borders; Labor’s FBT hit on cars; AAA rating.
EO&E...........................................................................................................................................
TONY ABBOTT:
This is an important day. It’s an important development of the Coalition’s border protection policy. As you know, the crisis on our borders has become a national emergency. We’ve had almost 50,000 illegal arrivals by boat; we’ve had almost 800 illegal boats; we’ve had 1,000 or more deaths at sea; we’ve had $10 billion plus in border protection blowouts. The problem is getting worse. This Government can’t solve it; the Coalition will solve it. But it’s important not just to have the right policies, you’ve got to have the right implementation as well.
The current government is all announcement and no delivery. This policy that we release today is about demonstrating to the Australian people that the Coalition has thought this through and we will have the appropriate organisational and structural arrangements in place to ensure that we can meet this national emergency on our borders.
We are announcing today that under a Coalition government, we will swiftly implement Operation Sovereign Borders. We will have the appropriate command and control structures. The operational control of Operation Sovereign Borders will be in the hands of a three-star military commander who will be reporting directly to the Minister for Immigration under the overall supervision of the National Security Committee of the Cabinet.
We have to tackle this with the appropriate level of will and the appropriate level of organisation. It is a national emergency. This is one of the most serious external situations that we have faced in many a long year. That's why it must be tackled with decisiveness, with urgency, with the appropriate level of seriousness. That's why we need to have a senior military officer in operational control of this very important national emergency.
I'm going to ask Scott now to detail the policy and then I'm going to ask General Molan to speak to the policy because he is one of the people who we have been consulting with in its preparation.
SCOTT MORRISON:
Thank you very much Tony and thank you also General Molan for joining us here today. For the past almost four years, since Tony asked me to take on this job as Shadow Immigration Minister, he and I have been working over this time to work through the details of what needs to be done to stop the boats and that has involved me going to many places overseas, to our offshore processing facilities, visiting our detention centres all around the country, talking to people on the ground, talking to people who’ve had direct operational experience and involvement in this area and this has been a process of years in learning the lessons of Labor’s failures, understanding the reasons for the success of the Howard Government’s policies and how they can be made to work again, but in all of that period of time, the one thing that stands out to me more than anything was the experience over Captain Emad. What happened with Captain Emad is this people smuggler was able to sail into the country and fly out of the country with agencies looking at each other – each of them trying to do their best – but frankly, under an operational command system that didn’t enable them to get the best outcome.
Now that’s not something we can allow the people who are putting themselves in many ways in harm’s way on a daily basis to be operating in this very difficult environment with this, as Tony says, this national emergency situation. We need to give them the clearest and the best way for decisions to be taken, for a chain of command to operate to enable them to do their best and to get the best outcome, which is what they want to see as well.
As I’ve moved around the country, and particularly talked to people directly on the ground here, their frustration is one that they’re doing their best but there is a real frustration in the way that all of these agencies, frankly just are unable to coordinate and work together in the way that should happen.
So the Captain Emad story, where this fellow pushed a shopping trolley around Canberra for years and then was able just to scoot out of the country because Customs and the AFP and DIAC simply weren’t connected to each other, illustrated to me more than any one incident what was fundamentally wrong with the operational implementation arrangements for how this Government has been running the show on these issues for some time.
We saw a very similar situation with the Egyptian Jihadist that was behind the pool fence; again, the lack of integration and connection and communication between agencies that contributed to that situation was significant. We saw it in the implementation issues around the failed Malaysian people swap where they set their own 72 hour time frame to get people transferred to Malaysia, which they missed and resulted in an injunction being imposed after that 72 hour time frame was imposed. The stories go on and on and on and that’s why we’ve decided to do Operation Sovereign Borders if we’re elected to government.
To take you through it – I’m going to ask the guys at the back of the room to move them forward if they could for me – if we go to the first slide; this is what was abolished by Kevin Rudd when he was Prime Minister. This is what used to work: turning back boats where it was safe to do so, 2007 December, abolished. The Pacific Solution, abolished February 2008. Temporary Protection Visas, abolished August 2008. The very simple and administrative single case officer review process for asylum claims, that didn’t see these things drag on endlessly in the courts, abolished in November of 2008. A deterrence focus to regional cooperation was abolished by this Government when they moved to their regional processing framework in the Bali Process of March 2011. Mandatory detention in this country was effectively abolished in November 2011 by this Government when they went to the widespread community release programme and access to the Refugee Review Tribunal which was abolished under the Howard Government, was restored under the Labor Government.
What it has been replaced with and what hasn’t worked – this is how many goes Labor have had at this – firstly, they extended the appeal rights and legal assistance in November of 2008 to those who were seeking asylum and come to Australia illegally by boat. There was the Afghan and Sri Lankan asylum freeze which was announced by Kevin Rudd back in April 2010, that didn’t work. There was the famous East Timor Solution before the last election, the last election fix we saw from Labor in July of 2010. There was the Afghan Return Solution in January of 2011, which has seen less than half a dozen people actually forcibly returned to Afghanistan. There was the regional processing framework, which I mentioned before, which Foreign Minister Rudd and Minister Bowen hailed as being another landmark achievement which also didn’t stop the boats. There was Manus Island Mark I in August of 2011 when that was mooted again as a solution by this Government and we never saw it after that election. There was the community release with work rights in November of 2011 which led to the sharpest surge in arrivals after that period of time.
There was then providing full appeals to the Refugee Review Tribunal, which had previously been abolished under the Howard Government, and therefore onto the federal court, and that was done in March of 2012. Then, there was the Malaysian people swap, which we all remember only too well. There was the Houston expert panel arrangement, which was put in place in August of 2012 and boats have clearly kept coming and now we have the latest election fix from the Government, which is the PNG arrangement which we already know is unravelling within days of its announcements as the core pledges and promise of that arrangement are not backed up in the text of the two-page arrangement, which doesn’t even have the legal standing of the Malaysian people swap, which was struck down by the High Court.
What has happened is this: the boats have come and they’ve come from an increasing number of nationalities – over 48,000 arrivals now – undoubtedly we’ll see that go to 50,000 in the not too distant future. If we look at what that record looks like, year-on-year, we have gone from just a handful of people turning up, around two per month back when this Government came into office, and we’re now at an average of over 3,000 per month. Last year, more than 25,000 people turned up illegally in Australia by boat. That is more than 5,000 more than the entire Refugee and Humanitarian Settlement programme, even as expanded under this Government.
If we go to the cost, the cost of this, I think, shows it more than clearly: $85 million when this Government inherited the solution, which has blown out to $2,900 million in this financial year and this financial year assumes only 1,100 people are going to be turning up every month and we’re now double that in the first month of this year.
Labor’s had a detention centre revolution in Australia and we’ve seen that with the expansion of the population in our detention centres. This chart also doesn’t include the 15,000 that are out in community release on bridging visas. What this shows is we had a population when we’re talking about just those who’ve arrived illegally by boat, there were just four people, just four in November of 2007 when Kevin Rudd became Prime Minister. Now that he’s Prime Minister again, that figure is approaching almost 12,000 in detention and there’s another 15,000 who are out there in the community. That is the consequence on those terms of failed policy, failed resolve and failed implementation and Tony has rightly mentioned, as all have and I’m sure all Australians, regardless of their position in the debate, share the concern about the horrendous loss of life that has occurred and continues and the 14,500 thousand people in the last few years who would’ve got a visa to come to Australia who are waiting somewhere else, but their visa was given to someone who came illegally by boat.
Labor’s failures, as I reflect on them, are these: first of all, they refuse to acknowledge the problem that they created in the decisions they took when Kevin Rudd became Prime Minister and they’ve refused to understand what has caused that problem or acknowledge those causes. They are more interested in the announcement effect of things than the implementation effect and we’ve seen that again with what the Prime Minister announced, but doesn’t have the capacity to implement with what he announced last Friday.
The internal division within Labor, as I’ve sat and I’ve watched them go from failure after failure after failure, there are reasons for that failure and one of those reasons is the internal division that exists within the Labor ranks on this issue, forcing back-downs, forcing compromises and a tendency for this Government to try and be all things to all people on this issue. What you need on this issue is clear-mindedness. You need clear direction, you need clear chain of command, clear authorities to get the job done – not trying to keep everybody happy all the time, which seems to have been the top priority of this Government over the years.
There’s been a lack of clear decision-making and authority across portfolios to make things happen and respond to changing events. They act one out. Each agency trying to do its own thing but not connected together in any sort of comprehensive strategy, putting incredible pressure on those who are forced and have to implement these things on the ground. A lack of coherent strategy as well, over time – one minute they’re saying the Pacific Solution is evil and the next minute they’re telling you it’s the answer, one minute they’re telling you they want to be compassionate and the next minute they’re telling you they want to be tough. This is a Government that is so double-minded in its approach that it’s completely compromised the messages that it’s been sending on this issue and when you look at their form, you come away with one message: Kevin Rudd is a soft touch on people smuggling, that’s his form. He may say many other things, but his form speaks louder than his words.
There is a lack of coordination and integration between agencies and there is a lack of a sense of urgency when it comes to these things – and this is I think one of the most significant things that military led-operations can bring to any operation, the sense of urgency, the sense of mission focus for which our defence forces are famous. And the consequence of all of this has been the agencies that have been involved, one out on these issues have been frankly overwhelmed by the task. I’ve seen that in the Department of Immigration which has frankly collapsed under the weight of having to deal with this issue in isolation over the last four or five years. I’ve seen it in the compromise to other parts of their operations. We’ve seen it in Customs and border protection as issues of guns and drugs and corruption and various other things do demand the attention and should command the attention of those who are running those agencies and who would be seeking to try and deal with those issues, but when you’re dealing with this chaos on a daily basis it clearly distracts attention.
So let’s move to what we’re talking about. Operation Sovereign Borders is about having a clear mission, a clear chain of command and a clear policy framework for doing that. What we do here is bring together more than 15 different departments and agencies who are involved in these organisational and operational matters. Everything from our Customs and border protection service, immigration, our security services, our defence forces, AMSA and others that are directly involved in so many elements, including I should stress the Australian Federal Police, and they are conducting their operations across a whole range of areas.
Our policy approach is based on four key areas. Disruption and deterrence on the ground and up through the chain and I should stress that includes disruption and deterrence here in Australia. There are networks of support that exist within Australia that are funding and organising people smuggling in this country and if you don’t believe me, just read the Captain Emad story again because he was proof positive of that being an operational situation. I am mystified as to why the Government announces on the eve of an election a $200,000 bounty for information and hasn’t put one in place for years while Captain Emad was pushing his shopping trolley around Canberra. Those disruption and deterrence operations have to happen in Australia, as much as they have to happen in Indonesia and up through the chain and into Sri Lanka.
Then there is detection, interception and transferring. That’s predominantly the work that is done at sea in terms of this operation and there can be no substitute, no substitute for a deterrence at sea when you’re looking to protect your sea borders. Kevin Rudd refuses to put in place a physical deterrent on our borders. Instead he, like his predecessor, is using our Navy and our Customs fleet as a taxi service. That has to end.
Then we have the offshore detention and assessment task and that relates predominantly to the running of our processing centres and our detention operations offshore in particular and that needs a very clear and direct focus from a very coordinated group of people.
Now, presently we’ve seen what happens when you get that wrong. Detention centres burn down. We’ve just had the latest one burn down in Nauru. Riots and chaos have been common with this Government over the last number of years as their border protection failures have only escalated.
And then there is the issue of returns and removing and resettlement. Those are the policies that are designed to get people back to where they have come from, at the end of the day.
Now, to the extent that what the Prime Minister announced last Friday can be implemented – and we have serious questions over that – we would salvage what we could out that arrangement in terms of what is there, but the implementation challenges are significant. But what we’re proposing today would give even what the Prime Minister announced last Friday the hope of implementation that certainly wouldn’t be present under Kevin Rudd’s Government. This will all feed in, as I said here; the disruption and deterrence will be led by the AFP, the detection, interception and transfer will be led by Border Protection Command, DIAC would lead the other two task groups, they would go into one central joint agency taskforce headquarters that would be headed up by a 3 Star military commander.
That 3 Star military commander would be appointed on the recommendation of the Chief of the Defence Force. It’s the Chief of the Defence Force’s job to advise the government on the best command and control structure for how that would then be implemented and obviously, given the opportunity, if we were elected to govern, that would be advice we’d be seeking about those arrangements. But what has to be clear is you have to have a clear chain of command. I mean, this chart, currently if you drew it for the Labor Party and how they’re operating this, would be an absolute noodle nation; there would be lines going everywhere. We’ve simplified that: clear responsibilities, clear policies, a clear chain of command to an experienced military commander that can work across both the civil and the military space going into one Minister, going into the Prime Minister.
If I could have the next chart. This is our regional deterrence framework, bringing together all of those areas. We have always said that regional cooperation is critical to this task – that’s why we established the Bali Process. But the Bali Process and all the other regional measures must focus on deterrence and this Government has been so double-minded on this issue that they have lost their way on that cooperation. That regional deterrence goes from everything from ensuring there are proper search and rescue response capabilities on the southern coast of Indonesia to ensuring that there is the appropriate special operations funding for people being on the ground in Indonesia, in Malaysia, in Sri Lanka. It goes through to the issues of offshore processing, ensure you can get the places on the ground in time and run those centres effectively.
So, we go to the last one. In the first 100 days, this is what Operation Sovereign Borders would be doing. Firstly, we need to get the operational protocols for what would be called Operation Relex II, which is the turn back the boats where it’s safe to do so instruction. Those issues would be worked through properly with our Border Protection Command to get the rules of engagement and the issues established for the procedures for conducting that operation.
We would establish the headquarters and create the joint agency taskforce and the attending other arrangements which are the interdepartmental groups that focus on supportive measures for this arrangement.
Temporary Protection Visas would be back on the books. We would increase the capacity of our offshore processing centres and we’ll have more to say about that between now and the next election. There would be immediate visits to a number of the key countries at a Ministerial level to work through operational arrangements; operational arrangements that are focused on implementation not press conferences. Re-tasking the Border Protection Command surveillance to ensure that we’re able to detect the movement of these vessels more properly and that is going to require an increase in our intelligence operations also – it’s not just about surveillance it’s about intelligence – and we will ensure that our Navy and border protection fleet will no longer be used as a taxi service, a water taxi service.
What we will do is we will be putting in place additional vessels to support our border protection fleet to conduct the transfers that will be part of these operations. Now, these transfers can be many and varied in their nature, whether it’s transferring people back to Sri Lanka or transferring people back in relation to the return and turn back policy and the operation of that policy, which the people smugglers will find out when they’re confronted with those tactics on the water and finally to any other transfers that are necessary. So, no longer under a Coalition government, if we’re elected, would our Navy and our Border Protection Command be used as a water taxi service, as it currently is under this Government.
So that is the package of measures we’re outlining today. It is about a clear mission, it is about a clear line of command and chain of command that must be followed to manage the risk and to ensure the implementation and it has a clear policy basis, and it’s the policy basis we have stood by for more than a decade. The people smugglers know the Coalition’s form when it comes to border protection. They know that we will fight this thing and them every single day. We have learnt from Labor’s failures. We know the change that needs to be made to get us from what we had under John Howard to re-implement that today and what that change is, is to put this operational command structure in place that means we can respond, we can move, we can adapt and we can deploy and under the experienced leadership of a 3 Star military commander, this will stop the boats and will get the job done.
TONY ABBOTT:
Thank you very much, Scott. You’ve obviously, as is quite apparent today, put an enormous amount of work into this policy and General Molan, if you could just add to those remarks.
JIM MOLAN:
Thanks Tony.
What I believe I bring to the Coalition’s policy is additional experience of how to conduct operations. Both major parties and I think the majority of the Australian people now seem to agree on why such operations are necessary. What I’ve been doing is looking at the how. I’ve got significant experience in conducting very complex operations all around the world and quite often in very dangerous situations. We all know that this is a very difficult challenge. To approach it one dimensionally is wrong. This is not the work for a committee. Look at the functions that we saw on the slide back there and that are listed in the policy documents that we handed out. Disrupt, deter, detain, intercept, transfer, assess, return, remove and resettle; conducted humanly, legally, often with courage, always with risk, by military, police, customs, officials, intelligence, diplomats and many, many others because as we all know, so tragically, this is about life and death.
This is high level, cross-agency and whole of government business. If you don’t have an appropriate response, you don’t have a policy. What I offer the Coalition is a check on feasibility. Is the policy workable? The result is that the Coalition, if elected, will be able to give more refined direction to the agencies and the agencies plans when they come back to government for approval can be better understood. It's very important to acknowledge that the actual detailed plans will not exist until the agencies produce them and the Government considers and approves them. That thoroughness is far, far better than policy on the run.
It's really worth noting this is not a military operation, it is a military-led operation but it is not a military operation, despite military involvement in the field, in commanding and in some of the language that is used. This is constabulary work, it's law and order. It's a complex challenge that needs a complex solution and it needs a capable organisation to run it. This is why Operation Sovereign Borders Joint Agency Taskforce is important. You need to respond comprehensively and to cover all the bases and to do that you need the kind of organisation that is being announced here today. And this is not an unusual circumstance. The people of Brisbane would certainly understand the military's involvement in this. It's certainly, for the post flood period, it is certainly not an unusual circumstance for the military to be used in this way. Border protection command has been doing this for years. In the latter stages of East Timor and in various situations in the Solomon Islands we've been doing this for years.
Plan well. Plan comprehensively from solid policy; don't rush to failure. Focus on the outcomes but be infinitely flexible and reactive in what you do on the ground. Finally, achieve effects across the whole of Government. This policy sets the stage for the operators in the field to do this and to be successful and this is what gives me confidence to endorse the Coalition's policy.
Thank you.
TONY ABBOTT:
Thank you so much, Jim. We have heard from Scott, we’ve heard from General Molan. Are there any questions?
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott as the General alluded to, the military has had involvement in this issue for some time. Under this plan how exactly does that involvement change or what do you see as the biggest change for the role of the military?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, it's a unified command and control structure with the military in command of the operational aspects of it. As Scott has pointed out with the Captain Emad shambles, with the Egyptian jihadist shambles, a whole lot of people all doing their own thing, not necessarily talking to each other and nothing very much happening. We've got to avoid that kind of disjointed disorganisation. That’s what this new structure is all about. It's about adding cohesion, consistency, direction, determination and a sufficient level of organisation and urgency. This is a national emergency. We have got to treat it as such. That’s why a military-led taskforce is the way forward.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, so you’re yet to speak to the Chief of Defence General David Hurley about this?
TONY ABBOTT:
No, that is not right. As a courtesy, I spoke to the Chief of the Defence Force this morning and as a courtesy we have also advised the Indonesian Ambassador that we would be making this announcement today.
QUESTION:
You don't think you should have consulted with him more widely before such an announcement?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, I’m very conscious of the proprieties here and the last thing I would want to do is to get senior serving officers directly involved in advising the Opposition; but we have consulted informally with serving officers, and obviously we've consulted very widely and deeply with recently retired officers such as General Molan.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, the language you're using in this document is very strong. Is there some kind of suggestion that Australia is under some kind of invasion from asylum seekers?
TONY ABBOTT:
This is a national emergency. When you’ve had almost 50,000 illegal arrivals by boat, you have a crisis on your borders; and in the end, the first responsibility of government is national security. If you don't control your borders, to that extent, you are losing sovereignty over your own nation. That’s why we have got to treat this problem with the appropriate level of seriousness, urgency and organisation. That's what this policy is all about.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, Kevin Rudd's said that without the PNG deal, thousands instead of hundreds of asylum seekers will be dying, do you believe that?
TONY ABBOTT:
We have had, so it seems, some 1,000 deaths at sea already since Mr Rudd himself watered down, indeed abolished, the policies that worked, as Scott has gone through. A whole range of effective measures have been systematically and serially abolished by this Government. So there's a very real sense in which Mr Rudd started this problem; Mr Rudd is incapable of fixing this problem. We are grateful to have the cooperation of the PNG Government in helping Australia solve it, but in the end, this is our problem. We’ve got to have an Australian solution, but to cooperate with other countries including PNG. We’ll salvage all we can from the arrangements that Mr Rudd has apparently entered with PNG, but we can never rely on other countries to solve our problems for us. That’s why we need a much higher level of organisation and urgency here in Australia.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, what’s your response to the PNG Government’s claims that you’ve misrepresented their position on the asylum deal?
TONY ABBOTT:
Look, I have been saying for years now that our foreign policy needs a regional focus – that we would run a foreign policy that’s focused on Jakarta, not Geneva. I have a good relationship with Prime Minister Peter O’Neill, who I’ve now met several times, but I’m confident that we can work effectively with the PNG Government as I’m confident we can work effectively with the Indonesian Government. What we have said about the true state of the agreement between Mr Rudd and Mr O’Neill is based on Mr O’Neill’s public statements. Yes, we had a private meeting with Mr O’Neill, and what he said in private was entirely consistent with what he said in public.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, you’ve challenged the Prime Minister’s policy. You said that from day one, the boats have to stop coming. When do you pledge the Coalition will stop asylum seeker boats coming after this policy is implemented?
TONY ABBOTT:
What I’ve said is that we will make a difference from day one. We will make a difference from day one; and I think anyone listening to today’s presentation watching the presentation from Scott, listening to the remarks of General Molan would be under no illusion about the seriousness with which we are treating this, would be perfectly well aware of the thought that has gone into it and the people smugglers will discover that our will is more than sufficient to match theirs. The people smugglers will discover that our strength is more than sufficient to match theirs. They will discover that our wits are far greater than theirs when it comes to addressing this problem. We will make a difference from day one and I am confident that by the close of the first term of a Coalition government, we will have restored the situation that existed between 2002 and 2007 under the Howard Government.
SCOTT MORRISON:
I just want to add to that. What this plan is about is about the Coalition, if elected, hitting the ground running. What Kevin Rudd’s plan is about is Kevin Rudd hitting the ground talking if he’s re-elected. This is about giving us the response capability to put policies in place. Now, that is what’s missing in Kevin Rudd’s plan – the implementation.
QUESTION:
So, back to that question though by the end of a first term of a Coalition government, if the Coalition is elected, there won’t be any asylum seeker boats coming, is that what you’re saying?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, under the Howard Government, for the last five years of the Howard Government, asylum seeker boats averaged three a year. At the moment under the Rudd/Gillard Government, we’re getting sometimes three a day even more.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, the Government’s offered you a series of national security briefings. Have you taken them up on that offer?
TONY ABBOTT:
I’ve had a series of briefings from a whole range of border protection agencies, intelligence agencies, military commanders and I will continue to get them.
SCOTT MORRISON:
Just on that – on that same weekend that the Prime Minister and also copied myself and other senior shadows in on, I just had exactly that briefing in Jakarta, from our own agencies.
QUESTION:
SO you don’t need Government facilitated briefings, you are already getting them?
SCOTT MORRISON:
I had already requested that briefing and I had it in Jakarta, with all of those key agencies. We’ve been keeping very up-to-date on these matters.
TONY ABBOTT:
If I could just further add – I’ve had a very wide range of briefings from a very wide range of defence, security and intelligence sources, but interestingly we were about to receive briefings from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet just a few weeks ago. These were cancelled with very short notice by the Prime Minister when he decided that the election was not necessarily going to happen on September the 14th.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, can I get your response, the Business Council of Australia has been quite critical of the Federal Government saying that they want decisive action on productivity rather than superficial agreements; and also saying it should be more than unions, union’s shouldn’t be the only stakeholders in the game. Can I get your response to that?
TONY ABBOTT:
I can understand the frustration of the Business Council of Australia because Mr Rudd has been talking about productivity ever since 2007 and yet his actions have reduced Australia’s productivity. They haven’t just slowed the growth of productivity, they have actually produced a diminution of Australia’s multi-factor productivity by three per cent since the end of 2007. This is a very serious situation. We have a productivity crisis in this country because we have a Government which is addicted to tax and to regulation and that’s why if we are going to address the productivity crisis, there needs to be a change of Government.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, is it concerning that Andrew Robb went on ABC Radio today saying that the AAA rating for Australia isn’t important?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, it’s very important that we have the strongest possible economic policy. The only way to get the strongest possible economic policy is to have a Government which gets it when it comes to the economy. We cannot have a strong economy, without strong and profitable private businesses and that means getting taxes down, getting regulation down and it means having a Government that lives within its means and that’s plainly the concern of Andrew Robb.
QUESTION:
Is the AAA rating concerning to you, is it important to you?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well the important thing is to ask yourself why does Australia still have a strong rating? And that owes nothing to the spending spree of the current Government and everything to the sustained reforms that were put in place by the Howard Government and to give credit where it is due to Mr Hawke and to Mr Keating. I am only too happy to give credit to my political opponents where they are actually improving our economy and Mr Hawke and Mr Keating between them did make significant economic improvements, many of which have been unravelled by this Government.
QUESTION:
So, the rating system to you means nothing?
TONY ABBOTT:
As I said the important thing is the economic policy, the economic policy which either buttresses or detracts from whatever rating we have got.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott can I just ask did you come up with the title, did the Coalition come up with the title or did the military because I thought it was convention that the military names its own operations.
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, we take responsibility. I know that success has a thousand parents and I think a lot of people will be very satisfied with this policy from me and Scott, to General Molan, to others. I think a lot of people will be very satisfied with this policy and I am not going to start handing around plaudits, I am going to say that we will all take responsibility for this.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott does the plan to salvage what you can of the PNG proposal, is that an admission that perhaps stopping the boats completely is an impossible task?
TONY ABBOTT:
No, it is a simple reminder that if you are going to stop the boats you need a complex range of policy responses in your armoury and that is what you have got from the Coalition – a complex range of sophisticated policy responses, not just a one dimensional reliance on other countries to do Australia’s job for it.
SCOTT MORRISON:
If I could just add to that Tony, if that’s alright? The issue with the Government’s policy is it is not just about sending people to Papua New Guinea for processing, that is offshore processing; that has allegedly been happening now since August of last year although very few people, less than one in 20 people, who have actually turned up by boat illegally in Australia have actually been subjected to offshore processing by this Government since they announced it. What the Prime Minister did announce last Friday was not offshore processing, he announced offshore resettlement for all; and that is the real test, ultimately, of whether that can be actually be delivered. There needs to be significant legislation introduced to the Papua New Guinean Parliament, to enable that resettlement to take place; and the Prime Minister is banking on this one thing – he knows that the true test of the implementation of this policy will not be faced, by him, before an election and so he is talking it up. What we have done today is point out the implementation policies that are needed to make, whether it is that policy of Kevin Rudd’s or any others, work. You need to have the machinery and the command to actually make things work and that is why this Government’s attempts at this have failed on every occasion. A lack of will, a lack of belief, a lack of operational capability that actually gets these policies delivered on the ground. An idea is one thing; if you can’t implement it then it is absolutely worthless. This is about implementing policies.
QUESTION:
Exactly what parts of the policy are you planning to salvage?
SCOTT MORRISON:
At this stage it is very unclear because of the scant detail about these arrangements about what can be salvaged. This is a two page document. That is all it is. It is not even a legally binding agreement. The issues of resettlement in Papua New Guinea are significant. They will have a right of veto as to who they resettle in Papua New Guinea and the Prime Minister isn’t saying that; but he is quite happy to put, with taxpayers money, in every newspaper and on every television screen in the country something he actually hasn’t even been able to get an agreement out of with Papua New Guinea for to do.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott can I just ask on Budget cuts, the Government is obviously preparing to announce some. I think the Coalition has previously said that medical research would be left out of any future cuts. Are there any other areas that you would guarantee wouldn’t be slashed?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, a number of points, if I may. First, it is that obviously it is important to look for savings but it is even more important to restrain spending and this Government’s problem is that it is engaged in a consistent spend-a-thon. Mr Rudd has been Australia’s world champion fiscal vandal. He has been Australia’s world champion, gold medal, fiscal vandal. Under Mr Rudd, in his first prime ministership, we were borrowing $100 million a day. Now, we are still borrowing $50 million a day because Mr Rudd simply can’t help himself when it comes to spending. So, that is the first point to make.
Second point to make is that what we expect from the Government is not just a return to fiscal prudence. What we demand of the Government, although don’t expect from the Government, is a return to fiscal prudence but also we have got to have a strategy for economic growth. My challenge to the Government in the next day or so when it is rumoured they are about to bring down some kind of economic statement is to have a clear strategy for economic growth; and the way to boost economic growth is to cut taxes and to cut regulation and to adjust your spending appropriately.
So, it is all very well to come in and say, well, there is going to be a cut here and a cut there – although let’s hope they are better at this than they were with the recent fringe benefits tax announcements – but what they have really got to do is offer some hope to the Australian people that things are going to be better in the future and that means fewer taxes, fewer regulations.
Thank you so much.
Location:
Federal