ABC 891

SUBJECT: Privatisation of ABC/SBS; Paid Parental leave; Rudd challenge E&OE................................ (Greetings omitted) Presenter: If we could start with the ABC, Christopher Pyne does the Coalition have a group within it that would like to see the ABC privatised? Pyne: No it doesn’t. There are motions moved at State Conferences, Young Liberal conferences, Federal Conferences year to year as occurs in the Labor Party, they are not binding on the parliamentary party, they’re not party policy, they’re just often interesting debates and we encourage debate in the Coalition, but no there’s absolutely no plans to do any such thing. Presenter: Because the headline in the Australia today is “Liberal push to sell off ABC and SBS” but these people are on the fringes of power are they? They’re within your party but they are on the fringe and you don’t really need to pay much attention to them? Pyne: Well the ABC is a national broadcaster and so is the SBS, it’s axiomatic that it’s the public broadcaster – it’s not possible for the ABC and SBS to be a private organisation, otherwise it sort of flies in the face of the whole charter of the government providing a public broadcaster. Presenter: Well the government had a telecommunications provider, which was a monopoly and that’s sold. We had a bank and that’s been sold, you’ve not got both got lots of things, both Liberal and Labor. What’s so special about the ABC? Pyne: We in the Coalition love the ABC so we couldn’t possibly see it being any different. Presenter: You don’t really? Pyne: We do, I love it. Presenter: Really? You do? Pyne: The ABC keeps opposition alive. John Howard told me that years ago that during the long years of opposition, it was the ABC who always gave the opposition equal time, gave them a chance to sell their message to the public and we wouldn’t want to see the ABC change at all. Presenter: Mark Butler? Butler: Yes, they were ‘halcyon’ days for the ABC the Howard Government- I remember that well. Pyne: Funding went up dramatically – you’re right. Butler: Christopher and a whole range of others keep complaining that the Labor party is coming up with scare campaigns about the future of the ABC or scare campaigns about what might happen to the GST if Tony Abbott is elected Prime Minister later this year. But they need to look a lot closer to home. I mean it’s the Victorian branch of the Liberal party, the old jewel in crown of the great Liberal party that will be debating over the weekend whether or not to sell off the ABC, I don’t know to Fox News, or News Corp or someone else and around the GST it’s really just Liberal Premier after Liberal Premier or former Liberal Premier, Nick Greiner this morning, coming out and saying we need to jack up the GST, we need to redistribute more of it to Western Australia. So frankly, I think Christopher and others in the Liberal party need to look closer to home than the Labor Party about these campaigns to have a muscular Abbott Government if it is to be elected later this year to take on some of these pretty awful agendas. Pyne: If only we had a muscular Federal Labor Government right now that made good decisions, that didn’t get us into massive debt and deficit, that didn’t jack up taxes to pay for that debt and didn’t cut spending because they‘ve mismanaged the budget so badly. I mean, I think the public would be very much looking forward to a government that knows how to manage an economy and balance its books. Presenter: Now, Chris Pyne. I think two weeks ago roughly, we asked you about whether gay couples were eligible for the Liberal Party’s parents subsidy. John wants to know whether you’ve found that out. Because I think you said you would find out about it and get back to us. Pyne: Well I haven’t. The paid parental leave scheme, the details of which are being fleshed out as we speak will be released in full during the election campaign and people will be able to see exactly how it will operate in government. Mark Butler is in Government so I’m assume he knows the question of whether the Government’s paid parental leave scheme applies to gay couples seeing as it is already in operation. Presenter: Mark Butler? Butler: Well I gave my answer last time we talked about this which was yes because we have removed any point of discrimination between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples in relation to commonwealth legislation. My understanding is that I was right about that answer. Presenter: Ok, Ok. Now Mark Butler… Butler:…And can I just say also that the same equal treatment would apply to the family tax benefit arrangement that we have announced in relation to families as well, but which the opposition would abolish if they were elected in September. Presenter: Mark Butler, Kevin Rudd has had a good think over the last few weeks and in a very lengthy essay has explained that he now supports gay marriage. It’s an interesting issue, is that a big turning of the tide and is it something that you think could be done, a vote could be taken before the September election? You could get cracking on it. I mean if Kevin Rudd is on board – it’s got to be a fait accompli is it not? Butler: Well, no I don’t think it is. I mean, Kevin is one vote and I think the fact that he is a former Prime Minister and someone who’s indicated pretty firm views about this in the past means that this is a significant change. But we had a vote, only several months ago and it was a pretty decisive vote. I voted in favour of the Marriage Act being changed. But, you know, we lost pretty significantly because the opposition will not allow a conscience vote or a free vote on this and I think… Presenter: … and your Leader, Julia Gillard opposed it? Has she ever explained to the Party room because her constant reply to this, very consistently is that “My position is well known on this” and that is she’s opposed to it. Has she ever, as Kevin Rudd has done, explained her thinking behind that? In other words has she explained to the Party Room or has anyone asked her “Why” is she opposed to gay marriage? Butler: Well no, she hasn’t given any explanation to the Party room that’s different to the public explanation that the Prime Ministers given a number of times and that is. Presenter: And what’s the public explanation? Butler: Well she takes the view, that I don’t particularly share, but these are matters of conscience in our Party. She takes the view that the Marriage Act should be maintained that there is a strong traditional view in the community about marriage being a relationship between a man and a woman and I guess that is the matter of conscience debate in the Party that we allow free vote on and I think until such time as both Party’s allow free vote, there’s not much chance of this passing the Parliament. Presenter: So that’s as far as it goes for her and that is that it’s traditional? Butler: Well far be it for me to speak for the Prime Minister but that’s been her public explanation and I think she’s been consistent about that. Presenter: Do you think it’s a bit lame though? Butler: Well, I think …. It’s not a view I share but there are a number of people in the Labor Party that take that view and a number of people who take a different view and we’re allowed to vote according to those views. Presenter: Christopher Pyne, is it the case? That there’s Party discipline on the issue of same sex marriage for Liberals? Pyne: Well, yes there is because we took the policy to the last election which said that we would not change the Marriage Act, as did Labor, by the way. Labor’s changed their policy and we’ve said that we will not change it in this term because when we make a promise, we keep that promise we don’t do what Labor did on the Carbon Tax for example where they promised they wouldn’t introduce one six days before the election and they did ten days later. Presenter: Do you think that same discipline should apply to the next term or, should the Party go to the election this time round and say in the next term, we’ll leave it to individual conscience. Pyne: Well, if a bill is presented in the next Parliament we will address it at that time. Presenter: No, you’re saying you’re bound by the promises you made at the last election campaign which is fair enough. This time around as you approach another election, so that you’re not bound next time should you say to the people we’ll leave it up to the individual consciences of individual MPs after the next election? Pyne: Well Tony Abbott’s made it clear that if a Bill is presented in the next Parliament that we will then discuss the issue of a conscience vote. I think the more interesting thing.. Presenter: No, no Chris Pyne, you can’t allow yourself to be hand cuffed this time around can you? Pyne: Well, we’re not hand cuffed now. The point is … Presenter: Well you are really because your saying we didn’t, we went to the election with a defined position and that is it wasn’t a conscience vote and that’s really your get of jail card, now to avoid that terrible situation happening again, if you regard it as terrible, and you support I think, gay marriage. Pyne: I support recognising same sex couples through civil union. Presenter: We haven’t got all day to go around that merry-go-round but you wouldn’t want, as David says, you wouldn’t want to be hand cuffed to that excuse again, I suppose? Why discuss it next time because what you could say in two years time is oh, well we went in to the election with the same policy we had the last election so this has just become one of those fulfilling prophecies. Pyne: Look we could be debating the number of angles on a pin. The point is there are massive issues facing the Australian public to do with cost of living, border protection, job security and economic management. This is an important issue particularly to some people who are very, very passionate about it on both sides of the debate. If there is a Bill presented in the next Parliament, we will then discuss whether a conscience vote will be given to Members of the Coalition, or not. I think the more interesting thing is... Presenter: But you’ll be bound by a position taken before this election Pyne: No because Tony Abbott’s made it clear that we will be discussing whether there should be a conscience vote or not, after the election if a bill is presented, which is different to the position we took to the 2010 election. Presenter: So you are softening your line? Pyne: Labor took the position to the 2010 election which was the same as ours, they changed that position in Government, the same way they changed their position on the Carbon Tax and so many other policy issues. Presenter: But I’m asking you about your position. Pyne: Well I think I’ve made our position perfectly clear, David. Presenter: Is it fair to say that your position is softening because there is some flexibility after the next election. Pyne: I’m not going to get into the processes of commentating in the way that you’d like me to do. I’ve outlined the position. It’s perfectly straight forward. The more interesting aspect of Kevin Rudd’s intervention is that it signals that he is back on for the Leadership challenge against Julia Gillard and my information from within inside of the Labor Party is that that is planned for June 3rd, in two weeks time. Presenter: You’re saying you’ve been told by somebody from within the Labor Party that Kevin Rudd will challenge for the Leadership in June? Pyne: That’s right, June 3rd. Presenter: Was this from an MP? Pyne: Well, I won’t say any more about that but I can tell you that my information has been very good and I was warned by this person two days before Kevin Rudd’s change of heart on same sex marriage that he would change his heart and make a public statement about it. I was also told that he would next make another interesting public statement, which I won’t reveal just in case I’m wrong about this in the next couple of weeks or the next ten days then he will challenge in that week of June the 3rd or on June the 3rd. Presenter: Mark Butler, what do you think? Butler: Ah, well I think that’s complete garbage. But I’ve heard no such thing. I think Kevin made the comments he’s made over the last couple of days because on reflection and particularly talking to other people, as he’s indicated, he has changed his views. I think he thought that was important to communicate to his electorate, the people of Griffith, not many of whom have strong views about this as Christopher said, in the community there are strong views on both sides but the idea that this has something to do with the leadership of the Labor Party I think is just ridiculous. Presenter: Oh well. June 3 is now in the diary, though and I bet it will be in yours. Mark Butler thank you. Butler: Thank you very much. Presenter: Federal Labor MP for Port Adelaide a federal seat. Minister for Social Inclusion. Chris Pyne thank you, federal Liberal MP for Sturt. Pyne: It was a great pleasure. Presenter: Thank you Manager of Opposition Business in the House. ENDS.