GREG JENNETT: Labor's Caucus has met todayand it's adopted a decision notto support the GovernmentSenate voting law changes. Thatcompletes a fairly long journeyfor Labor in just two years.Its Senate Leader Penny Wongjoins us now. Senator, it ishard to the outside observer tounderstand how the ALP driftedin two years from a positionthat Gary Gray, John Faulkner,Alan Griffin all supported, tothis one you've arrived attoday.
SENATOR PENNY WONG, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE: Senate voting reform iscomplex and the Labor Party hassettled its position. Werecognise that the current systemisn't perfect but no system is.Our concern is what has beenpresented to the Parliament isa deal done behind closeddoors, the largest change toSenate voting in 30 yearsthat's going to be rushedthrough the Parliament with theconsent and willingness of theGreens.
Let's understand whatthe deal does. It is designedto purge the Parliament, notjust for now but, if possible,forever, of all minor parties.That's what it's designed todo and we think there's a problemwith that.
JENNETT: Doesn't that presenta problem, or isn't there analmost embedded acknowledgement,in that thinking that Labor will notform the next governmentbecause, if it did, you'd beable to work with aconsolidated cross bench thatmight be the Greens and NickXenophon? You've done thatbefore in government, why wouldthat be a problem now?
WONG: No,that's not our thinking. Ourthinking is this: we recognisethat we would probably beadvantaged, frankly, by thissystem to some extent. It is asystem thats designed to advantagethe major parties and theGreens, but the difficulty istwofold. One is that about 3.3million Australians voted fornone of those parties, so votedfor someone other than theCoalition, Labor or theGreens.
JENNETT: Since when has thatbeen Labor's overridingconcern? You could look at itthe other way and say 10million voted for the major parties.
WONG: I think a system whichessentially says to that manyAustralians, we are going toexhaust your votes or corralthem for one of those three parties, is not particularlydemocratic. I think the other point is,we do think there is a risk that theGreens have done a deal whichwould enable the Coalition tomore easily gain a Senatemajority.
Let's remember whatthat would have meant. If theCoalition had a Senate majorityin 2014, we'd have $100,000degrees, wed have pensions cut, wed have all thedrastic measures which were sodreadful in the 2014 Budget.The last time the Coalition hadcontrol, we got WorkChoices.
JENNETT: Sure, but there areplenty of psephologists who say, to do that,even under these proposedchanges, they have got to win anenormously highvote. Are you conceding that thats on the cards?
WONG: No, I dont. Everybody has their ownset of assumptions. I think its undeniable that if you take 3.3 million votes and you either exhaust them out ofthe system or essentially corral them to the major parties, thats going tobenefit the Coalition, theGreens and Labor. What the Greens are doing is essentially pullingup the drawbridge behind them.It would have been unlikely,frankly, that the Greens could havegot to the position they'vegot, where they currently are,if this system had been inplace. What they are saying is: we want to pull up the drawbridge behind us and make sureno one else can get in. Ican't see how that's good fordemocracy and nor can I see how a risk of Coalitionmajority is good for the Australiannation.
JENNETT: At what point in the last couple of years did youarrive at the view that the mixture of people we haveon the current cross bench ishealthy, its representative ofAustralia?
WONG: Let's notpersonalise this. I think this is themistake the Government ismaking. I know they want to retrofit aset of voting laws which meanthey get a more compliantSenate. And I disagree with most ofwhat Bob Day stands for, I disagree with muchof the way in which Ricky Muir has voted. There are many issues where I disagree with them, but the point here is this: this is a system that is designedto benefit the twomajor parties and the Greensand to purge minor parties andindependents out of the system.Do we really think that that's aconsequence we want? We are upfor a discussion about Senatereform. Our judgment has beenon this bill which is not the same as the JSCEM, the Parliamentary-
JENNETT: -Close but -
WONG: -But it's not thesame. Our judgment is thenegative consequences of thisoutweigh the benefits.
JENNETT: Did youseek the advice of your partysecretary in reaching thisposition?
WONG: This is the positionof the Labor Party. It is asettled position after adiscussion, as you've saidyourself, in the Caucus andShadow Cabinet.
JENNETT: Because GeorgeWright in 2014 told theParliamentary Inquiry that this hasbecome, group votingtickets have become, a seriousissue for the voting system inthe Senate and its beingmanipulated. So he seemed to havea fairly clear view backthen.
WONG: As I said, I don't thinkanybody is suggesting thecurrent system is perfect, butthis is a sledgehammer. I mean this isa purge, frankly and we don'tthink it's appropriate. Ishould also say to you that oneof the things that the ShadowCabinet and the Caucus hasendorsed also is a set ofamendments to this legislationto improve electoral donations,to introduce some of theaccountability measures thatthe Government has opposed interms of donations
JENNETT: -Like lower thresholds?
WONG: Lower thresholds, banningoverseas donations, anonymousdonations and also dealing withdonation splitting. So having amore transparent electoral donation system, which is goodfor our democracy and we lookforward to Lee Rhiannon andthe Greens supporting us on those amendments.
JENNETT: Lets see where they go. Thecross benchers, as we heard a moment ago, seem fatallyresigned to the prospect that theywill be, to use your word,purged and probably at a doubledissolution election as earlyas July. Do you share theirview on timings and options?
WONG: Ihave to say the wheels seem tobe falling off the Government'sagenda so badly, I wouldn't besurprised if they want to rushto a double dissolution earlyelection. I wouldn't besurprised. They are all at sea, they areinternally divided on manyissues. On social issues andon economic policy, the PrimeMinister has contradicted theirposition in the Parliament.Now there's an accountabilityissue, why has he told theParliament one thing when theABC and others have been toldby Government sources that'snot the case? But there is a broader economic policy issue.What is the agenda? They don'thave an agenda.
JENNETT: There was, just around DD options, there was somespeculation, completely unconfirmedyesterday, that some people in theGovernment had mused out loudabout moving the Budget forwarda week. You've been involved inthose processes before. Is thateven possible, so push thebureaucracy to prepare thesedocuments?
WONG: If Scott Morrison'sspeech to the Press Club was anindicator of how advanced theirthinking is, if I were them,I'd want a lot more time. But maybe time wouldn't helpbecause I don't think they havean agenda.
JENNETT: Let's go to some otherpolitics of the day. The PrimeMinister has ordered a reviewof the safe schoolsanti-bullying program. Are yousatisfied that it is servingits needs and is justified toreceive Commonwealth funding?
WONG: Can I be clear about what thisprogram is designed to address?Remember, it's a program thathas had bipartisan support.It's designed to address theterrifying statistics and I'dinvite you to look at whatBeyond Blue has said aboutyoung people, gay and lesbian,LGBTI young Australians, and the number of them, the 80 per cent, that have experienced discrimination or abuse andthe terrifyingly high numbers of those who have attempted suicide orself-harm. We all want ourchildren to be safe and this is a program about that. I hope that themore sensible people in theLiberal Party will continue tofocus on that very importantobjective.
JENNETT: Some of thecriticism of it, which we will hearin a moment by the way, its articulated by CoryBernardi, is that it has becomeideological. Are you satisfiedthat its not?
WONG: I have to say its interesting Corycalling anybody elseideological. He certainly likes to get alot of attention and criticises his own sidea lot and runs what's apretty hardline ideology. My view about this is this is notan ideological debate, this isabout making sure our childrenare safe. Nobody should go toschool and be unsafe. Nobodyshould go to school and beabused or bullied and this is aprogram thats designed to dothat.
JENNETT: Just finally on what is a busy day for you, Penny Wong, wearing your Trade hat,we read today an officialannouncement the trade envoy,Andrew Robb, is heading toCuba, something of a first, apioneering visit. TradeMinister Wong, if we canimagine that in a few months'time, is a Cuban FTA a priority foryou?
WONG: Well, there are all sortsof cigar jokes that could bemade now, aren't there? But I think themore important point is, Ive got a lot of regard for Andrew, but having a Trade Minister anda trade envoy is prettyembarrassing for Mr Ciobo.Really it shows he needs his handheld.
JENNETT: Fair enough. Penny Wong,thanks for your thoughtstoday.
WONG: Good to be with you.