Transcript - ABC 891 Two Chrisses - 20 July 2009
29 Jul 2009
Transcipt (greetings omitted)
Matthew Abraham:
... Christopher Pyne ... have a look at this ... page two of 'The Australian', Mia Handshin who pushed you to within 100 votes in your seat -
Pyne:
It wasn't 100 votes, it was 1,711.
Abraham:
Not that you're counting! Let me rephrase that...
Bevan:
And you've tracked down the names and addresses of everyone ...
Abraham:
... she's reduced you to one of the most marginal seats in the nation, how's that? There she is playing with her little bubby, her little child in this quaint little romper jumpsuit thing and wow, 'Star candidate offered another try. Don Farrell, leader of the right, has said if she wants to have another go in Sturt, bring it on, she's got it.' How do you feel about that? Nervous?
Pyne:
No, of course not. How I feel about it is really neither here nor there. I think one of the mistakes that people make, especially aspiring candidates, and some MPs is they think it's all about them and they don't realise it's actually all about the electors in the electorate of Sturt or whatever electorate you're representing, whether I'm the candidate or the Labor opponent is the candidate. Essentially the person who is the member for Sturt should be the person who can best represent the electors and puts them first, not their own ambitions or their own opportunities in life. So I'm not in the least bit worried about that. Labor will choose a candidate, good luck to them. People make the mistake of thinking in politics that the last election will be the same as the next one but I remind people that at the last election Labor said they wouldn't touch private health insurance. Of course that didn't happen, they broke that promise, they'll return to that after the next election I'm certain. They said they'd be fiscal conservatives before the last election. In 2010 we'll have $315b of debt and a budget deficit. So, you know, the last election is over, the next one will be fought on different grounds and I'll be reminding people that Labor promised them a lot of things before the last election which they haven't delivered and in Sturt that's had a real impact on people because 72% of people in Sturt have private health insurance and yet they've been hit very heavily by Labor.
Abraham:
Chris Schacht, what's your assessment of the seat of Sturt? It's at 1% but there's always a theory in politics that that's probably the high water mark. You get your big swing to win the seat, that extra 1211-and-a-half votes or whatever it is...
Schacht:
It's 850 to 900 votes if it's changed and there's a new ... if Chris isn't ...
Pyne:
856 votes precisely (unclear) to change...
Schacht:
... and that's not accounting for a couple of your dead people you got to vote as well!
Pyne:
... if I didn't know you I'd demand a retraction! But knowing you as I do, that's one of the milder insults I've had to put up with!
Schacht:
... I've lived in Sturt my whole voting life in South Australia and we've only won it once, '69 to '72. We won it by a couple of hundred votes. The problem for the Labor Party, and the advantage to Chris and the Liberal Party, is that the southern end of the electorate takes in what we call tiger country, Burnside, and that shows a very small propensity to swing either way - good years and bad years it always delivers 70%, 75, 80% of the vote and that's the base in which the Liberals can always hang on. And it hasn't changed that for 30 years. So, as much as I would like to see Labor win the seat, irrespective of whether Mia's the candidate or not, I'm now after 30 years ... not very sanguine about being able to always say we can win the seat. We can always run it close in a good year, we can run it close again next time but if we really wanted to win the seat I would hope that at the next redistribution all the areas south of the Parade in the electorate was chopped off and given ... over into Mayo or something. Then we would have a classic marginal seat that could be held like Kingston by Labor in good years and probably by the Liberal Party in their good years. At the moment Sturt is one of those seats that is tantalisingly close but always tantalisingly.
Abraham:
So you don't think you'll...it's hard...
Schacht:
It's always hard. We had a very good Federal result last Federal election, and the best result we ever had in the State in South Australia since 1943 was the '69 Federal election, and we won it by a few hundred votes. We've never repeated the '69 Federal result in South Australia in Two-Party-Preferred terms ... First Preference terms, until we do we won't win the seat. When we win it for one term, a bit of a swing back, and we lose it.
David Bevan:
Talking about the eastern suburbs, I heard again, now this is just scuttlebutt but speculation about Mike Rann moving to Norwood, Vini Ciccarello's seat.
Schacht:
What, to stand as the candidate?
Bevan:
Well he's lived there for many years...
Schacht:
Well Vini's been re-endorsed for the Labor Party for the next state election. Doesn't mean to say that at some stage she might like any endorsed candidate choose not to run again. I haven't heard any of that. I've actually heard that story two years ago before, or even three years ago, that Mike Rann could be a candidate in Norwood because that's where he lives et cetera. I would have to say if I was the Premier and had a choice between Norwood and his own seat our in the Salisbury area -
Pyne:
Do you remember the name of his seat? We're talking about Ramsey, isn't it Ramsey?
Schacht:
Or was it Taylor? Ramsey. Why would he? He holds that seat comfortably, he services that electorate very, very well.
Pyne:
They're missing out a bit in Ramsey, aren't they? Because you couldn't even remember the name of the seat because the people in Ramsey haven't seen their local member as much as they've seen him in Norwood.
Schacht:
...he services the area very, very well. That's one thing he does do irrespective of where he lives. And I would just think if you're the Premier, come the State election you've got to campaign all over the state in all sorts of seats and if you're running in a marginal seat, which Norwood is...therefore, you're tied down a fair bit. So I think it's better for the Labor Party that he stays the Member for Ramsey, stands there and campaigns across the state as the Premier.
Pyne:
I think certainly Vini Ciccarello is feeling the pressure in Norwood from our candidate there, Steven Marshall, who's a very successful Adelaide business person and lives locally and is doing a very good job. I'd be surprised if Vini gave it away because -
Schacht:
I'm not saying that she is, I'm just saying that's what would have to happen.
Pyne:
But certainly Steven Marshall's campaigning...
Abraham:
She stared down Nigel Smart.
Pyne:
But there was a 9.8% swing across metropolitan Adelaide in that election and in Norwood it was about 3%. Well that means that in fact she didn't do very well, quite frankly. I mean the swing should have been on average it should have been close to 10% and Nigel Smart managed to hold it down to about 3%. So she didn't do very well at all.
Abraham:
She held the seat.
Pyne:
She held the seat but the swing should have been three times higher.
Schacht:
But the demography of Norwood is gradually moving against the Labor Party as more and more of the old working class shift out or actually unfortunately die out. And so areas like west Norwood and Kent Town that used to be very strong for Labor have now got, you know, young professional people.
Pyne:
If you keep the names of the people who died you can always vote for them Schachty.
Schacht:
Well that's your trick, not mine.
Pyne:
Maybe now we're even?
Abraham:
John from Port Pirie. Hello John?
Caller John:
... I'd like to bring to both your guest's notice, this September 20th Pension increase that we were promised? The Government has said that it will give the Single Pensioners $32 a week increase and combined married couples $10 increase, but I rang Centrelink last week and the $10 a week that aged couples are getting is actually all our allowances and supplements rolled into one, paid weekly instead of quarterly and weekly. And the $32 that the aged Single Pensioners are getting includes that $10 so the combined couples aren't getting an increase and the aged single people are only getting $20 instead of $30.
Pyne:
John, it's a very interesting point you've made and I'll go away and ask our Shadow Minister for Families and Community Services, Tony Abbott, to have a look at the facts that you've said, we'll get the transcript of this program. Because you do have to watch the slide of hand from Government with respect to pensions. What you're really saying is that potentially people could be worse off because rolling of the allowances and it raises another interesting point. People in my electorate have been saying to me people from the Housing Trust houses and they'll loose a lot of the percentage increase anyway because the State Government will take it in terms of increased rental.
Schacht:
Well I'm not an expert on the issue that the gentleman's raised but in view of the fact that you'll get you Shadow Minister, I'd invite Matt and David to get the Minister.
Pyne:
Jenny Macklin?
Schacht:
... to answer the question that we'll quite rightly put.
Abraham:
... onto China and Chris Schacht, I think you do business in China?
Schacht:
Try to do business in China. The talk is always interesting and after I saw what happened to Mr Hu from ... Rio Tinto -
Pyne:
You'd be checking your papers regularly.
Schacht:
I was going to think cautiously go back next time but -
Pyne:
If you get arrested I can't promise I'll come and visit you. I'll send you a card.
Schacht:
I have to say I'll call on the Attorney-General of South Australia to use his well known .
Pyne:
Yeah, well Mr Atkinson will certainly leap to your defence immediately I'd assume.
Schacht:
To get me out of the country.
Abraham:
I'd just avoid going there if that's going to be your fall back option. However, Chris Schacht ... maybe because there are Labor Governments in power at state and federal level there do appear to be quite a lot of Chinese connections in terms of business with the Labor Party and yet not much influence when it comes to bailing out somebody who's been - well, I don't know if he's been charged yet but certainly is being held, detained.
Schacht:
Well first of all, there are a lot of Australian businesses, large and small, the interest I've shown in China is in business, it has nothing to do with the State Government. And though I've been ... paid for it and gone on trade delegations from South Australia led by the Premier and by other Ministers, always on my own efforts or my own company's efforts and that's what trade missions are about. Now, I have to say I think is dead right to say that no matter how close you think you are, the Chinese system, it's a one party state, it's been like that for about 5,000 years whoever happens to be leading the place, Emperor or ... this is the way they run the place and the Chinese have a very ... it's a cultural thing in my view ... that the country's strategic interest is seen as one and they have yet to separate how we in the west separate economic and political ... you've got to understand the country you're dealing with.
Abraham:
So if you were gathering information on your competitor's prices in a normal Western democracy, that's normal.
Schacht:
Normal. But in China...
Abraham:
... it's a crime against the State! Or it could be, because the corporation's State-owned.
Schacht:
State-owned. And they can use the interpretation. I remember when I read the Human Rights delegation to China in '91 we were told in Shanghai in one year there were 16 000 prosecutions for Middle Offences and only 2 pleaded Not Guilty because under their system, it ... if you plead Guilty, you probably get a lesser sentence. You'll be found Guilty no matter what the initial charge by the police, that's it. Or by the Security Bureau...what's it called? So you have a system that's been there culturally. That the State, or whatever you want to call it, sees everything in a total picture, and it is fair warning that you've got to understand the country you're dealing with just as we'd expect that when they come to our country they'd understand our rules.
Bevan:
...the problem seems to be that the rules have been unclear... That it's been a little fuzzy.
Pyne:
The rules change.
Schacht:
The rules change. Let me give you an example: years ago, the Chinese Government had a rule, or a particular rule about tariffs. Three-quarters through the year they discovered that their income from tariffs was under-budget. So without warning to anybody, the just said that the tariff for the remainder of the year would go up by 20%, and if you happen to have your stuff half way through the Chinese board that was bad luck. No argument. No appeal. You just paid it, or you lost it. That's a system in China that is gradually changing, they have signed up to the WTO and other International organizations but it is a cultural change that is going to be slow in that country and I think that happened to Rio is a warning to everybody that you've got to take a different approach when you're doing business in China.
Abraham:
Chris Pyne?
Pyne:
Thanks Matthew, I think it's an interesting ... Schachtty's covered the aspect of China and business, but what I think is interesting from our point of view in Australia is it's a classic example of where spin seemed to suit the Government at the time. The Federal Government was happy for the Australian public to think that because Kevin Rudd had mandarin Chinese and all these relationships with China, people like Tony Burke, Minister for Agriculture, was travelling back and forth to China regularly before the last election and many other Ministers, Joel Fitzgibbon's involvement with Chinese business people and the list is virtually endless. Because of this connection that they all had with China, that the public would get a special treatment, that the public would be special beneficiaries of special treatment from the Chinese Government. What we've actually seen here is reality hitting and spin in the Stern Hu case because the Chinese Government are treating Australia no differently to any other country or any other people regardless of their relationships that the Prime Minister apparently had in China. It's exposed that Labor's very good at spin, but when it comes to substance, the substance did not match the rhetoric and I think it's tremendously embarrassing for the Prime Minister and that's why it's been an issue for at least ten days, it's constantly in the press, because the media had been led to believe, the public had been led to believe that there was a special relationship. There's a man who's been arrested, I think you're right I'm not certain that he's been charged, after two weeks in prison and yet Kevin Rudd has not been able to make any dent at all on simply getting facts and information! I mean, we're not asking for Mr Hu to suddenly be released, what's been asked is that the information be provided and that he be charged and poor Simon Crean went to Shanghai to meet with so-called 'high level' people and he met with a deputy-bureaucrat somewhere - it was very embarrassing for Australia that the Chinese Government treated the Australian Government with such contempt. I think it highlights that Labor's good on spin and very short on outcomes.
Bevan:
Chris Schacht, is it a reality check?
Schacht:
Well I think that any dealing with China has always got to be dealt with in reality but one of the things that's got to be understood here, Australia under John Howard agreed that China should be treated as a free market economy. A lot of experts said 'hang on a moment, too much of the economy is...'
Pyne:
... Labor supported it.
Schacht:
...but John Howard made the big jump that China should be treated as a free market economy ... people said 'hang on, a lot of the economy's managed by the Government. All the banks are owned by the Government for example in China. This is not a way to move at this stage, because it's not a genuine free market economy'. And what we've seen in this present case is that we're still emphasis ... in China about the definition. Everybody knows that, about whether it's commercial or whatever, the Chinese have a system that enables interpretation from when it suits them for political reasons, for economic reasons, and I don't think we should be holier than thou in Australia...
Bevan:
...you can't blame John Howard for ... Rio Tinto is a private company.
Schacht:
...Australia told China 'we now treat you as a free market economy'.
Pyne:
That's no excuse for Stern Hu being arrested and not being charged.
Schacht:
... it's the (unclear) coming from the Opposition that we're not doing enough. ... When you were in Government you were happy to treat China as an open, free market economy. What you're now saying is that it's not.
Pyne:
No, no. That's not what I just said. My criticism is that Kevin Rudd built up the expectation that ... the perception that he was some kind of globe-trotting , world renowned international Mandarin speaker. Most people in diplomatic circles realize that when Chinese diplomats come to see you, they all speak English perfectly. Most of them bring an interpreter and the interpreter speaks English and the diplomat continues to speak Chinese. It's part of the diplomatic speak, if you like, to try and maintain a distance. Kevin Rudd went to China. Went to Beijing. Spoke to the University students in Chinese, was really parading himself around as this Mandarin Chinese speaker who knew everybody. Completely breached many of the ...kind of unspoken but understood rules of diplomacy where you maintain a distance. And now of course, the rubber's hit the row. Mr Hu needs the representation of the Australian Government and Kevin Rudd has no more impact on the Chinese Government than any other country of a comparable size or...
Bevan:
... but it sounds like it wouldn't have mattered what he did.
Schacht:
... well I can say ... that's the point ...
Pyne:
The vision he wanted the Australian people to have (unclear) I have a special relationship, I'm Mr Modern Australia. The truth is that he has no impact on the Chinese Government whatsoever on this Hu case and it's tremendously embarrassing.
Schacht:
The perception is that ...
Pyne:
... not to mention that poor Mr Hu's family ...
Schacht:
When Kevin Rudd spoke in Chinese on several occasions, he does speak fluent Chinese, Mandarin. And when he spoke at the University students in Beijing he actually made some pointed remarks about a more open system. He made criticism ... the Chinese didn't broadcast that. Of course! We all know that's the system. But what the Chinese are doing there to protect their national economic interest. What has happened, whether half of Australia spoke fluent Mandarin or not, including Malcolm Turnbull and you and me, they are making decisions about their economic interest and if they have to do what they are now doing to do that - don't be surprised, it will continue.
Abraham:
Christopher Pyne, you're not suggesting that things would be better for Mr Hu if Kevin Rudd ordered Chinese by numbers rather than by using (unclear)? 49 and 52 and 60 - don't lock up any of our business.
Pyne:
What I'm suggesting is ... No, I haven't even come close to suggesting that Matthew. That's a serious misrepresentation. What I'm saying is that the politics of it in Australia is that Mr Rudd at one point wanted to spin his Chinese speaking as this would give us a special relationship with China. When the rubber's hit the road, and Mr Hu needs representation, that the reality is that Mr Rudd has no better relationship with China than any other World Leader in fact John Howard had a better relationship with the United States and China based on mutual professionalism, I'm saying than Kevin Rudd has managed to achieve precisely nothing for Mr Hu.
Abraham:
... Mike from Manningham wants to make a point. Hello Mike.
Caller Mike:
Good morning. I find the sanctimonious viewpoint of the Opposition on the locking up Mr Hu without legal representation etc etc absolutely scandalous. I can remember back to a young Adelaidian being incarcerated in Cuba for three or four years and the then-Liberals couldn't have given a damn about him, rotting in hell.
Pyne:
That's simply not true. We made representations to the United States Government, we met at the most senior levels. The suggestion at the time was that ... the facts aren't entirely with me, but the Prime Minister spoke to George Bush himself, certainly on a (unclear) ...
Schacht:
... so he was saved by his electoral skin ...
Pyne:
... Alexander Downer spoke with the Secretary of State. There were constant representations to the United States Government.
Schacht:
And the Indian Government ...
Pyne:
... successful ones at that.
Schacht:
... case was on. The Indian Government protested that no, he'd been held without charges being laid against him for 10 or 11 days and now we've had ... that is true. I think that is true. So no country is willing ... a clean pair of hands on some of these issues. I would point out that other Australian businessmen have been held in China. Have not been able to leave the country. They haven't actually been arrested. Had their passports withdrawn, and they can't leave the country for several months until a commercial dispute is resolved. That has happened to other Australian businesspeople from time to time.
Abraham:
You wouldn't be drawing a parallel between the David Hicks situation though would you? I mean, he pleaded Guilty to material support for terrorism!
Pyne:
... Mr Hu hasn't exactly been pleading Guilty to providing material support to terrorist organizations. That's quite a different case, but...
Schacht:
... I would point out that Mr Haneef was held for a number of days without being charged and the Indian Government protested ...
Pyne:
...our friend from Manningham was talking about David Hicks.
Schacht:
I know, I'm just saying that there is a range of issues that we've always got to be very careful if we're holier than thou, to use a religious term, because somewhere everyone will find a case where we haven't been perfectly good.
(ends)