E&OE……………………….……………………………………………………………

 

 

The Coalition has a very strong record over the decades when it comes to engagement with Asia. It was Percy Spender after all who instituted the Colombo plan, which has been so important even now in our links with the countries of Asia. It was Sir John McEwen back in the late 1950s who put in place the trade arrangements with Japan and of course, John Howard immeasurably deepened our relationship with Asia despite scepticism from the Labor Party that he would be able to do so. I believe that as Opposition Leader, I have continued that tradition. As Opposition Leader, I’ve made three official visits to Asia, to Japan, to China and most recently to Indonesia and we have two Asia specific policies out already: Our commitment to restore language study in schools, to try to ensure that 40 per cent of school students are studying a language, predominately an Asian language within a decade. We’ve also committed to a two-way street version of the Colombo plan. So, we take Asia seriously.

 

I think we take Asia more seriously than this Government which is why I’ve said repeatedly that we need more Jakarta and less Geneva in our foreign policy. It’s good to see that the Government appears to have been heeding that message. So, the Opposition broadly welcomes the Asia White Paper. There is a sense in which what it contains is common sense but predictable. It’s full of laudable goals, but not very many specific initiatives and certainly no commitment of money to any of them. To some extent, this Government is scrambling to overcome some serious failures in its relationship with Asia, most notably the early ban on uranium sales to India only just reversed and the catastrophic ban on live cattle sales to Indonesia, which still has ramifications.

 

To some extent the Government is playing catch up politics with its new commitment to Asian languages and its Australia Awards which sounds like a poor man’s version of a two-way street version of the Colombo plan. This is a Government which has been consistently strong on aspiration, but weak on delivery. There are a series of major statements from this Government that haven’t led to any specific initiatives. There was the Defence White Paper of 2009 which hasn’t been acted upon, there’s the Gonski statement which has not yet been specifically acted upon, there’s the Murray Darling Plans which so far the Government is not very good at delivering upon. So I think the problem with this statement today is that it is of a piece with a Government that tends to be far more talk than action and what we see today is that the Government is saying something today which is contradicted by what it did last week.  For instance, objective number one of the White Paper is to further develop Australia’s skills and education, yet in the MYEFO mini budget last week, they cut $3.9 billion from education funding. Objective number two is to further enhance Australia as an innovation society and economy and yet in the MYEFO money mini budget last week, there was hundreds of millions of dollars cut from university research.

 

Fundamentally, the best guarantee of Australian participation in the Asian century is a strong economy and unfortunately, the principle policies of this Government will make our economy weaker, not stronger. There’s the carbon tax, there’s the mining tax, there’s the failure to get Government spending under control. There’s the failure to boost productivity and my fear is that unless the Government can do more to boost our domestic economy, inevitably we are going to be left behind. Inevitably, the Australian moment in the Asian Century could easily pass, but as I said, we do broadly welcome it. It is full of predictable common sense. The goals are laudable, but the specific commitments are few and far between.

 

 

Mr Abbott, if you won the next election, would you commit to matching the increase in the diplomatic footprint in Asia that’s outlined in the document?

 

 

Well, we certainly think that as part of a foreign policy which has a Jakarta rather than a Geneva focus, that is where our diplomatic effort should go.

 

 

Mr Abbott, you said that unless the Government keeps the economy strong we’re going to fall behind and we will not be able to participate or experience the benefits of the Asian Century. The economy’s growing at the moment and productivity has also improved.

 

 

Well, productivity has blipped up recently, but for the first few years of this Government, the productivity performance was poor to say the most and if you look at growth, GDP growth per person – GDP per head has grown at just over a half a per cent a year compared to well over two per cent a year under the Howard Government. So, while headline GDP figures have often been respectable, when you actually look behind it, GDP growth has been pretty anaemic.

 

 

Mr Abbott, How’s the mining tax going to harm the economy if it’s not raising any money?

 

This is a lose-lose tax. It is a lose-lose tax! What this Government has done and it’s an extraordinary achievement from this Government. I mean an absolute remarkable coup is bring in a confidence and investment sapping tax that doesn’t actually raise any revenue and only the geniuses that run this Government could come up with such an extraordinary economic own goal.

 

 

Do you think Australia’s economic future lies with Asia – within Asia?

 

 

There is no doubt that over time, more and more of our trade will be with Asia, more and more of our investment will be investment in and from Asia. Over time, there should be more and more cultural engagement with Asia. So look, I think Australia’s future is with Asia, but in the end we are a global country with global reach, but we need to focus on the area where the principal opportunities lie.

 

 

Does business do you think need to do more to engage or as the Government says have a deeper experience and knowledge of Asia?

 

 

I think that’s important and that’s why I’m so strong on what I call the two-way street version of the Colombo plan. I was in a meeting in Bali about a fortnight ago. It involved three Australians, four senior Indonesians. Six of the people in that room had been to university in Australia. Now, this is the marvellous legacy of the Colombo plan – the Colombo plan which sadly has been defunct for the best part of two decades. We need to revive it and it needs to be a two-way street. Our best and brightest need to be studying in our region as well as the best and brightest of the region coming to Australia to study.

 

 

Mr Abbott, doesn’t that actually happen in this White Paper, because it does suggest that universities boost the number of Australian students studying in Asia and improve financial assistance? Isn’t that exactly what you are talking about?

 

 

The great thing about the Colombo plan was that it was something that had a very high profile in the region. It was a little like Rhodes scholarships for the region and what I’m talking about is something which should be really a very prestigious thing – something that the best and the brightest in the region would aspire to. Something that the best and brightest here would aspire to.

 

 

Mr Abbott, you spoke – you’ve had your policy you’ve announced on Asian languages. I guess what’s flagged in this and what Julia Gillard announced what they would adopt is a little more comprehensive in so far as that every school must offer one of these priority languages and will have funding tied to it. Is that something in principle you feel you could support at this stage? Before you’ve seen the detail?

 

 

Well, I don’t want to get drawn into that level of detail until I’ve seen the detail and what we need is not just to make it available, we need to ensure that it’s attractive enough for people to be actually taking up those opportunities. Now, there are lots and lots of schools which have language programmes available – foreign language programmes available. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer of our youngsters are taking those foreign languages. So we need to drill down into the reasons why this is the case and try to ensure that we get much better outcomes in the future than we’ve had in the recent past.

 

Back in the 1960s, 40 per cent of high school leavers took a foreign language. Now it’s down to 10 per cent. Now, if we want to let other cultures know that we take them as seriously as we want them to take us, we need to make much more of an effort with foreign languages.

 

 

Mr Abbott, the White Paper unveils an income growth scenario for Australia about $10,000 I think by 2025. Is that – is it too ambitious? Is it about right or is it achievable under the – what’s your view on the ambition of that policy?

 

 

Well I think we should be trying to maximise our income. Of course we should be trying to maximise our income and you know, if we want to improve Gross National Income per head, the best thing we can do is abolish the carbon tax, because under the Government’s own modelling, Gross National Income per person will be $5,000 a year less in 2050 with a carbon tax than without a carbon tax.

 

 

Can I ask you a question on another topic? Today, Kevin Rudd has penned an extract for Maxine McKew’s book talking about the leadership team saying that Kevin Rudd actually asked Julia Gillard to be his successor. What’s your reaction to that and why do you think Kevin Rudd is still going on about it? Do you think he needs to move on?

 

 

I think the public are sick of this soap opera. It is a soap opera. The Labor Party leadership is a soap opera and the only way to end the soap opera is to change the Government to give the Labor Party a stint in Opposition when they can sort this stuff out.

 

 

Mr Abbott, the WA branch of the Liberal Party passed a motion last night strongly urging federal MPs to support full deregulation of the wheat market immediately which is not your policy. Do you have concerns given the extra pressure on the WA MPs that there might be more MPs willing to abstain or cross the floor on this bill when it comes to the house this week?

 

 

Look, a few points in response. I fully understand why some people in the west feel strongly on this, but West Australian wheat growers are themselves divided. Sure the PGA and the west is strongly in favour of the Government’s legislation, but there are other wheat growers – experienced senior wheat growers who aren’t in favour of it. So, I understand the situation in Western Australia. I respect the call of the WA state council – our lay party is perfectly entitled to pass resolutions, but in the end, the policy of the Coalition is determined by the parliamentary party, not by the lay party. That’s always been the way we’ve done it.

 

Unlike the Labor Party, we aren’t bound by the decisions of people outside the Parliament. Now, we’ve had a very lengthy discussion in our Party room on this matter. Lots and lots of people had their say on both sides of the issue I’ve got to say. But the overwhelming view at the end of that discussion was that we would stick to our position, which is that we support deregulation, but we want it to happen the right way, not the wrong way and the trouble with this bill is that it isn’t addressing some of the issues that need to be addressed if the industry is to be fully deregulated, but should there be a change of Government within twelve months, work will be well underway to bring this about.

 

Thank you.

 

[ends]