14-September-2008
Portfolio Media Releases, Foreign Affairs, Personal
Topics: Peter Costello, Liberal Party Leadership, WA State Election, the Prime Minister's overseas travel, Government's bid for UN Security Council seat, Government's ban on uranium sale to India.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Andrew Robb, good morning, welcome.
ANDREW ROBB: Good morning Barrie.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Peter Costello there talking about staying beyond 2010. You wouldn't want that, would you? Would the Liberal Party want that?
ANDREW ROBB: Look my assessment Barrie is that Peter effectively has ruled out the leadership. He did it after the election. Nothing I've seen since, privately, publicly, or even this week, has changed my view on that. Secondly, he's got no long term future as a backbencher.
So it's very clear in my mind that there will be no resurrection. I think he will pull up stumps and we've now got to move on the next generation and get on with the job that we're paid to do.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Why do you say he has no long term future as a backbencher? That is because that's the view within the party?
ANDREW ROBB: Well, I would assume he would see he's got no long term future. I mean having been the steward of the economy for 12 years and having done such an outstanding job, having left such a huge legacy, it's, in my view, inconceivable. He has no long term future as a backbencher.
And I think what he said after the election, in other words that he is looking to another career outside of politics, I think that is still the prevailing view. And I think he really has in all sorts of ways, despite a little bit of wriggle room, which may owe a little bit to the sales pitch that's going on this week, I think in effect he has said this week that he will be moving on.
BARRIE CASSIDY: And the sooner he moved on the better?
ANDREW ROBB: Well it, the timing is, you know, somewhat at his discretion. I think it is appropriate for him to be satisfied where he's going and also to put some distance between the book and any movement out of politics.
It's his call on that front. But the main thing is that I think for the colleagues who accept that we can't be held captive to a messiah complex. We've got to move on. I think he has said enough privately and publicly to indicate that he is moving on and we need to get on with it now.
BARRIE CASSIDY: So you seem to accept that there would be some destabilising factor if he was to stay on the back bench and that at the very least it would be a reminder of what might have been, and you don't need that.
ANDREW ROBB: Well no, I don't think it's, you know if, it is his call and if he's there on the back bench, if we have psychologically moved on, accepted that he's going, I don't see a problem in that sense.
The point is we now need to you know, to give Brendan in my view some clear air. He has earned that. I mean, there are some people out there who have enjoyed the soap opera of the last few months and are urging us to entertain another soap opera. Well, we shouldn't do it, you know. Brendan I think has earned the right to demonstrate with some clear air his effectiveness as a leader.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Now the memoirs have got a lot of attention obviously, but what is happening right now in the Liberal Party is far more interesting and far more important than any retrospective about Peter Costello and whether he was denied the leadership in the past.
ANDREW ROBB: What do you mean Barrie? What...
BARRIE CASSIDY: Well by that I mean that you've got a leadership crisis going on in the Liberal Party right now and surely that is what the party should be focusing on rather than what occurred some 12 months ago.
ANDREW ROBB: No, no, what we've had now is several months of speculation about Peter Costello's intentions and given, you know, the qualities of the man, the record of the man, the history, it has overwhelmed any opportunity for Brendan to make his own mark on things.
Now I think we've got to move on from that. He has deserved the right to show his stuff, to show how effective he can be as a leader, and if he does increasingly show his effectiveness he will get support.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Okay, so he's on trial I think is what you're saying. What's the benchmark? What's the timetable?
ANDREW ROBB: Well we're always on trial. We're always on trial. Look, there's no timetable on these things. These things become obvious. I mean I think if Brendan has this opportunity and can demonstrate an increasing effectiveness as leader, he will have strong support. If he struggles with effectiveness I would say to you he would be the first person to identify that but he needs to be given this opportunity.
BARRIE CASSIDY: But how do you measure that effectiveness? Does it in the end come back to the polls - a 16 per cent preferred prime minister is not good enough; 43 per cent two party preferred is not good enough?
ANDREW ROBB: Barrie, polls and all these things, they help you with these sorts of judgements but it is a question of judgement and people do know, and Brendan will know himself, right? So I don't see a problem with that.
The thing is we have to get off his back, you know, get away from the messiah complex that often has plagued our party and allow him a chance, with all of us doing our job, to, you know, pin Labor to the wall. They've been now in office nearly a year. It's all talk and no action. We've got an enormous opportunity and a responsibility to keep them accountable and expose their lack of readiness come into office and their lack of leadership under Kevin Rudd.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Okay, in Laurie Oakes' column yesterday a suggestion that you're the only person in the party who can guide and influence Malcolm Turnbull. Do you have that sort of relationship with him?
ANDREW ROBB: I think Malcolm would find that a bit of an odd statement. But I've got a good relationship with Malcolm, known him 20 years. He's got a similar relationship with many other colleagues in the Parliament. So no, I don't accept that.
BARRIE CASSIDY: If he was to be leader the suggestion is you would be shadow treasurer so that you could keep an eye on him.
ANDREW ROBB: Look, I'm privileged to have the job that I've got. I think our whole focus, including mine and Malcolm's, must be on giving Brendan the opportunity to lead us and lead us effectively and, you know, that is our priority. We start entertaining other hypotheticals, we're doing ourselves a damage.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Now you talked about the messiah complex; Peter Costello talks about a cult of personality or a cult of leadership and that's been devalued in his view. Is that simply because this class of 96 was essentially in awe of John Howard and he put them there and therefore they remained loyal to him right to the end?
ANDREW ROBB: Look Barrie, I'm really not that interested in history. Look, in any organisation anybody who is there and is overwhelmingly effective for a long time, as John Howard was, they will demand and they will attract great loyalty, great respect.
And, you know, the fact of the matter is in hindsight, the population said that we'd run our race and John Howard had run his race. But you could see the dynamics of how what happened, happened within the party. And it's true of any organisation, not just in politics, in business or in bowling clubs...
BARRIE CASSIDY: But it's not just raking over history though because for a while there seemed to be this almost obsession with your preselections that you went for the average Joe rather than the sort of party professional. I suppose Jackie Kelly was the best demonstration of that.
Did you get the balance out of whack? Is it time to start looking again for some more professional politicians?
ANDREW ROBB: No, that's not, that was a great strength of ours. One of the reasons that we I think were so effective for 12 years - and I suspect when people look back on that period it will be seen as a golden age - one of the reasons is that in the party room we had all shapes and sizes. We had people from all sorts of backgrounds.
We didn't have a whole lot of suits, you know, from politics as the other side of politics has got. That's why they are not, they've got no sense of where to go with policy, what to do. They've got no certainty. That's why it's all talk and no action. There's no decisions been taken in nearly 12 months of office. I put to you it's because they know their politics; they don't know their community. They're not of the community like our party room has been.
It's a great strength of our party room and one of the reasons we were so successful as a government.
BARRIE CASSIDY: How big a shock will it come to the Liberals and the Nationals around Australia if Brendon Grylls does a deal with Labor in the west?
ANDREW ROBB: It will be a huge shock. To suggest in my view that there is any sort of natural fit between the National Party and the Labor Party is farcical. And I just assume and desperately hope that in the end principle will come into this.
I mean here you've got the Labor Party, the only reason this whole issue is being discussed is because the Labor Party is on its knees in Western Australia. It's been corrupt, it's been a disaster, it's been directionless. It has stripped regional Australia of money and seems a great irony that now the National Party might even entertain some sort of fit with the Labor Party.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Okay on some of your portfolio responsibilities now. And uranium sales to India - how do you think the Government has handled that up to this point?
ANDREW ROBB: Barrie, this is a scandal that has gone under the radar and it's going to cost Australia billions of dollars.
Stephen Smith, has come back last night or the night before, is misleading the Australian people.
India is profoundly upset and annoyed at the fact that we are refusing to sell uranium to them for clean power nuclear generation. Now we are urging other countries - a sort of a touch of the Colonial stuff here - after 100 years of humiliation we are now saying to India: You can buy it from somebody else and you should but we don't trust you with our uranium.
And it is going to affect our relationship. It's going to cost the Australian community billions of dollars. And it is only because of internal, grubby internal Labor politics. There is a deal being done not to sell uranium to India and the national interest has not been considered.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Now on Kevin Rudd who is off overseas again next Sunday to the UN and part of the important business is to try and have Australia sit on the Security Council.
The former minister Robert Hill seems to think that Australia is well placed to win that bid.
ANDREW ROBB: Well, firstly at what price? I mean we made a clear eyed judgement in 2004 about a pitch for a Security Council seat and the view was we would have to change a lot of policies in regard to Israel, our support there, other issues in Africa in order to get the numbers out of the 192 countries. So firstly what price? They never answered that question. How many consuls and embassies will we have to set up unnecessarily to attract the vote? These are the sorts of issues that need to be discussed.
But before that, Kevin Rudd, he's been away 50 nights. John Howard at this same time had been 18 nights away in his first year of office. Kevin Rudd needs to get some runs on the board in Australia, deal with the pensioners, deal with other issues before he starts to again strut the world stage preaching to others and, you know, putting aside his responsibilities back here in Australia. To miss the Parliament for a week in his first year of office is just, you know, it's totally inappropriate, it's unacceptable.
BARRIE CASSIDY: But you say at what price - according to Robert Hill they are off to a flying start I think because of the, as he says, the ratification of Kyoto and the apology to the Aborigines. Both initiatives were noticed internationally.
ANDREW ROBB: Well, good. I'm pleased that they're noticed internationally. I'm sure it will have some impact. It doesn't answer my question. There's 192 nations - all sorts, all shapes and sizes. Our assessment based on professional advice from the same people that are advising the Rudd Government was that just three years ago, that we would not be able to secure the numbers without severely compromising important, often bipartisan positions, on some of our relationships around the world; and we would spend $30 to $40-million opening up unnecessary consuls or embassies around the world.
BARRIE CASSIDY: So it's not worth it in your view?
ANDREW ROBB: Well that was the view in 2004 based on the professional advice. Now if they're going to make this huge effort we've asked a quite legitimate question: Why is it different now three years later? Why is it different? And they haven't answered that question.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Okay, we're out of time. Thanks for your time this morning.
ANDREW ROBB: Thanks Barrie.