Transcript - Two Chrisses - ABC 891 - 13 Sept 2010

SUBJECTS: Labor's new ministry

Matthew Abraham: Now, Chris Schacht, former Labor Senator and former ALP State Secretary; I don't know if you're across all the details of the Gillard line up, but we certainly lose Penny Wong as Water and Climate Change Minister, but she does get quite significant rise in status to Finance Minister. But on that issue, I wonder whether we're going to be short changed in South Australia?

Chris Schacht: Well, I wouldn't think so. If the Federal Labor, whatever the new arrangements are, and I've seen them on the website; I notice we have an extra front bencher from South Australia and I have to say if any of them forgot that water was the number one issue for South Australia in the future, I'd be very surprised. So I don't think we're going to let anything slip, and by the way; Penny Wong by being Finance Minister is in a position to have a very strong overview because she's on of the most powerful ministers in the Government and I'd be staggered if Penny didn't have a major interest as both a minister from South Australian and her old portfolio of water.

David Bevan: Well, Phil Coorey from the Sydney Morning Herald was arguing that maybe having a Labor man from Sydney can do more to clean up the Murray than having a Labor woman from South Australia or Liberal/Coalition MPs from New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland because a Labor man in Sydney doesn't need their votes. What do you think, Chris Schacht?

Schacht: That is a reasonable piece of speculation. I think it's a matter of irrespective of who holds the position, if you're a Labor member from South Australia, whether you're on the back bench or the front bench, this issue is not going to go away. And if anybody from South Australia lets it slip, then you'll pay the political penalty. It doesn't worry me at all who is actually holding the title in the hand. The real issue is to ensure South Australia does well.

Abraham: But worried Penny Wong because during the election campaign she said that one of the strengths was that she was Water Minister and Barnaby Joyce was from Queensland and he's meant to be overseeing South Australia's interests and that wasn't good enough.

Schacht: I presume Barnaby Joyce is still on the land because after his performance ensuring that two of the National independents went with the Labor Government, I'm not sure Barnaby Joyce is worth anything for anybody these days.

Christopher Pyne: You sound a bit groggy, C1.

Abraham: It's two thirty in the morning over there. Give him a break.

Pyne: You need to have a red bull.

Schacht: No, no. I want to say, particularly to Matthew, that we were invited to dinner at the Vatican and on the way there I dropped a little note in the box on the door recommending you for a Papal Knighthood on behalf of all of us generous non-believers. And I hope that it comes through for you.

Pyne: You get it for patience for putting up with you (Schacht). In terms of the reshuffle; firstly, can I congratulate Mark Butler on being appointed a minister. He has the portfolio that I last had in Government in 2007, which was Minister for Mental Health and Ageing. And while my title was "Ageing", I also had mental health and I'm glad mental health has been recognised by giving it a title in the actual ministry because it is a very important health issue, and one that I've pursued for a long time. Congratulations to him, it's great to see a South Australian make their way up the greasy poll and I'm sure he'll do a great job on that greasy poll.

Bevan: But the mental health issues and the ageing issues are peculiar to South Australia, but water is. We have a particular take on the water issue.

Pyne: There are three stories out of this reshuffle, which I'd like to comment on. The first of course, is that the education ministry has disappeared, which is a shock and a surprise and I think a lot of people would be quite surprised to see education downgraded, especially the vice chancellors of the universities who're now called skills. And of course universities are much greater than a jobs factory. They are very important places of learning.

Abraham: Do you think it's just an oversight? Phil Coorey was saying, "Maybe they just forgot to put the word 'education' in."

Pyne: It could be just a stuff up; as they say if there's a choice between a conspiracy and a stuff up in politics, then it's usually a stuff up. That's possible, but we certainly won't make the same mistake in the Opposition.

Abraham: So the universities are covered under skills. There's no further education?

Pyne: No. They have a minister for jobs, skills and workplace relations.

Abraham: "Skills" are what they call schools in Victoria. So maybe it's the same thing.

Pyne: So we've got a minister for schools in Peter Garrett, but he doesn't have responsibility for the school hall program, which seems particularly peculiar.

Bevan: Who's got that?

Pyne: That is also in skills. In Jobs, Skills and Workplace relations and I think this is obviously because having failed to give away pink batts for free; Julia Gillard is concerned he (Peter Garrett) wouldn't be able to deliver the school hall program. She hasn't been able to deliver it either, but they have put that into a portfolio which has nothing to do with schools, which is particularly unusual. Higher Education is split between two ministers; Kim Carr is responsible for post graduate higher education and Chris Emerson is responsible for undergraduate higher education. The universities have really been slapped in the face by this reshuffle and they are quite rightly very angry.

But the second story is....

Abraham: Kim Carr is Minister for Innovation and Science.

Pyne: That's right.

Bevan: So he gets the post graduate portfolio.

Pyne: Apparently he's responsible for research and higher education, which is not clear from his title, but apparently we're supposed to divine that. But the second story is of course that the faceless men have been rewarded. Julia Gillard's latest broken election promise is that the faceless men wouldn't be rewarded. She said that at Rooty Hill when she was asked about it, but David Feeney, Don Farrell, Mark Arbib, Bill Shorten and Mark Butler; all the factional chiefs who executed Kevin Rudd have been rewarded and promoted to new jobs which they didn't have before.

Bevan: I think to be fair to Mark Butler, he said this morning that he was not thrusting the knife into Kevin Rudd. In fact, he was one of those people in the Labor Party who took a bit of convincing that the - the deed was done by other people, not Mark Butler. The butler didn't do it.

Pyne: (inaudible)

Abraham: Chris Schacht, have the faceless men been rewarded?

Schacht: I don't think so. I would expect when I was reading the website in the last 24 hours in Rome, the eternal city, that as the liberals sit on the other side again in Opposition thinking, "How did we lose, what am I going to say," to assuage their feelings of defeat and I thought this would be one of the lines they'd raise. None of the people Christopher's just mentioned, has he commented about the ability they've got to do the job. It's just that they happen to be in an area where they've been identified in playing a roll in changing the leadership of the Labor Party. The leadership was changed.....

Bevan: What kind of a Government do you think we'll get now?

Schacht: I think a very good Government, but the proof will always be in the eating of the pudding. And I have to say, the way Julia has negotiated with the independents over the last two and a half weeks clearly ran big rings around Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party to get together a minority government. It's the same as Mike Rann did in 2002, and we know that that went on to be a very successful government. So I think this is just nitpicking, as in the disappointment that the Liberal Party looks around and says, "How did we not end up in Government?"

Pyne: Let's move on from that C1. Talking about what happened in the last few weeks is very interesting, but people are more interested to talk about what's going to happen in the future.

Bevan: Hang on. Why couldn't you? Before we talk about the future, why couldn't your side cobble together an agreement?

Pyne: Well, we did what we thought was necessary to convince the independents.

Bevan: But if you look back, it'd be pretty clear in your mind, Chris Pyne, why you failed.

Pyne: Well, the two independents were never going to support the Coalition.

Abraham: They were just toying with you?

Pyne: We did our best in negotiations.

Bevan: But is that what you think, looking back on it now there's nothing you could have done to have won them over?

Pyne: Well, I'm quite sure that we couldn't have done any more than we did.

Bevan: Ok, so there's nothing more that you could have done. They were always going to vote for Labor?

Pyne: It's really a matter for them to explain those things. I think Tony Windsor's remark last week was kind of bizarre he was supporting the party which he thought was less likely to win an election. That suggested he didn't want the Coalition to be in power and if that's the case then maybe he never wanted to Coalition to be in power.

Bevan: But wasn't that really an insight into him prolonging his power.

Pyne: Yes, of course, but what the independents don't want is an election, because it will go from roosters to feather dusters when one side gets a majority. So therefore they chose the party that they thought they had more sway over, as in the party that would lose an election if it was called.

Bevan: So, you don't think it's because Julia Gillard and the Labor Party are better negotiators than you? You just think Tony Abbott was on a hiding to nothing?

Pyne: The Coalition offered very good packages to the independents on rural and regional education, health, transport and infrastructure etc.

Bevan: Was he on a hiding to nothing?

Pyne: Who?

Bevan: Tony Abbott?

Pyne: I don't know what that means. What do you mean?

Bevan: That he was never going to cobble together a deal. He was wasting his time.

Pyne: Who knows. I don't know what was in those men's minds. I think the most telling and indicative phrase was that we chose a party which wouldn't win an election, and therefore wouldn't go to an election. We told them we wouldn't have an election, that'd we go full term. But they obviously believed that we were in a better position than Labor - I don't know whether they're right or wrong - that we are in a stronger position electorally than Labor. That may be true. It may not be, but perhaps it's the fact that we'd just had a very good election result and they thought we'd just keep going. But who knows, every election is different. And I think they simply made the decision that they would be able to stay in their positions for longer if they kept Labor in power.

Bevan: This is C1 and C2 on 891 mornings and Jack from Semaphore. Hello Jack.

Caller 1: This is my first question to Christopher Pyne. I thought one of the things that... (inaudible) on Abbott during the negotiations was that he was refusing to allow the policy to go to Treasury. He didn't trust Treasury. And, I mean, I don't think that installed a lot of confidence. But, you know, its not all that long ago that we found that there were leaks coming out of Treasury related to the conservatives. A very high profile person lost his job within Treasury. So I'm just puzzled to hear why they went down that line.

Pyne: Well we could revisit every utterance of the independent's for the last two and a half weeks. My hunch is they've had quite a lot of publicity.

Bevan: No I think the question was why didn't your side willingly hand over your papers to Treasury for costings.

Pyne: Well because during the election campaign we gave, I think, 52 of our policies to Treasury for costing and when they started leaking that information to the press, the Sydney Morning Herald I think was the first leak which is actually a criminal offence, we decided that we weren't going to give them any more information, until the independents insisted that apparently this was a very important part of their decision-making process that we give our documents to Treasury so we did.

Abraham: And when you did Treasury found a big hole in it.

Pyne: Well Treasury had a difference of opinion with the Opposition about assumptions and data and so on. But, I mean, I will point out that Treasury estimated that the mining tax would cost $12billion and after it was reduced in the deal with the big three miners it was apparently going to collect $20billion. So I'm sure Treasury are wonderful people and they're very good but you know there are 'lies damn lies and statistics' I think is the saying.

Bevan: Glen Evans is Visiting Fellow of Politics at Adelaide Uni. Good morning Glen Evans.

Caller 2: Yes good morning Matthew, David and two Chrises.  Before I ask my question of Chris Pyne I would just like to mention that counting is actually still going on in some seats and the two party preferred vote Labor's currently ahead on 50.08% or around 19 000, a bit over 19 000 votes. My question to Chris Pyne is, he is very critical of who the Labor Party has chosen for the Ministry and quite dishonestly in some cases calling them faceless men. So my question to him is if he thinks they're no good who in the Labor Party does he think will do a better job?

Pyne: Well Glen if you're a visiting academic at the University you don't sound very non-partisan. So I hope your students are fully aware of your strongly biased views. I think that Labor has chosen a frontbench that rewards the faceless men because Julia Gillard had made that arrangement with them the night they executed Kevin Rudd. And that is old-style politics. People can disagree with that all they like but Mark Butler is the head of one of the most powerful unions in South Australia, well now of course no longer, he is now a member of parliament, Don Farrell was head of the other.  Those two men make all of the decisions about who gets preselected in this state essentially for state and federal politics and that is how they run the Labor Party. Bill Shorten, obviously head of one of the most powerful unions in Australia, was quite public about how easy it was to execute Kevin Rudd. They found it amazing when they pushed the door there was nobody standing on the other side. David Feeney as well. So you know its quite straight forward that they are the factional leaders of the Labor Party and they have been rewarded.

Abraham: Chris Schacht, you going through a few rosary beads there in Rome?

Pyne: A bit of Holy Water for you Schachty.

Schacht: Look all I can say is Chris Pyne, quite rightly very understandable, expressing the frustration of losing and that happens to us all in politics from time to time and we know what comes around goes around and here again the Liberal Party through whatever reason could not negotiate themselves into Government despite the fact that they had three independents sitting that they always claimed in safe, in what would normally be, safe conservative Liberal or National Party seats. And that frustration is really starting to show. It will mean I think over the next few months the real problem will be how Tony Abbott handles and manages that frustration as it bubbles up in different places. One prediction I always made was despite Abbot's successful campaign in winning a number of seats, had Malcolm Turnbull been leader of the Liberal Party I think he would have negotiated an outcome with those three independents from rural seats that would have put them into government.  Abbot couldn't do it, I think Turnbull would've.

Bevan: Now Chris Pyne, why did Andrew Robb have that rush of blood to the head, when you talk about faceless men, and contemplate, had to be talked out of challenging Julie Bishop?

Pyne: Well I think Andrew, I haven't discussed this with Andrew, but I think there was some people pressing Andrew to take a step forward for the deputy leadership. I think the wiser heads prevailed and it was explained to him that we wanted to continue with the leadership team that had got us from what looked like losing 22 seats last December to winning more seats than the Labor Party. And we've been a very successful team, not just Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop, but the entire Shadow Cabinet and the Parliamentary Party in general and we would not be seeking to change that. He obviously within a short space of time got that message and withdrew.

Bevan: Chris Schacht, how do you reckon that was conveyed?

Schacht: A broken arm is how it was conveyed, by a very quick snap of the lower arm... (inaudible).

Abraham: Chris Schacht, because we are going to quickly run out of time. We touched on this briefly with you on the day that the deal was finally clinched for Labor and that is that if the next three years is successful for Julia Gillard will Labor be in a bit of a bind because it will show that the Greens can be trusted with a position in the lower house, that they can be part of a coalition and that Labor's left wing could leak or leach across to the Greens and the Greens could come out of this very well. Labor obviously wants to do well in the next three years but they could be in a bit of a bind.

Schacht: That's a reasonable piece of speculation. My own view is that if the Government performs well and continues to perform well in the economy and handles a number of issues that are reasonable for normal Labor supporters to say the Government is doing a good job. They're running a good campaign on issues that are the strength of the Labor Party, they have been for a hundred years. I do not think the Greens will keep all those votes who drifted from Labor to the Greens this election whether its in the House of Reps or the Senate. Though I can't imagine, I have to say the way the Senate works is the Greens will have the balance of power outright I think for at least six years but in the House of Reps I think all those will come back to Labor if the Government performs well and the Labor Party will be able to have a comfortable majority.  And then (inaudible)... the Labor Party should not, even if it gets an absolute majority, go back on the what I think are very decent parliamentary reform that have been agreed and now, including with the Liberal Party, and I think that will actually make it better for the Labor Party to go to the next election with those reforms working well.

Bevan: And Christopher Pyne you leave us at the start of a new era. How do you think its going to play out, particularly the Labor Green coalition?

Pyne: There's two things I'd say about that. One, I hope that the Government does govern well for the good of the country and we will hold them ferociously to account as an opposition. Number two, I think its good that the Greens are now going to be properly scrutinised now that they are in the balance of power in the Senate and they may have wished too much and got what they wanted. I think they are going to find that the public will recoil in horror when they realise what the Greens really stand for. The Greens are a protest party, there will always be a place for a protest party in this country but I noticed only on Q&A last week, another very good ABC program, that one of the audience was asking Christine Milne about all the taxes that the greens have on their website: death taxes, inheritance taxes, property taxes - none of which were explained. But the Greens will now come under greater scrutiny and that will lead to a, in my predication, a diminution of their support.

Abraham: And I think this is a statement from Bill Shorten's office to the Disabilities Sector in relation to the appointment of a designated person in the Gillard Ministry with responsibility for disability. I can advise that Senator Jan McLucas will be Parliamentary Secretary for Disability.

Pyne: That's not what it says.

Abraham: No that's what his office is saying. There is no mention of a Parliamentary Secretary for Disability in the list.

Pyne: It might be another one of those mistakes they've made.

Abraham: As you may be aware, he writes, Sentator McLucas has vast experience in disability having served as Shadow Minister for Ageing and Disabilities from October '04 to June '05.

Bevan: 6 months.

Pyne: She came to a rather sticky end in that portfolio but you can go away and research that and discuss it without defaming anybody at some future point.

Abraham: Thank you. And the Shadow Minister for Ageing, Disabilities and Carers from June '05 until December '07, Senator McLucas was responsible for drafting much of the ALP's '07 election policy in relation to disability and carers which form the basis of the Labor Government's significant reform and achievements in the portfolio during its first term. So Bill Shorten is saying that most of the achievements were not his work but Senator McLucas' work and she is now going to be the Parliamentary Secretary for Disability even though that is nowhere in the list that has come out from the Government. That looks like its going to be fixed up. And Chris Schacht, thank you for talking to us from Rome, former Labor Senator and State Secretary, and Chris Pyne.