This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2018/nov/08/malcolm-turnbull-on-qa-former-pm-in-first-interview-since-leadership-coup-politics-live

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Malcolm Turnbull on Q&A: leadership plotters 'effectively blew up the government' – politics live Malcolm Turnbull on Q&A: leadership plotters 'effectively blew up the government' – politics live
(35 minutes later)
Next question – and my notes just say ‘Ash’ so I apologise to the questioner for shortening his name: Natasha wants to know about Trump:
Upon your resignation, you mentioned how some strong voices from 2GB and Sky News After Dark had directly influenced parliamentarians andcatalysed the insurgency. Has this shaken your faith in traditional forms of media? The US mid-term election results have just come out. It looks like the Democrats have taken the House, which means President Trump’s power has been reduced. I’m aware that you were able to establish a working relationship with the US, despite all the hardships, difficulties and controversies. However, would these results - and the further difficulty for Trump to pass laws and bills - what do you think that will mean for Australia?
Turnbull:Turnbull:
No, it hasn’t shaken my faith in it but, having said that, I’ve been involved in the media business now for well over 40 years, so my expectations are very realistic. Well, look, I think the Australian relationship with the US is very, very strong. Presidents and, indeed, prime ministers - particularly prime ministers - come and go. (lols)
The media has always played a role in politics. Media players - be they editors or proprietors or commentators - have always sought to exert power, and there is no doubt there was a very consistent campaign waged against me by a number of outlets - you mentioned 2GB, that is one, obviously, Sky News After Dark - doesn’t have a very big audience, but... Perhaps a little more often than we’d like, in the case of prime ministers...! But the relationship is very, very strong.
(more laughter) You know, President Trump and I had some... ..ah, tough moments. But I was able to achieve the outcomes for Australia that I needed to achieve, and that was - you know, that’s my job. I mean, when you’re dealing with foreign governments - as the Australian prime minister - you are the advocate for Australia. You’ve only got one client - that’s Australia.
Turnbull: Well, it doesn’t. It doesn’t. And...
Tony Jones: You include The Australian as part of the News Limited empire? Tony Jones:
Turnbull: Some parts of the News Limited empire - not all of it. Many of the tabloid newspapers were supportive of the government when they thought we were doing a good job. They weren’t sort of consistently seeking to undermine it. But I’ll give you an example. Are you relieved that Trump’s power has been reined in somewhat due to these mid-term results?
One of my colleagues from Queensland - a man who has been a good friend of mine in the past, and I’ve helped in the past - he explained why he was supporting Peter Dutton to me. And he said,
“The problem is with my branch members, my LNP branch members.” He said, “Every night, the commentators on Sky News and during the day, Alan Jones and Ray Hadley, are having a branch meeting with them.”
Essentially, he felt he was being pressured by his branch members, and he felt he couldn’t resist that pressure.
Now, the problem is - and this is a fundamental problem that the Liberal Party faces - in order to be successful as a political movement, you have to win votes from the centre.
The Liberal Party, to succeed, has to be a broad church.
And that means that it has to, you know, represent people with liberal views and people with more conservative views. That was Menzies’ broad church - how it’s talked about and so forth. That is being frayed. And what we’re seeing is voters saying to the Liberal Party, “You are not liberal enough.”
Now, we should reflect on this, and the part - my party, the party I joined in 1973 - has to reflect on this. There are three really safe - formerly really safe - Liberal seats: Mayo in South Australia, Indi in Victoria, Wentworth now in New South Wales - my old seat.
All in very different areas but, forever, have been safe, conservative seats, safe Liberal seats.
They are now occupied by three Independents who are all women, who are all small-L liberals, and all of whom, in one way or another, have been involved in the Liberal Party in the past, either as being members of the Liberal Party or as having worked for Liberal Party members - and sometimes both.
So what that’s telling you is that the voters are - through voting for these Independents - saying, “We are concerned that the Liberal Party is not speaking for small-L liberal values, for genuinely liberal values, and therefore we take the matter in our own hands and we put in a liberal Independent.”
And that’s what you have in those three seats.
But he has no evidence Scott Morrison’s backers were pressuring people to join the Peter Dutton coup.
His very quick answer on that – that he has no information and no one has told him - may leave some people in doubt though.
Quickly, chiming in from the sidelines.
Malcolm Turnbull is making his intentions clear this evening.
No one’s sensibilities will be spared.
Removing him remains an act of madness.
People need to account for their madness.
Turnbull never imagined cabinet ministers with grave responsibilities would move against him, the prime minister.
(He was warned by friends, actually, but never mind that inconvenience.)
Turnbull wishes Scott Morrison all the best, because he’s “dealt himself a very tough hand of cards, and now he has to play them”.
It’s take no prisoners.
But Toby ( I think) isn’t quite satisfied with that answer:
I find that really doubtful. Do you think people become prime minister by accident, speaking from experience?
Turnbull:Turnbull:
Well, it certainly wasn’t an accident on my part, but … I’ve made a practice - certainly when I was prime minister, and I think I’ll maintain it for a while yet - of, ah, not running a commentary on the politics of other countries. So, you know, the Americans have got their own democratic processes. I think some of our institutions are better than theirs.
(Laughter) But they’ve made a decision, and you’re right - the whole US Constitution is based on checks and balances, and it is very common in mid-term elections for the House to flip away from the governing party.
Then he gets down to it. Kavi is up next on right wing and populist politics:
Look, what happened was that the insurgents – Dutton, Abbott, supported by Cormann, Fifield and Cash and Hunt and Ciobo and Michael Keenan and Angus Taylor – there’s along list of them – they effectively blew up the government. My question is - do you have any regrets about bringing in the double-dissolution, which emboldened the extreme minority in the LiberalParty, as I think? It just took a handful of extreme elements in the Liberal Party to wreak so much havoc. In your opinion, how do you think we - as a country - should curb or stop this right-wing populism that seems to be growing in the rest of the world? How do you think we should - what should we be doing to stop and curb it right away?
And that created a situation of enormous instability. That created the – what happens in a party room, to be clear about this – is that people become frightened, and they become intimidated and bullied. More applause:
And they’re frightened that the destabilisation is going to continue. And so there are some people who would have voted for the spill not because they wanted me to stop being prime minister, but they wanted the destabilisation to stop. Turnbull: It’s a good question, Kavi. I think the most important thing is to respect each other. The challenge within the Liberal Party is that the increasingly - you know, the right-wing and, of course, where you draw the line there - I think we know who you’re talking about -
Now, my view is – you do not give in to bullies. You don’t give in to that intimidation. And I never have. But it is – and you’ve heard all the accounts, there’s so many accounts from people at the time - but that was the environment. More laughter
But, really, in terms of answering why they did it, why they blew up the government of Australia, why they overthrew the prime minister – who was, as we were saying earlier – our government was in a competitive position, doing well – in fact, we were doing the best we had done since the 2016 election, as it happened. Maybe they were worried we’d win the election. Maybe they were not worried we’d lose it – maybe they were worried we’d win it.
Next question!
Thank you for your service anyway, prime minister. Former prime minister, I do apologise. I want to know – what role did the prime minister play in your ousting? Is ScoMo a Steven Bradbury, or Niccolo Machiavelli?
(Laughter)
Turnbull:Turnbull:
Um... ..well, look, he... I take Scott at his word. ..are not prepared to accept the consensus. You see, the fundamental premise of a political party is that you have a group of people with different backgrounds and different points of view and they meet, and they debate issues, and then they reach a consensus and they say, “Alright, we’ll go along with it.” “It’s not exactly what I want or I don’t entirely agree with it, or I disagree, but I’ll go along with it.”
The insurgency was, ah, was led by Peter Dutton, was obviously strongly supported by Tony Abbott and others. Ah, Scott did not support it. Ah, and he’s said that publicly. So … by Steven Bradbury, I assume you mean he took advantage of a situation that was created by others. What you’ve seen increasingly from the right, even if they’re not in the majority, they’ll say, “If you don’t give us what we want, we’ll blow the show up.” That is intimidating and that is bullying, and that was at the heart of the coup back in August.
Well, I suppose, you know, that is how he’s presented the circumstances himself, and I’m not in a position to contradict that or question that.” That is a real threat to the Liberal Party. Whether it’s within the Liberal Party or within the nation, mutual respect is the foundation of ours - the most successful multicultural society in the world.
Jones: “You don’t look back at that moment where he put his arm around you...and professed openly his loyalty, only to become prime minister two days later?” Let me give you some good news, though, about why we are better off than the Americans in terms of politics.
Turnbull’s expression makes everyone laugh. Firstly, we have compulsory voting. It’s a very good thing. Because that means that you don’t have to run off to the extremes to energise, you know, your base. Everyone has to vote, and political debate is won and lost in the centre. And political parties that overlook that, as I said earlier, are at a real risk of losing. You win in the centre.
Turnbull: “Well, he’s very tactile and friendly.” Tony Jones:
More laughter. So shouldn’t you have governed from the centre?
And he’s only human!
MORE laughter.
Please send your thoughts and prayers to my colleague Gareth Hutchens who is being forced to listen to my every vocal explosion during this episode.
But has this killed off the government’s chances of staying in government?
Well, look, I mean, I wish Scott all the best … in the election. I really do.
(SCATTERED LAUGHTER says TVeeder)
No, look, he has – OK, let me put something on the table right at the outset. There is a media narrative which goes like this: “Prime minister is deposed by his colleagues. The deposed prime minister then goes off and plots to bring down his successor and overthrow him”
The media will write that story whether the facts fit it or not. Now, what I have done is quite the opposite. I have left the parliament. So I can’t be a threat to Scott Morrison or anyone else.
I’m not even in the parliament. I’m not in the party room anymore. I have had – as you observed at the outset – little or nothing to say since I gave my farewell remarks in the prime minister’s courtyard.
In fact, of course, which were well summed up, as so many people have written to me to say – I’ve had hundreds and hundreds of letters, many of which have been very moving, but one common theme was that our grandson, Jack, spoke for the whole nation at the end of my speech.
After that, I’ve had very little to say. And I’ve done that deliberately because I wanted to give Scott all the clear air to do his own thing. He has dealt himself a very tough hand of cards, and now he has to play them. But he’s the prime minister, and he has to get on with it.”
Milly is next and wants to know; with the benefit of hindsight, could you have done anything differently to protect yourself and your position against agitators such as Peter Dutton or Tony Abbott?
Turnbull (yeah, probs, but also, maybe not?)
Ah … Well, I’m sure there would be, but I’m not sure what that would be. I mean, you know, I ran a very traditional cabinet government. It was very consultative. You know, I’d learnt from my first time as leader in opposition, I’d learnt from the example of predecessors as prime minister, so I ran a very consultative cabinet government, and I don’t think anyone argues with that.
So we followed process and made sure that we had an inclusive process. So, for example, with the national energy guarantee – it had gone through the cabinet at least three times, it had gone through the party room several times … I was very careful to make sure that I brought the party together. One of the most important things as leader is to keep the party together. But obviously, if people …”
Jones: “You have cabinet ministers who voted against you in the first spill.”
Turnbull: “I know …”
Jones: “How much of a shock was that?”
Turnbull:Turnbull:
No, I did not anticipate that people would act – particularly cabinet ministers – would act so self-destructively. But I did.
You know, Paul Keating had a great saying – I think it was Jack Lang’s originally – that in the great race of life, always back self-interest, because you always know it’s trying. To put it another way – people will normally act in their own self-interest. Jones:
They might get it wrong, of course – they might be mistaken as to what’s in their self-interest – but it was so obvious that the coup, the insurgency that occurred in the last part of August – it was so obvious that it was going to be destructive, it was so obvious that there was not going to be any upside to it – and of course that’s what’s turned out – it never – it really never occurred to me that senior members of the government - particularly people with such solemn responsibilities – you know, Peter Dutton’s the home affairs minister, responsible for Australia’s national security, for heaven’s sake - domestic security. ..and earned your back on these small group of conservative whose seemed to dictate so much of what happened in terms of policy?
Mathias Cormann – the leader of the government in the Senate, Greg Hunt, the health minister, Steve Ciobo, our trade minister ... More applause
Jones: “Who you promoted into cabinet?”
Turnbull:Turnbull:
Sure. And there’s plenty of others. But it never occurred to me that those people would act in a way that was going to be so damaging both to the government, to the party and, frankly, to the nation. I mean, stability is very important. And disturbing that stability should only be done with a very clear justification and a very clear purpose. And even then, it carries risks.” Well, I’m not sure what they - I don’t know what they dictated in terms of policy. I mean, ultimately you could say they dictated a leadership coup that saw me out of my job as PM.
So, Tony Jones wonders, do you know of anyone who voted against you, who now regrets it?
“Ahh... Well, I couldn’t possibly comment...but look,” a relaxed and reflective Malcolm Turnbull says.
The audience laughs, because he wants them to, but Jones is ALL BUSINESS:
So, that’s “yes” but you can’t say so...?
Turnbull:Turnbull:
Look, the reality is, people have got to be adults and be accountable, OK? And so, when you elect someone to be a member of parliament, you’re impose in them a very solemn and very sacred responsibility. And they have to stand up and be prepared to say why they do things, why they vote for things. And so, the people who chose to act in what I thought was a very -it was madness - a very self-destructive way, to blow up the government, to bring my prime ministership to an end they need to really explain why they did it. And none of them have.” Well, that’s a pretty big one.
Basically - you did this people. SO SIT IN IT. Jones:
Tony Jones jumps in with a follow up: Well, it is, but the policies - and I certainly did have a policy of remaining prime minister...
At your last press conference in Canberra, you referred to the polls, you said you were just behind in the published polls. Even more laughter!
Turnbull: Yep.
Jones: But in your own polls, you were a little bit ahead. At a speech in New York, you said the internal Liberal Party polling showed you were four points ahead in 40 marginal seats.
Turnbull: Yep.
Jones: Did the party room have that information?
Turnbull: “Well, everyone knew about it. It was - just to explain to everyone - the published polls - whether it’s Newspoll or the Ipsos poll or, you know, the Essential poll that you see in The Guardian - they are all polls of the whole nation. What political parties do is they poll the marginal seats, because that’s where the elections are decided.
So, we typically poll 40 marginal seats - the government’s 20 most marginal seats and theOpposition’s 20 most marginal seats. So the seats you need to hold and the seats you want to win, basically. So, in our own polling, we were - in the August poll, August track, which is what we call it - we were 52-48 ahead.
And in the published polls, as everyone knows, we were 51-49 behind. Which is effectively level pegging. So there’s no question the government was doing well. We were thoroughly competitive. And we were in a position where we had every chance, every prospect, of being able to win the election.”
Turnbull:Turnbull:
Well, thanks, Steven. And that’s the question I can’t answer, of course. The only people that can answer that are the people that engineered the coup – people like Peter Dutton and Tony Abbott and Greg Hunt and Mathias Cormann – the people who voted for the spill. So, there are 45 of them. ...but my - in terms of the policies I delivered, they were consistent with what we took to the election.
Most of them are well-known – there are no bones about who they are. They have to answer that question. I can’t answer it. From my own point of view, I described it at the time as “madness”. All of the points you made are right. No-one accused me of breaking an election promise. Literally. But can I just another point?
The economy was strong. It’s one of the things I’m most proud of – when I became prime minister, I said I would deliver economic leadership. In the 2016 election, I campaigned own delivering jobs and growth. And we delivered both - record jobs growth. Our House of Representatives electorates are determined independently by an Electoral Commission. So they’re not gerrymandered the way so many of them are in the United States, where so many of them are gerrymandered so they either can’t possibly be won by the opposite party - that means, in order to get the preselection to win the primary, again you’ve got to run off to the extreme. So I think, for those two institutional reasons alone, I think our democracy is more focused on the centre than it is in the US.
The strongest jobs growth, in fact, in our nation’s history. Strong economic growth – the envy of the developed world. By any measure, we’ve achieved enormous economic progress. Andi is up next and she gets applause for her question:
You know, great achievements in the trade arena internationally – I’m sure we’ll come to that. Good evening. What would your young self make of your efforts as prime minister of Australia and your failure to stand up and do something to prevent the humanitarian disasters of Nauru and Manus?
So you’re right – the government had achieved an enormous amount – much more than I thought would be possible, given that we didn’t have anything like a majority in the Senate – we were in a minority there – and we only had a one-seat majority in the House. Turnbull:
So I was very proud to be able to do as much as I was as prime minister, and I want to thank, again, the Australian people for giving me the opportunity of leading this remarkable nation for nearly three years, and I want to thank all of my colleagues for their support that enabled me to achieve so much. Well, given, Andy, that the young are always very critical of the old, I’m sure my young self would find plenty of shortcomings in my old self.
But as to why a number of them chose to blow the government up at the time they did – you’ve really got to ask them.” Tony Jones: Moral shortcomings?
Steven opens up the questioning – he tells Turnbull he didn’t vote for him, but thanks him for his public service. Turnbull: Certainly not.
Labor would be very happy with this question, given they have been asking it every question time since 25 August: I’d just say this to you - what I was able - my goal as prime minister, with respect to the people that the Labor Party - Kevin Rudd - had put on Nauru and Manus - was to get them resettled, but in a way that did not get the people-smugglers back in business.
Australian politics can be a brutal futile business. It seems the day you become prime minister is the day you come close to becoming an ex-prime minister. So, given that the economy is ticking along nicely, unemployment rates are at decade-long lows, business confidence is high, and a chance of the mythical budget surplus next year, can you answer the question your apparently accidental successor is unwilling or unable to answer: “why aren’t you still prime minister?” There was not one successful people-smuggling expedition to Australia during my time as prime minister. Not one. So on that score, I was successful. I was able to negotiate a deal with Barack Obama to resettle refugees from Nauru and Manus into the United States - rather controversially, and with some, ah, difficulty, I was able to hang onto that deal with President Trump - and, at this stage, between 400 and 500 people have been resettled.
He’s in a suit. So cross that off your bingo card. So they are being resettled, so my track record, as far as Nauru and Manus is concerned, is - I kept the boats stopped, I did not put anybody on Nauru and Manus, but I ensured that hundreds were taken off and resettled without getting the boats started again.
No tie though. Because – casual. But, obviously, now the job is Scott Morrison’s, and what Scott has to do now is manage it and continue that momentum. And I know he has the same commitment and the same goal that I did, because Scott has huge experience in this area - he was Immigration Minister - and he knows what needs to be done.
Now it is on ABC News channels and also News Radio I believe, and for my peeps in Queensland – try ABC24 But the one thing you don’t want to do is get the people-smugglers back in business, because we know what happened under Labor, and it’ll happen again. You had 50,000 unauthorised arrivals, and you had at least 1,200 deaths at sea.
Leigh Sales has said her good evenings and we are minutes away. I don’t want that to happen again, and I don’t think anyone else really does. We’ve got to keep people safe, and we owe it to the people seeking to come to Australia to ensure that they come through the proper channels. We’re taking 15,000 or so refugees a year through proper channels. We took 12,000 additionally from the Syrian conflict zone. We have one of the most generous humanitarian programs in the world. But the only proviso is that the Australian government determines which refugees come into Australia - not thepeople-smugglers.
Get that popcorn cooking. I think that’s what Australians expect.
Malcolm Turnbull has also updated his personal website – when you’re looking for statements from the 29th prime minister in the future, you’ll find them here. This will be a long one, so bare with me.
And for those wondering if THE leather jacket will make an appearance: Tony Jones: OK. One of the things that was encompassed in that deal was an agreement not to change climate change policy. We’ve got a question on climate change. We’ll go to that and talk about that in a minute. The next question is a video from Mike Cannon-Brookes, the co-founder and CEO of Atlassian.
WHAT WILL HE WEAR #qanda pic.twitter.com/bzCVL6xaaO Mike:
You’ll be disappointed. He auctioned it off for charity in November 2011. Our current prime minister, who once famously waved a lump of coal at the opposition in parliament, has defined “fair-dinkum power” as energy that turns on when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing.” Thousands of Aussies - including me - are joining together to redefine “fair-dinkum power” to mean “renewable energy that is clean, cheap and reliable”. Our nation is blessed with renewable resources. We have more sun, wind and hydro than coal, gas and oil resources combined. Our vision is that Australia can get to 100% renewables and beyond, and that this transition to renewable energy is not only good for the planet, it presents one of the greatest economic opportunities for our country in terms of job creation and economic growth over the next 10 to 20 years.
But he did buy another one. So my question to you is: What’s your advice to get politicians onboard with our vision, and will you join us?
The Daily Telegraph’s Sharri Markson reported about a week ago that Malcolm Turnbull had signed up for the international speakers’ circuit. The audience applauds the video.
From her report: The Greater Talent Network, which used to represent US President Donald Trump, announced it had exclusively signed the former prime minister, describing him as an extremely intelligent, humorous and charismatic speaker.” Malcolm Turnbull:
So we can expect to hear a lot more from Turnbull beyond tonight. Well, thanks, Mike. I think you’ve got to have a technology-agnostic approach to energy. We all know where our energy future lies - it lies with renewable energy, backed up with storage - whether it is batteries or pumped hydro, which has been one of my great passions - and there are other technologies. But that’s where we’re going. We’re heading to a lower-cost, zero-emission energy future.
In fact, as Katharine Murphy reported last week, we don’t even have to wait that long – we can hear from him again next week: Now, the challenge is - how do you get there without energy becoming unaffordable or unreliable? Put it another way - how do you get there without going broke or the lights going out? So that’s why I’ve always said energy policy should be guided by engineering and economics, not ideology and idiocy. But the point Mike makes about our renewable endowment is absolutely right. I mean, you look at solar, for example - solar PV.
There have been grumblings about Turnbull within the government, with some colleagues complaining he was not more active on behalf of the Liberal party’s candidate in the Wentworth byelection. The central element in a photovoltake panel - the solar module, PV module - the cost of that has come down 10-fold since 2010. So the cost of generating solar power keeps on coming down. And by the way, thanks to technology developed at the University of New South Wales, it’s going to come down even more.
There has also been tension between the former prime minister and Morrison over the new prime minister’s inclination to move Australia’s embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. So we are going to - we are in a position, with this enormous solar endowment, where we will have a huge amount of energy opportunities. But here’s the thing - it’s very quick to build a solar farm.
Turnbull late on Monday implicitly warned his successor against following through with the shift Morrison telegraphed in the run-up to the byelection, after a meeting with the Indonesian president on Monday. If you have the planning permission and all the consents, if you have an allen key, a post-hole digger and a cement mixer, you can build your solar farm in less than 12 months, if you order all the panels and so forth. It’s all completely modularised. It is that straightforward. The challenge is, of course - how do you store it?
Turnbull warned there would be consequences for Australia’s relationship with Jakarta. Morrison dismissed that advice, saying Australia would forge its own foreign policy. That’s why you need long-term vision and planning for projects like SnowyHydro 2.0. If you are going to have pumped hydro, and you are going to be pumping the water up the hill when the energy is cheap and then running it down the hill when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing, you’re going to connect two huge damns 20km apart with a mountain inconveniently located between them, you’re going to have to do a lot of digging.
The ABC is billing the special episode, hosted by Tony Jones on 8 November, as an opportunity for Turnbull “to answer questions from the people of Australia”. That requires planning and design. I set out a whole agenda for an engineering and economics-based approach to energy nearly two years ago, and I spoke at the Press Club in early 2017. That was the vision that I delivered on. So you have Snowy Hydro 2.0, the biggest renewable project in Australia’s history since Snowy 1 - that will be built, it’s got a great...
Turnbull is also set to deliver a keynote speech at the Australian and New South Wales bar associations’ national conference in Sydney on 16 November.” Jones: To bring you to a couple of things Mike said - 100% renewable baseload power, he’s talking about. Achievable?
It has been almost three months since Malcolm Turnbull lost the Liberal party leadership – and with it, the prime ministership. Seventy-seven days, if you like to be more exact about these sorts of things. Turnbull:
In that time, we have had a few tweets – most notably, last week when Turnbull stepped in to correct the record over what exactly he was asked to do as Australia’s envoy in Indonesia, after Scott Morrison said he overstepped his bounds during the visit, on Sydney radio. Theoretically, it is. The question is - is that going to be the right mix?
But other than that? Jones:
Nada. But is it a question of government will to make that happen?
Until – tonight. Turnbull:
Here’s how the ABC announced it on 31 October: No, it’s not. The economics is driving you there. There is no question - if you wanted to build a new dispatchable power station - if you said you wanted to deliver 1,000 megawatts of power continuously, and we wanted to do that from new sources, I do not believe that you would build, today, a coal-fired power station, regardless of issues about climate policy and carbon risk and all of those things. Putting those to one side, because the renewable generation is so cheap - as long as you’ve got the ability to back it up, you can deliver that dispatchable power or, as Scott Morrison would call it, “fair-dinkum power”.
Malcolm Turnbull has been inundated with media requests since he was removed as Australia’s 29th prime ,inister by his parliamentary colleagues. This is exactly what Snowy Hydro is doing. They haven’t built Snowy 2 yet, but they are buying - and Paul Broad, the executive, has been open about this - plenty of renewable power at around $40 per renewable hour, and they deliver it at $70 per renewable hour at their existing pumped hydro. That is cheaper than...
Now he has decided his first major media appearance will be to answer questions from the people of Australia on Q&A. Jones:
Politics. Parties. Leadership. Disruption. Growth. Climate. Gender. Prices. Innovation. Conservatism. Entitlement. Compassion.” Back to the original question - can a group of rich mates get together and do what governments won’t do?
The audience will be asking the questions, but host Tony Jones is going to do what Tony Jones does, and niggle. Turnbull:
So what version of Turnbull will the viewing public receive today? What’s his mood? And should Morrison and the Liberal party be as worried about this appearance as they have spent this past week being? Well, I’m not sure what you mean by that.
Asked today about what he thought while in Townsville, Morrison trotted out this: Jones:
I wish him the best and if I asked him a question I would say how are you going?” That’s what he’s saying - “Get together with us, and we can produce 100% renewable energy for this country.” That was his claim in that question.
We hope you enjoy this special politics live and hope you hit us up in the comments with your thoughts, predictions and general feelings – as always, you know I will be watching. Katharine Murphy is also on deck, so make sure you keep an eye out for her thoughts, as the hour plays out. Turnbull:
You know I’ve got coffee. And you know I wish it was something stronger. If Mike is inviting me to invest in a renewable energy project with, you know, storage or pumped hydro or whatever, then I would look at it on its merits, obviously. I’m back in business. I’m retired from politics!
Ready? I’m retired from politics. I... ..I’m back in business, and I will be, no doubt, Lucy and I will - well, Lucy is at the GSC, so she’ll continue being the planning tsar of Sydney, I guess, but for my own part, I’m out of politics, and I will return to the business world, and I love nothing more than technology, I love new projects, I like new technology, and I love creating jobs.
It all begins at 8pm daylight saving time, but let’s get into it. So, you know, I laid claim to creating, you know, 1million jobs when I was prime minister. Of course, the creation was all done by people in business. Now, having served Australia in the parliament and as PM, I will now go back to creating jobs at a more hands-on level, in terms of business and investment.”
PHEW
Tony Jones:
Here’s one for you – the Guardian, when you became prime minister said prophetically is “the compromises he has to make to achieve his resurrection” – that included a deal with the National party, and effectively a deal with the rightwing.
You talked about your consensus style, but did that kill off the real Malcolm Turnbull?
Turnbull:
Well, no. I got so much done. You know,the Labor Party used to say, “Oh, Malcolm used to be in favour of marriage equality – he’s no longerin favour of it.” Then I legislatedit, right? So I delivered it.
The audience does not like this. “No you didn’t” can be heard, which is no mean feat, given they don’t have a microphone.
Turnbull:
We did. We did. It’s legal: 5,000 people have been married – 5,000 same-sex couples have been married in Australia since it was legalised just about a year ago, and that was done under my government.
Now, you know, that is a fact. It might be a melancholy fact, from some people’s point of view – from the Labor -arty’s point of view, because they would have rather they did it – but it is a great Liberal achievement. A great Liberal achievement. And it was my government that delivered it.
Louise has a question about what went wrong and she is not mad, she is just disappointed.
Mr Turnbull, early on, I thought you had a vision for Australia. I saw you as a potentially great leader, intelligent, and economically wise. I was sadly disappointed with your time in office. You were ineffectual, not able to make the hard decisions, nor confront the media to argue your case. Unengaged with the public and biding your time towards the end. I would like you to take responsibility, and not blame anyone else for this. You had the opportunity, and you blew it. What do you say to the Australian public?”
The audience applauds.
Malcolm Turnbull:
I have to say to you that the achievements of the government speak for themselves. Record jobs growth. Strong economic growth. Reduced personal income tax. Reduced company tax. Record investments in infrastructure. Reformed schools funding. To have consistent, needs-based funding across the country. Reached record funding in health and pharmaceutical benefits.
Record funding and support for Australian Defence Industry. Was able to protect the Australian steel industry and the thousands of jobs from what would have been 25% tariffs to be imposed by Donald Trump – the only country at the time to get that exemption.
Ensured that the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and a huge trade deal that everyone thought was sunk when Trump pulled out, was maintained – protecting thousands of jobs. And legislated to legalise marriage equality.
Now, those are all achievements – most of which people said could not be done.
Most of them, I stood when they were being presented in the parliament – the press gallery said to me in the PM’s courtyard, “You’ll never get it through the Senate,” or “You won’t be able to do it.” Bill Shorten, who was no friend of free trade, said at the press club that my pursuit of the Trans-Pacific Partnership was a delusion and a vanity project. Now, through sheer persistence and commitment to defending and advancing Australia’s interests, I got it done.
The bottom line is, that’s my record.
Tony Jones: “Can we just go back to the questioner – what was it that you were disappointed about, Louise?”
Louise:
Well, I felt that, with John Howard, for example, he was always arguing his point in the media. He could stand up and argue for whatever he was arguing for. But Malcolm – Mr Turnbull – I wish you’d been in the media more. I wish you’d come out and been arguing your point more. All those things that you just mentioned – I wish you’d been repeating them over and over so people could get a sense of what you had achieved. But you were missing in action towards the end. I don’t think I saw you very much in the media at all.
Turnbull:
Well, I … I can assure you, I spent a lot of time, ah, in the media and on the media – in fact, it is the lot of prime ministers to spend a huge amount of their time in the media and communicating.
So … but I’m sorry you missed it. I’m sorry you did. But you know what? There’s some old videos – you know, you can go back! Go back on some old showreels, to the archives!
Goodness me there is a lot to keep on top of when there are no dixers!
Will has a question that I think quite a few young Liberals have themselves:
Mr Turnbull, why did you fail to show support for fellow Liberal Dave Sharma in the Wentworth byelection, and do you acknowledge that this was instrumental not only in the Liberal party losing a crucial seat it has held for almost a century, but also losing the balance of power in parliament?
Turnbull:
Well, Will, I did support Dave Sharma, and did so publicly on every single day – and even on Twitter, Lucy and I gave him our blessing and our endorsement.
Every day, Dave and Scott Morrison and others repeated, and the media repeated, that he had our support.
So there was no question that he had our support. My judgment was that, given the circumstances, were I to be campaigning in or be particularly visible in any way in the Wentworth byelection, it would be unhelpful to David Sharma’s prospects.
It also, frankly, would not have been very helpful for me maintaining my own, ah, peace of mind, after an event like this – it’s very important to look after yourself and your family, and it was good and timely for us to step aside and step back at that time.
Now I assume people recognise I’m quite familiar with the electoral arithmetic of Wentworth, a seat I represented for 14 years.
My judgment is that Dave Sharma would have won the election – with a reduced majority, obviously, quite substantially reduced – had it been held on the Saturday before, on the 13th rather than the 20th.
I believe the byelection was lost in the last week.
It was a pretty messy week for the government, with announcements and, you know, the vote on the It’s OK To Be White Pauline Hanson resolution in theSenate.
We talked about Barnaby Joyce. There are a number of other things – the announcement of a review as to the location of the Australian embassy in Israel.
All of those things created a very messy week and, if you look at the pattern of the postal votes – which is very interesting – the postal votes that were received by polling day – most of which were posted, naturally, in weeks beforehand – favoured Dave Sharma about 65%.
Now, when I was the MP, the slice of the last postal share I had was 76%. So that was a big swing, but not enough to lose the seat. Every package of postal votes that followed, Sharma’s share diminished. And the last 1,400 postal votes actually were won by Kerryn Phelps.
So you can see that what happened in that last week was the swing against the Liberal party was accentuated and accelerated to the point where Sharma lost the seat by, you know, 1,800 votes or thereabouts.”
Tony Jones: “Briefly, you’re saying Morrison government’s killed itself off in Wentworth?”
Turnbull: “You may very well say that, but I couldn’t possibly comment.”
Magnus wants to know (after thanking him for being there tonight) about Barnaby Joyce:
He’s described as, in some circles, “Australia’s greatest retail politician”. Given the question marks that hang over his head in relation to misconduct and mismanagement – to cite two quick examples, the Murray-Darling scheme and a more obvious catastrophe might be something like putting his toe in the water for a leadership tilt in the leadup to the Wentworth byelection – is he really one of Australia’s great retail politicians, or perhaps maybe more of a liability to himself, his party and, more broadly, the Coalition?
Turnbull: “I think I should take that as a comment.”
There is laughter and applause. But there is more.
Magnus:
I respect the response...To draw to you Scott Morrison’s remarks about the Australian parliament resembling a Muppet Show at the time of you being deposed -if we were to talk about Barnaby being in the cast, would he be Gonzo or Becker?
Turnbull: “Look, I’m sure Scott regrets that analogy.”
(More laughter)
Turnbull puts on his serious voice to continue though.
The Australian parliament is at the centre of our government. It’s where our governments are formed. It’s where our laws are made. And those who go into the Australian parliament should do so solely with the interests of the Australian people in mind.
And when they take actions - whether it is voting on a bill or voting in a ballot - they should be prepared to justify it. And I’ve always done that.
Tony Jones: “Should Barnaby Joyce have any possibility of coming back as deputy prime minister, in your opinion?”
Turnbull: “Well … I’m not a member of the National party, so that’s a matter for them.”
Jones: “But would it be a logical thing?”
Turnbull:
Well, it’s a matter for the National party to choose their own leader. And the Coalition – if we’re in government, the leader of the National Party is the Deputy Prime Minister.
So if you’re asking me the question were Barnaby to be re-elected leader of the National party, would he become deputy prime minister? The answer is yes. As to whether he would ever be re-elected leader of the National party, that’s a matter for the Nationals.
But coming to the point you made about Wentworth – in a hard-fought byelection in which the government was arguing that you should vote for the Liberal party to ensure the maintenance of stability and climate change was a key issue, I’d have to say that, in the last week, Barnaby foreshadowing his own leadership challenge to Michael McCormack and calling for Snowy Hydro 2.0 to be abandoned and replaced by a coal-fired power station was hardly calculated … to advance Dave Sharma’s prospects.”
Jones: “I think you have your answer!”
Jason’s question is basically – given how you became prime minister, did you deserve to lose the prime ministership in the same way.
Malcolm Turnbull basically starts off by giving Labor one of its election campaign ads.
Turnbull:
Well, I think the move to remove me in August was crazy. I think it was self-destructive. No one’s explained it. It was pointless. And nobody’s actually set out what the reason was for it. I mean, Scott Morrison can’t explain it. He’s the new prime minister.
I’m the outgoing prime minister. I can’t explain it. And the people that were responsible choose not to do so. So, you know, there’s some issues there. But in terms of what the question is - as you measure your own performance as prime minister, you’ve got to ask yourself, ‘What did I do in the time that I had?’”
Tony Jones: “No, actually, that’s not what the question was about. I’m going to bring you to the point of it. What’s the difference between the Dutton challenge against you and your challenge against Tony Abbott?”
Turnbull:
Well, with Tony Abbott, I set out exactly why I sought to challenge him. I explained what my reasons were – very openly – laid out my agenda, won the ballot, and then set out to deliver that agenda. And it was very, very warmly welcomed by the Australian people. I mean, we won the next election and we got enormous support. And we got a lot done. So, from my point of view, I had a justification which I was open about, an agenda, an economic agenda – and taking a more positive approach to our society – a more inclusive approach – a number of other things that I changed.
But the bottom line is – I delivered on it. And I’m pleased and proud that I did.
Jones points out that Peter Dutton had a plan to take the GST off power bills. Turnbull is having NONE OF IT.
Jones: “Peter Dutton would say he had an agenda and, among other things, he wanted to take the GST off power prices. So he would argue, I guess...”
Turnbull: “You can say he ‘would’ argue. He hasn’t.”
Jones: “He did at the time.”
Turnbull: “He said he wanted to take the GST off power prices. That might be a justification for bringing a submission to cabinet. It’s hardly a justification for overthrowing the government.”
Just a note – most of the government appears to be very, very quiet on social media right now.
Millie is next up:
Politics is an aggressive and competitive environment, and numerous women have survived it. However, behaviour such as that exhibited during the recent leadership spill emphasised the challenges that women in politics still face. What is your perspective on the treatment of women in federal politics – specifically the treatment of Julia Banks and Julie Bishop during the leadership spill – and how do you propose it improves for future female politicians?
Turnbull:
Well, Millie, thank you very much. I believe the culture in parliament is not sufficiently respectful of women. It is – as someone who came into parliament from the corporate sector – I’d say it is decades out of date.
It is like stepping into, you know, a business, an office, in the 80s.
It is very, very blokey, and there is insufficient respect for women, in my judgment. And just about every woman in parliament will confirm that one way or another – and you’ve mentioned a few of them who’ve made that point. You have to lead by example.
I sought to do so. I have done so. And you have to speak up for respect for women. And one of the points that Lucy made very succinctly – which I’ve always quoted, again and again – in fact, it formed part of a government advertising campaign in respect of violence against women and children – is to say that not all disrespecting women leads to violence against women, but that is where all violence against women begins.
At the foundation in workplaces – this is why I introduced the so-called “bonking ban” – you would think you wouldn’t need to do it, wouldn’t you?
(laughter)
Really, you’d think it would be pretty obvious. But what I set out to do was to ensure that parliament, as a workplace, was respecting women in the way that a modern workplace is expected to do.
And I think there’s still work to do, but I think that – you know, I can say this to you – that Scott Morrison absolutely shares my values on this. Scott and I talked about the …
Jones: “Sorry, I’ve got to bring you to …”
Turnbull: “The code, and he absolutely endorsed it.”
Jones: “I’m going to bring you to the end of the question, which is about the way women – you talked about this at the beginning a little bit – about the way women were bullied during the spill lobbying, during the coup, effectively.
“Of course, we don’t know the details of what happened, because most of the investigation of that happened secretly. Should it be out there in the open?”
Turnbull:
Well, you know ... Everything in parliament should be accountable, right? I mean, everyone is there, elected by the people. They’re paid by the taxpayer. Just as people are entitled to know why those who voted for the spill – particularly those who led it, particularly the cabinet ministers – they’re entitled to know why they did it, so people are entitled to know what happened in the course of these events. I mean, you can’t just dismiss it as, you know, something to be brushed under the carpet. But can I just make this point?
I know that, naturally, there is a huge focus on this. I understand that. So many people have asked me the question – they’ve asked me a question I can’t answer, right?
‘Why did it happen?’ But I just want to say to you that leading Australia for nearly three years as prime minister was an enormous privilege, and I celebrate – and am proud of – the achievements I was able to make.
So I’m – I’m not, you know, miserable or bitter or resentful at all. I’m joyful that I had the opportunity to take on that role and do as much as I did in the time that I had. I think right at the outset, the first questioner said, “When you become prime minister, you’re one day closer to the time you cease to be prime minister.” Well, that’s true regardless of how you leave office, obvious!
So you’ve got to do the best you can in the time you have. And I got an enormous amount done. You know, think of the big social reforms – legalising same-sex marriage – I mean, what a gigantic reform that was – I was able to do that.
Jones: “Malcolm, we’ll come to that in a future question.”
Turnbull ignores him.
… and trade. I’m very positive about my time in office. It ended sooner than I would like it to have ended, and it ended in circumstances that remain unexplained. But nonetheless, it was a time of great achievement