Radio Interview, ABC RN Breakfast

SUBJECTS: Defence cooperation with NZ; AUKUS; Australian Submarine Agency; NRL in the Pacific; Australia-PNG relationship; Hamas-Israel conflict. 

PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: The Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister have been across South Asia and the Pacific this week for diplomatic and defence talks. It is an increasingly sensitive and tense time in the region which our leaders are trying to navigate. I spoke earlier with the Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister, Richard Marles. He's in Auckland where he and Minister Wong are meeting their New Zealand counterparts. Minister, welcome to the programme.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Good morning, PK. how are you?

KARVELAS: Good, thank you. You're in New Zealand. New Zealand is struggling with its own defence budget. There are reports they're looking for savings of $360 million. Are they pulling their weight in our defence relationship and is that the right decision during this strategic competition time?

MARLES: Well, we work really closely with New Zealand. There is no country in the world with whom we have greater trust. New Zealand literally is family. And so whatever New Zealand spends on defence, whatever we spend on defence, our focus is looking at ways in which we can use that trust as an asset, integrate ourselves more, do more collectively so that we get a better bang for our buck, if you like, we get a better quality out of the spend that both of our countries make. And we're taking really big steps down the path of working much more closely together, planning together, thinking about how we can procure material together, operating together. And that makes sense. And it means that for both countries, we get the most out of what we spend on defence.

KARVELAS: And given AUKUS is such a focus of ours, and we will get to AUKUS proper in a moment, are you talking about AUKUS with New Zealand? I mean, there have been comments, for instance, New Zealand's Labour Party has said they would not sign up to AUKUS, the former Prime Minister, Chris Hipkins, says he wants to remain nuclear free. Is this on the agenda?

MARLES:  Well, AUKUS, Pillar II – so not the submarines, but the other component of AUKUS, which is around looking at innovative defence technologies – we are talking to New Zealand, as we are talking to Canada and Japan and Korea around whether there are areas in respect of Pillar II, not the whole of it, but on a project by project basis where it makes sense for us to work together. And there's interest here, none of this is about to happen tomorrow, but we are exploring what kind of research and innovation is occurring in New Zealand, what capability there is, where we might be able to work together. But at the end of the day, New Zealand is a Five Eyes country, we have great strategic trust with them, they're also a highly capable country and so over the longer term, it makes sense that we would collaborate on developing innovative defence technology, which is really at the heart of AUKUS Pillar II.

KARVELAS: I want to move to AUKUS proper, if we can, and have a substantive conversation about it. You've appointed former senior defence and security bureaucrat Dennis Richardson to conduct what's been described as an urgent top to bottom review. What's the review about and why Dennis Richardson? What do you want him to do?

MARLES: Well, we're now three years into AUKUS, three years since it was announced, and the Australian Submarine Agency, which has been in place since July of 2023, really evolved out of the taskforce that was established three years ago when AUKUS was first announced. So, we feel that now is the right time to have a look at ASA, check that we've got all its settings right. We're asking ASA to do a really big thing and they have done a great job up to date, up till now. Importantly, we are meeting our timelines and our milestones. This year, the maintenance tender of the USS Hawaii was really the big activity and that went very well. You know, we're seeing the development of HMAS Stirling, which is where the Submarine Rotational Force-West will be based in Rockingham, south of Perth, that's all going along well. But not everything is perfect with ASA, it would be astounding if I was sitting here talking to you today saying that it was. And so we want Dennis to have a look at this in a short, sharp way, kick the tyres if you like, just check to make sure that we've got everything in the right place and to work out where we're not going as well as we should. And I'm ultimately confident that we are going to succeed in the task of acquiring this capability. But part of that confidence is because I know that we will apply a method of scrutinising ourselves to the highest degree possible, holding ourselves to account, understanding where we're doing well, but where we need to do better. And really that's what we've asked Dennis to do. And in terms of why Dennis, I mean, Dennis is a former Secretary of Defence, Secretary of DFAT, Dennis is a very accomplished and esteemed former public servant. And so there's really no one better to have a look at how a new agency, which is being set up, is going.

KARVELAS: Yeah, he's certainly very well regarded, there's no doubt about it. Look, the agency's Deputy Director-General was responsible for this policy implementation. David Hallinan quit after raising concerns about how the agency was run and he was pretty dissatisfied with the response he got. Is this linked to this and why were his concerns dismissed?

MARLES: Well, look, I'm not about to go into the individual circumstances of David Hallinan, but the answer to the first question is no, this is not linked to that. Really, we are at a moment in time, three years down the track, if you like, from when AUKUS first started, but coming up to almost 18 months of the existence of ASA proper, we are asking it to do a really big job. Like, if you look at agencies in our counterparts in the United Kingdom and the United States, in many ways, ASA is doing what similar agencies would be doing in those countries and more in terms of operating, doing the fundamental procurement, establishing the joint venture with BAE, but also all the infrastructure around both HMAS Stirling and Henderson. So, it is a big job. We want to make sure that we're on the right track. I think there's a lot that's going well, I do think that there are areas where we could be doing better and it's really that which led us to think that it is a good time to be kicking the tires, to seeing what more we can do, make sure that we are getting it all right and to do this with the spirit of not being defensive, if you like, that everything's perfect, because that's never going to be the case, but actually the opposite: making sure that the method that we apply here is to engage in complete kind of ruthless scrutiny of ourselves, to make sure that we are doing this in the best possible way. And that's really why we've got Dennis involved.

KARVELAS: There's a few other questions on other issues I'd like to ask you. PNG's Prime Minister has said his country's bid to join the NRL doesn't hinge upon a security pact. But we know that government sources have actually said negotiations would see China blocked from gaining a military foothold in PNG. Can you clarify?

MARLES: We work closely with Papua New Guinea in relation to our defence cooperation, the security of both of our countries. PNG is a very close friend. I mean, it's obviously a sovereign country and has its rights to have the relationships that it wants to have with any other country and we're very clear in the way in which we engage with png, that of course that's the case. But we are, you know, we focus on our relationship with Papua New Guinea. We want to be the security partner of choice, and we believe we are the security partner of choice. And there's lots of incidences of that, not least of which is our relationship–

KARVELAS: So, let me ask specifically– 

MARLES: Our defence relationship, but– 

KARVELAS: But is deal linked to a security arrangement that would stop Beijing from gaining a significant police or military presence in PNG?

MARLES: If we're talking about the arrangement for an NRL team based in Papua New Guinea, this is a long held dream of both Papua New Guinea and so many of us who have worked with PNG over many, many years. When I was the Parliamentary Secretary for the Pacific back in 2010, this was on the agenda then and very much an aspiration of the country and it's something that we have wanted to try and facilitate, and we’re really pleased– 

KARVELAS: Is it just about sport, though or is it also about security?

MARLES: It's fundamentally about support and it's about the cultural affinity that our two countries have. Rugby League is a massive issue, or massive passion, I should say, in Papua New Guinea and across the relationship, be it security, be it cultural engagement and sporting engagement such as this, we want to have the very best relationship that we can possibly have with Papua New Guinea. And building our affinity and building upon our affinity is perhaps a better way of putting it, with PNG is the way in which we should be engaging in our bilateral relationship with PNG, and that's what we're doing here. And we also work very closely in terms of security matters with PNG. And affinity, if we take that as a guide, forms a part– plays a part in that as well. I mean, when you look at– 

KARVELAS: So, there is a link?

MARLES: When you look at the defence relationship that we have with PNG, the comfort, the ease which Papua New Guineans have in terms of doing so much of their defence training with the Australian Defence Force is in large measure to do with the cultural comfort, the affinity that they have with us. So, we are building the relationship across the board and be it defence, be it culture, be it sport, be it human development in education and health, you know, that's how we're navigating our relationship with PNG.

KARVELAS: Just finally, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, the office of Benjamin Netanyahu has strongly criticised your government over what it says is a retreat in support for Israel and the promotion of Palestinian statehood at the UN, where of course, there has been a recent vote where Australia had previously abstained and now you've taken a different view. And he suggests, or the office suggests, representing Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli government, that Australia may no longer be a key ally of the Jewish state. How do you see it? Are you a key ally or does this show a departure?

MARLES: Well, we remain a close friend of Israel as we have been–

KARVELAS: But are you a key ally, or is this the– is there a different position? Because that's how they see it.

MARLES: Well, we're a close friend and we don't see that there is any change in our friendship, our relationship, our support for Israel. Nor PK is there any change in our support for pursuing a two state solution, that's been the bipartisan policy of our nation for decades. And the way in which we vote in the United Nations seeks to give expression to that. There are in fact many resolutions in the UN around Israel and Palestine. In terms of how we vote in the whole suite of those, we do so really trying to give expression to a view that we very much support Israel, but we support a two state solution and that ultimately does mean the establishment of a Palestinian state. And the way in which we vote, we do so consistently with friends and allies. I mean, we vote often with the United Kingdom, with countries like New Zealand, countries like Canada. So, if you stack up our voting record against those countries, you see significant consistency in the way in which we vote in the United Nations. But fundamentally we are absolutely a friend and a close friend of Israel. But we do support a two state solution and there's nothing new in that. We've supported that over many, many years. And again, if you look at the voting record on any specific vote, you'll see that what we're doing is consistent with governments of the past as well.

KARVELAS: Well, it's not consistent. You have changed your voting. 

MARLES: Yes, but votes do– 

KARVELAS: You might make that argument that it's the right thing to do, that's different. But it has changed.

MARLES: Yeah, but votes change back and forth over a whole suite of resolutions in the UN over time. I mean there are votes that we are doing now which are consistent with what John Howard was doing, for example. So, I mean, I think the important point to make here is that what we see to do in the United Nations when you step back and you take it as a whole, is yes to support Israel, but to support a two state solution. And that has been the position of government in Australia over a long period of time.

KARVELAS: Ok, in these comments that have been provided that I'm seeking a response to, it's been described as ‘disappointing’ the position Australia has taken and the UN would– the vote at the UN would undoubtedly invite more terrorism and more antisemitic riots, including in Australia. Is that the consequence?

MARLES: Well, I don't accept that at all, obviously. And all we are doing, as I've just said, in expressing our voice in the United Nations is to support Israel but is also to support a two state solution. And we've been doing that over a long period of time and we do that consistently with other countries in the world who are friends and allies of Australia. And and so I absolutely don't accept that proposition. You know, our responsibility here is to try and use our international voice in that way. We're not changing from the idea that there should be a two state solution and all we're doing is giving expression to that in the United Nations.

KARVELAS: Thank you so much for joining us.

MARLES: It's a pleasure.

ENDS