SUBJECTS: International Women’s Day; Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; AUKUS partnership; nuclear-propelled submarines.

DAVID BEVAN, HOST: Penny Wong joins us now. Good morning Penny Wong.

SENATOR PENNY WONG, SHADOW MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS:Good morning. Good to be with you, David and Happy International Women's Day.

BEVAN: Well you have been a driving force behind the big breakfast held in Adelaide each year for International Women's Day, I think for at least 20 years. So for you, you must be getting to the point like where it is marking the passing of the years. Do you get thoughtful at this time of the year thinking 'it’s another International Women's Day'?

WONG: Well, first, the driving force behind the breakfast is actually the Adelaide community. I mean we are the biggest breakfast in Australia, which is a fantastic achievement for the people of Adelaide, and particularly women all around South Australia. It's great. I get thoughtful about where we've come from and where we have to go. I think it's a day where I always think about how far we've come but I'm always really conscious of what my daughters, and the next generation of women and girls, what their world will be like. I think that's an important part of IWD.

BEVAN: Well, how far have we come?

WONG: We're better off than we were in terms of women don't get sacked from jobs just because they're pregnant. We have better childcare, we have better paid parental leave, maternity leave. We’ve still got so much work to do, though, when it comes to things like family violence, making sure that women and children who are the survivors of family violence are supported. We have unacceptable levels of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and we still are a long way off equality. In fact, we have slipped as a nation to 50^th on the World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap ranking. So this is a ranking of all countries - we've dropped over 20 points since 2014, with the worst results ever. And you know what New Zealand is, David? They're fourth. So I reckon this IWD it would be pretty good if we committed to getting ourselves into the top 10.

BEVAN: What is driving that?

WONG: It's a lot of things. It's women's participation in leadership. It's where women are in the workforce, the gender pay gap. We've got a long way to go when it comes to women's economic participation. It's one of the reasons why Anthony Albanese made his first major policy announcement childcare, because we know how important accessible and affordable childcare is for women, from all sorts of families, to increase their workforce participation. And that's good for them, it's good for their families and it's really good for the economy.

BEVAN: To Ukraine. Do you agree that NATO must resist calls to enforce a no fly zone?

WONG: I read your interview with Peter Dutton. And I think actually - he's said a lot of things recently with which I don't agree - but I actually think he was right in saying this is one of those really hard decisions that NATO has to make in the face of an aggressive, I think in many ways irrational leader in Vladimir Putin, who has been prepared to put the nuclear card on the table and NATO has to make very difficult decisions about how to manage the risk of escalation. But just taking a step back here, what is happening in Ukraine is an unlawful, violent invasion by Mr Putin and his troops. And we know that what is happening is more women and children and many civilians are being killed in what is an illegal, appalling act of warfare. And the international community must continue to be resolute in our unity and in pushing back and imposing the most crippling economic sanctions we are able to.

BEVAN: The United States is working on a replacement program with Poland, which would send fighter jets to Ukraine. Is that too risky?

WONG: Look, I think in the circumstances, making sure we provide whatever assistance we can to Ukraine and its people - whose bravery has been extraordinary - is the right thing to do. It is a big decision. These decisions are being made in countries around the world. Germany has changed its position. Over decades it has refused to send military assistance, weapons and the like, into conflict zones and they made a decision to change their position in the face of what we are seeing from Mr Putin, which is not only tragic and appalling for the people of Ukraine, it is a fundamental attack on the rules which have ensured we have stayed reasonably safe and prosperous in the period since World War II. It's an attack on international law, international norms and the global order.

BEVAN: But Poland sending fighter jets, and then behind it the United States backfilling them. Isn't that exactly the sort of thing that could spread the conflict?

WONG: Look, I think providing military assistance to enable Ukraine to defend itself in these circumstances is justified. And that's the position the international community have taken.

BEVAN: There is a massive refugee crisis unfolding, as a result of all of this. Now, it's early days and many of these people would just want to get back to their loved ones that they've left behind. The men, the boys, the older men who aren't allowed to leave Ukraine. They've been conscripted. They just want to get back. But should Australia be preparing to take its share of displaced people?

WONG: Look, I think the Government should be looking at how we can assist in this humanitarian crisis, both in the context of people staying here, of working with the international community to place people who are refugees, who have fled the crisis, and also to provide humanitarian assistance, not only to Ukraine, if we can, if the international agencies can get in there, but also to those countries where we see a lot of refugees, particularly Poland, crossing the border. I understood that the Government has said they're willing to do that. It's a position we've taken in relation to Afghanistan and also Hong Kong, that where you have conflict or situations of danger that we should do what we can as a country to assist.

BEVAN: Is there any doubt that an Albanese-Wong Government would support the nuclear powered submarine program?

WONG: We have been very clear in our bipartisan support for AUKUS, which is the partnership between Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom. We've also been very clear that we support the acquisition of nuclear propelled submarines. We were convinced by the capability argument that was put to us and we have been very consistent in our bipartisan support for that. That doesn't mean we support everything the Government announces. And we were concerned to see on Sunday, Peter Dutton making announcements about bases - well actually an announcement about an announcement for a base which I think Greg Sheridan, a very respected Defence writer, described as an announcement about a never never base. I don't think that's the way to deal with these issues. We proposed a bipartisan committee to the Prime Minister, to Mr Morrison, given how close the election is, but as importantly, recognising that this submarine capability will have to be managed by, steered by governments of both parties over decades. It's pretty telling that Mr Morrison refused to have that kind of bipartisan engagement.

BEVAN: You say it's a never never base. We're going to have to have a base for these things. It's not unreasonable for the Prime Minister to say, look, here's three options. What's wrong with that? You are going to have to put them somewhere.

WONG: It's not an announcement. It's just an announcement that we're thinking about an announcement. This is the problem with this Government. They think that talking about defending Australia is the same as defending Australia. It's not. You make sure Australia is secure by acquiring the capability that we need. They seem to think that announcements, and announcements about announcements, is sufficient.

BEVAN: We have a capability gap.

WONG: We do.

BEVAN: Ok. Is it unreasonable to think of buying something off the shelf? Or could we revive the French deal? Malcolm Turnbull was saying yesterday, that look, we should never have ditched the French deal because we could have continued with the new generation of conventional submarines, which were adapted from a nuclear-powered model, and found a nuclear powered option further down the track with those French subs.

WONG: Look, these are really big decisions and decisions the Government needed to consider when they junked their second submarine contract. Pretty important to remember, this is actually the second time they've ditched the submarine contract. The first was obviously the proposed Japanese submarines, which were then replaced with the French and now we've got the Government replacing them with nuclear propelled submarines under the AUKUS partnership. I am deeply concerned about the capability gap. I'm not going to make announcements in Opposition without looking at all of the issues about how you would deal with that. We're talking about a multi-billion dollar, decadal question - a question that will go over decades. But I would say this; when I asked questions in Senate Estimates about this, it became very clear to me that the then end of life for the Collins, and the commencement of the earliest reasonable time for acquiring a nuclear sub had a gap, demonstrated a capability gap. It was, I think, very concerning, and even more so that no one seemed to have an idea about how that would be filled.

BEVAN: How many years is the gap?

WONG: Well, Peter Dutton has given us a number of dates about when the first submarine would arrive and a number of dates about how long the Collins will continue but we know that some of the commentary is 2040 for the nuclear sub. And we know with the Collins, even with extensions, you're looking into the early 2030s. Now, the Government has to deal with this and I don't see from this Government, a plan to deal with that.

BEVAN: Do you think we're going to have to buy something? Just to fill up...

WONG: I'm not going to get drawn into that, David. I just think if you decide to acquire a new capability - and there are compelling grounds for nuclear propelled submarines, which we support - you have to look at how you manage, ensuring the defence of Australia, the capability to defend Australia, in the interim. And I've not seen anything yet from Peter Dutton or Scott Morrison, other than announcements on that front.

BEVAN: Is it clear to you what level of support nuclear powered submarines would need in Australia, specifically South Australia, in terms of the nuclear industry? I don't even know what that means. But I'm figuring that something, if they're nuclear-powered submarines, you're going to need something nuclear, in terms of an industry to support them. And if you're not a nuclear-powered scientist, you might be struggling to get your head around it. Do you know what we're going to have to do? Will laws have to be changed? Do you have your head around this?

WONG: Well, I've had a briefing and then a Prime Minister refusing to allow Labor to be part of a committee process to oversee this, so I'm not in a position to answer those questions. They are probably questions for Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton. What I do know is that even on Defence's own assessment, there'll be a thousand fewer jobs in South Australia as a consequence of this decision, notwithstanding all the hoopla that Mr Marshall...

BEVAN: But what I'm getting at, is in terms of the nuclear industry. I mean, are we just going to get a box that we never open and we just put it into the ship, so nobody in South Australia has to know anything about the nuclear power industry. We just build the ships that we slot the box in. Or are you going to have to have people around you that know what they're doing? You see where I'm heading with this. Are these unreasonable questions?

WONG: I think, the first point I'd make is one of the things that Mr Morrison said when the announcement was made, and that Labor said was one of our conditions for supporting it, was that there would not need to be a civil nuclear capability, with the sort of capability that was envisaged in the submarines. I think that's probably the answer to your question.

BEVAN: And you're satisfied with that?

WONG: Well, that's the Prime Minister's assertion and it is consistent with the briefing that we had.

BEVAN: Penny Wong, thanks for your time.

WONG: Good to speak with you.

Authorised by Paul Erickson, ALP, Canberra.