DAVID SPEERS: Shadow Foreign Minister Penny Wong, thank you for your time this afternoon.
I am not sure if you could hear what Michael Fullilove was just saying there. It kind of fits in with arguments you've been making for a while as well, I suppose, about the need for Australia to be a bit more independent in its foreign policy outlook. With the huge events of this week, what is your view on that right now? In terms of where Australia should be sitting in the international order.
SENATOR PENNY WONG, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE: Well, good to be with you David. It has certainly been a big couple of days hasn't it when it comes to foreign affairs, and it rightly has the coverage it deserves. When Donald Trump was elected I think I wrote an opinion piece that got a bit of attention where I described it as a change point. And I was making the point, as you know, that a number of the policies and views he espoused as a candidate were very different to a number of views that the foreign policy establishment, over successive US administrations, had broadly held there are obviously differences. I think Michael Fullilove was pointing to some of them in his discussion with you earlier.
In terms of what we have seen over the last couple of days, I would make these points: it is historic, we haven't seen this before obviously a US President sitting down with the leader of the North Korean regime. The extent to which history will regard it as a success will depend on what steps are taken towards the complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation of the peninsula, and in particular, of North Korea's nuclear capability.
SPEERS: And look, we have not seen any concrete commitments from North Korea in terms of that, but a general promise towards denuclearisation, and there is obviously a great deal of hope and trust that that will happen this time. The Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says Donald Trump's giving it a "red-hot go" and seems to indicate that we should support that. Is he right in saying that?
WONG: Of course we should be supporting steps towards peace and security in the region and central to that is removing North Korea's nuclear capability. I think I have been on your program before David and certainly on other news programs talking about various missile tests over this last year or so and the concern in the region, the concern globally; North Korea being such a risk to global security was palpable. So it is always better for people to be talking than not, it is better to be seeking an outcome that improves security and peace than engaging in missile testing.
There is a question of the extent to which concrete steps will be taken, and I think on that front, we know two things: one is we know that this regime, whether under Kim Jong-un or others, has made previous commitments to the international community that they have not honoured. And we also know, that the reason in part, in great part I suspect, that they have come to the negotiation table, is the extent of the economic, diplomatic and political pressure the international community has placed on the regime. So that obviously needs to continue until we see more concrete outcomes.
SPEERS: To that end, should any Australian economic sanctions be lifted until we do actually see verified evidence that North Korea has destroyed its nukes?
WONG: I wouldn't see a case for that unless it was in concert with the international community and as part of a strategy. And I do not believe what the Foreign Minister or others in the government have said would suggest anything otherwise.
SPEERS: Okay, so we should not lift sanctions until there is some verified evidence that North Korea is serious?
WONG: And what I'd add to that is any lifting of sanctions or any easing of pressure does need to be something that the international community work together on. Part of why the strategy to date has been more successful than previously is there's been a collective effort across the international community, including China, but obviously led by the United States and others.
SPEERS: Donald Trump as we know has said that military exercises, the war games as he puts it, will end. That is something North Korea, China, Russia have been after for quite some time. Was he right do you think to commit to that?
WONG: I think it would be useful if the US provided a bit more clarity and detail about what that announcement means and the extent to which it is a temporary or permanent announcement. Certainly it appears the South Korean Government, from the public reporting I have seen and obviously it is only public reporting suggested that the South Korean Government wasn't across or fully briefed on the detail of that. I would make the broader point though, there are a range of demands that North Korea is seeking of the US and others. Whatever economic and security guarantee North Korea is seeking, can I emphasise that it has to be in the context of and comprehending of the security of the whole region.
SPEERS: Just to come back to what you were saying there. You would like to see more detail around this decision on the military exercises before making any judgement as to whether this is giving up too much?
WONG: I think we would want to know, dont we, about what are the steps that will be taken by North Korea as part of the arrangements going forward. I do think it is important to recognise this is a first step. It is a pretty historic and unusual first step, and one that we all hope can be built on
SPEERS: Why unusual?
WONG: I think the President sitting down with the leader of the North Korean regime is probably pretty unusual, David.
SPEERS: It is, it is. Just to be clear on this, youre saying you havent yet seen commitments, firm commitments from North Korea that justify ending these long running military exercises?
WONG: No, I didnt say that. What I said is we would want to see, going forward, what commitments North Korea is prepared to make, and we would want to see further detail in relation to the troop exercises. Obviously, we are not in the room negotiating. I make a broader point though, which really does respond to the central point you are making, which is this is about regional security ultimately. It is not only about North Koreas desire for economic security. It is not only about the bilateral discussions between the US and North Korea. This is ultimately about regional security.
SPEERS: Can I turn, Penny Wong, to the Foreign Influence Transparency Register that the Government wants to introduce. Labor is not yet on board as far as I am aware. The Prime Minister and the Attorney-General were asked today whether Huawei, the Chinese company, should be on that register should it become a reality given clearly there are concerns about Huaweis involvement in an internet cable being built, an undersea cable to the Solomon Islands. Australia will now build that instead. What is your view on Huawei, can we start there? Is this a company that you understand to have links with the Chinese Government?
WONG: As I understand, Huawei is a part or whole, I cant recall precisely the ownership structure of a state-owned enterprise, it certainly has links as a consequence of that. But can I just get out of the specific. More broadly, in relation to the cable, we are supportive of the governments actions to do more in the Pacific. We think it is a little belated but it is welcome. And Australia being a natural partner for infrastructure for developing nations is a good thing.
In relation to the Transparency Bill, I am on the committee that is considering that so I am going to be careful about what I disclose to you, David. Obviously further amendments were released by the government I think on Thursday, actually by the committee. Government amendments were released on Thursday. Were in the process of considering those and there will be further hearings I think next week, when Parliament sits, on that bill. The principle is that persons including legal persons, such as companies, do need to register if they undertake certain activities. So your question about Huawei will be a question, in terms of the legislation, about whether they fall within the remit of the legislation. Given the legislation has not been finalised, it is not really a response I can give you.
SPEERS: I appreciate the committee is still doing its work so maybe you cant comment on this. My reading of it is that if a company does not want to list themselves and the government thinks they should be, this is going to end up in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal where things could get rather messy if the government or that party has to prove or disprove links to a foreign power. How do you work that out?
WONG: This is probably a question for Christian Porter, isnt it? I mean it is their governments legislation... (laughs)
SPEERS: It is, but is this a concern for Labor at all?
WONG: Look, I think the principle is one we agree with. Whatever government were talking about, whatever foreign principal, we ought to ensure our sovereignty is safeguarded. I made that point last year. That is above politics. We have had concerns, as have media organisations and charities and a range of civil society organisations about the drafting of this legislation. The government sought to remedy some of that and we will see, obviously, as the committee considers those amendments, whether or not they have sufficiently done that.
SPEERS: Okay. Just on Huawei, your understanding is it is linked to the Chinese Government?
WONG: I am not going to get into a long discussion about the nature of state-owned enterprises and to what extent the particular commercial structure or corporate structure of Huawei is or isnt, I really am not. I think the issue here is the way the legislation works is if you are undertaking certain activities, people including legal persons would be required to register.
SPEERS: And this company would fall into that category?
WONG: Well I dont know. As I said, it is probably an issue for Christian Porter.
SPEERS: Alright, yes. He was asked today and it is still a little unclear. Well see how that committee goes with that further work over the coming weeks. Penny Wong, Shadow Foreign Minister, I do appreciate your time.
WONG: Great to be with you, David.
Authorised by Noah Carroll ALP Canberra.