TRANSCRIPT - RADIO INTERVIEW - ABC RN BREAKFAST - TUESDAY, 8 FEBRUARY 2022

E&OE TRANSCRIPT
RADIO INTERVIEW
ABC RN BREAKFAST
TUESDAY, 8 FEBRUARY 2022

SUBJECTS: 2022 election, Parliament’s workplace culture, pairing arrangements, religious freedom legislation, anti-corruption commission.

PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: Tony Burke, welcome.

TONY BURKE, SHADOW MINISTER FOR INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS: Great to have you back in the press gallery.

KARVELAS: Anthony Albanese is clearly worried about a repeat of Bill Shorten’s election campaign three years ago. But has any government ever come back so close to an election to snatch victory from defeat at this point? Could you really lose it from here?

BURKE: Games have been lost in the fourth quarter before. And that's what Anthony reminded us of yesterday when the caucus met. We take absolutely nothing for granted. And I think it wasn't just ourselves but plenty of commentators were burnt on election night last time, thinking that our position was going to be stronger than it was. We are taking nothing for granted and spending every moment we can making sure we're working through our plans and communicating them.

KARVELAS: Parliament will open today with a statement acknowledging the bullying, the sexual harassment and assault that occurred in the building. How important will the gesture be to the victims of Parliament's toxic workplace culture?

BURKE: I'm concerned that we may fall short of what we'd hoped because of the COVID restrictions at the moment. It would have been better if we could have been able to send invitations to the various people who've been public who’ve been harmed through the culture here. It's not our decision as Labor, it’s the presiding officers who’ve had to weigh up, is it better to delay or not delay? The statement needs to be made. But there's going to be more work to be done given that with COVID restrictions it's not going to be the sort of moment that it should have been.

KARVELAS: Does acknowledgement go far enough? Should it be a fully-fledged national apology?

BURKE: I wouldn't object to there being a bigger apology. As I've said before - I'm not sure if I've said it when I've been interviewed by you - but there's not a single culture in this building. This place runs as more than 400 small businesses effectively and you get different cultures in all of them. And some of them, people have loved working here and some of them have been toxic and horrific. And this building should be the model of a good workplace, no matter which office you end up working in. So you know, that's what it needs to be. And it is a failure that we've had the extraordinary stories that we dealt with last year.

KARVELAS: On the religious discrimination bill … well actually I just want to ask one other question before I get to that. just on the pairing for going to the Grace Tame and Brittany Higgins speech. Will Labor be providing pairs to the government so that their MPs can go to this?

BURKE: There's 12 pairs automatically already. The government haven't requested any extra ones. If they do, of course we’d give them. It's the same approach that we had when the March 4 Justice was out the front of the building. This is not a moment where we want anything other than people being able to attend. So we've already shown where we're willing to do that. And I'm not sure where … I know there's a bit of a knee-jerk blame Labor from Mr Morrison in how he likes to brief things out but they haven't requested any pairs. And our record is we're not going to play games with something like this. It's an important day.

KARVELAS: All right, moving to the religious discrimination bill that will be before the House today. Labor has now seen the amendments. Do they include greater protections for gay and lesbian students but not transgender pupils? It seems to me, I've got a confirmation there from Simon Birmingham that the transgender student element will be continued in the review, only gay and lesbian students will be in?

BURKE: Well, first of all, I'm not sure that we have seen the final amendments. The last I'd been briefed on, which was only yesterday, was that the government would not be able to provide the final form of their amendments until after they'd had a further meeting. Now, I don't know if that's right or not. But that's the latest that I've heard. And so we've been waiting for there to be a final government position before we can then respond to it. In terms of the specific example you gave, the Prime Minister previously said he would end discrimination for all students. And he should be true to his word on that.

KARVELAS: Okay. The government would send off the transgender question for review by the Australian Law Reform Commission, that would take at least 12 months. Would you accept that?

BURKE: It's not for me to offer the acceptance in this interview but I'll simply say what I said a moment ago - the prime minister said he would end discrimination for all students.

KARVELAS: Full stop, not just on the basis of sexuality.

BURKE: He said he would end it for all students, that that's what he said, full stop, and he should be true to his word.

KARVELAS: Could this be a political tactic to wedge Labor? Force you to oppose the bill so the government gets to campaign on religious freedoms at the election?

BURKE: Most of what Mr Morrison does is a political tactic and wedge politics, that is how he behaves.

KARVELAS: So if that, let's accept, although I don't have evidence of it, but let's accept that that is the strategy. What's your response? Are you prepared to stand firm and not support this bill, not give your support for this bill, if it continues, for instance, to discriminate against transgender students?

BURKE: Whatever final form it's in the bill will involve a mix of issues. And we need to work through those. And one thing that I think is important to make clear, particularly, you know my part of Sydney probably has the highest level of religious observance in the country. And so a lot of people will be unaware of examples where people do get discriminated against because of their faith. There are no shortage in particular, Islamic women, but not limited to Islamic women, you'll find different examples of Orthodox Christians as well. A series of examples where people do get discriminated against in awful ways where currently they have no protection. The example that I often give is if a woman is walking down the steps at Lakemba Train Station and is vilified because she's Arabic she has legal protections. If she's vilified because she's Muslim, she does not. That exact sort of example, the Prime Minister referred to in his speech introducing the bill. It turns out that clause isn’t in the bill. So we were trying to work out what the final form of this will be like.

KARVELAS: Okay, okay. The government has just informed me that Labor has absolutely been given and briefed on all the amendments. They say you are across the changes.

BURKE: Well, I can only tell you what I was told yesterday: that we were still waiting for a final government position. Now, if that's what they've proposed, or what they've decided on, I don't know the answer to that. But when caucus met yesterday, we were not in possession. So we had our meeting where we normally go through legislation, we were not in possession of the final changes.

KARVELAS: But later you weren't briefed? After caucus met?

BURKE: Well, I've told you what I'm aware of.

KARVELAS: Okay. They argue something different.

BURKE: If what they've said is accurate, if what you've just been told is accurate, then that means we've been provided with them less than 24 hours ago and we have to work through them.

KARVELAS: Okay. And if you have to work through them, we know for some time now, but the statement of belief that some think will be used as a sword. Are you concerned about the statement of belief and how it may be used? And are you willing, are you prepared not to vote for it? And then to actually stand firm if you think it's actually gone too far?

BURKE: Look on that specific issue and the issue of any of the amendments, that's something that caucus will work through when we had the final amendments. From what you've described, that might not be far away.

KARVELAS: On the federal ICAC, the PM has appeared to contradict the Attorney General by saying that there may still be time to legislate a Commonwealth integrity commission. But is there any point introducing it for debate given Labor has ruled out supporting it, which is the government's explanation for not bringing it on in the first place?

BURKE: I wish their rule was only to bring forward legislation if we support it because I'm not sure that this is normally how they operate. They will find any excuse they can to not clamp down on integrity. And why wouldn't they? The last thing they want is an anti-corruption commission. The model that they put forward, basically allows ministers to get off scot-free. And when you're a government that has been engaged in sports rorts, carpark rorts, that spends $30 million on land that's worth $3 million, it's no surprise they don't want an anti-corruption commission.

KARVELAS: Okay. You could have one if you supported their model.

BURKE: That wouldn’t give you an anti-corruption commission. An anti-corruption commission also has to rope in ministers. And there one doesn't. When Helen –

KARVELAS: It gives you something. It perhaps gives you more than we have at the moment, right? There's something up that you could support?

BURKE: Look as Zali Steggall referred to, there's a majority on the floor right now to debate Helen Haines’ bill. That's there, right now. If the government wants to have an anti-corruption commission, there's a piece of legislation before the Parliament that forms the basis of that debate. There'd be amendments to it, there'd be argument about it. But the reason that they have found every excuse for delay is they don't want an anti-corruption commission.

KARVELAS: Tony Burke, it's been a pleasure to speak to you. Thank you so much for coming on the program in person.

ENDS