Interview, Sunday Agenda with Andrew Clennell

Andrew Clennell: Joining me live is the Trade Minister and Special Minister of State, Don Farrell. Don Farrell, good morning. 

Minister for Trade: Good morning, Andrew. 

Andrew Clennell: Can we start with the meeting between Prime Minister Albanese and President Xi last week in Brazil. You also had a recent visit to China. Xi was perhaps warmer than he has been when it came to foreign leaders with Donald Trump being elected. What do you make of all that?

Minister for Trade: Look, I think it's a sign of the success of our stabilisation program with the Chinese Government. You'll remember, Andrew, that when we came to office two and a half years ago there was $20 billion worth of trade impediments on Australian products going into China. People said we couldn't get that business back, that it had been lost. Well, as a result of our stabilisation process, all of the products either have gone back into China, often at volumes higher than previously, or they're on the way to coming back.

So I think it's just an indication of the success of that stabilisation program, and the effort that the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, myself, and the Defence Minister, have put into that relationship.

We want peace and prosperity in our region. We want to get that trade back into China. We also want to diversify our trading relationship, and the good relations now between Australia and China are simply one step along the way of achieving that.

Andrew Clennell: Is there any danger in your government becoming too close to the Government of China, given their record of human rights, cyber‑attacks, foreign inference and the rest?

Minister for Trade: Andrew, on every occasion we take the opportunity to push our national interest and our national security. Nothing that we have done over these two and a half years interferes with our national security and our national interest. Getting $20 billion worth of trade back into China is very much in our national interest. We're going to continue to do that, but at all times, this Government understands that there's no more important role for a Federal Government than national security, and every decision that we make will ensure that we continue to push Australia's national security.

Andrew Clennell: You've made great advances on trade with China, but now we have another trade challenge in terms of Donald Trump, and his proposals for tariffs. How confident do you feel about taking him on in relation to that, about the Prime Minister having success heading off a possible 10 to 20 per cent tariff on Australian goods?

Minister for Trade: The American people have made their decision about who the next President will be, we respect that decision, and we will work with incoming President Trump. I've reached out already to the Commerce Secretary to make contact with him.

Our primary argument, I think, to the Americans is, look, we don't think tariffs are a good idea. Just look at the relationship between Australia and the United States; it's overwhelmingly in the United States' favour. We buy about twice as much product from the United States as we sell. That's been the case since President Truman.

Andrew Clennell: When you say you reached out, have you had an actual conversation?

Minister for Trade: No, I've put in a request to have a discussion. It's, I think, good to make contact in advance ‑‑

Andrew Clennell: Sure.

Minister for Trade:  - of the change.

Andrew Clennell: It the tariff becomes --

Minister for Trade: As you know I --

Andrew Clennell: Sorry, go on.

Minister for Trade: Look, as I've done with my Chinese equivalent, Wang Wentao, I've now had meetings with him on at least nine occasions, it's important, I think, in international relations, particularly in the trade space, to make a personal link, a personal contact with the person that you're dealing with. I think you get better results from that personal contact, and I want to make sure that we are one of the early people that speak with the incoming officials.

Andrew Clennell: If the tariff were to become real, what would it mean for our economy?

Minister for Trade: Look, it's transparently obvious that it would not be good for the Australian economy. We're a trading nation, one in four jobs in Australia are linked to trade. If you're a company that trades, invariably your profits are higher, and if you're a worker that works in a trade-exposed industry your wages are higher. So free and fair trade is very, very important to us.

But look, we're not at that stage yet. I'd argue that we should calm things down a bit, not panic, and do what we've done with the China relationship, which is cool, calm negotiation to try and get the best result for Australian farmers, Australian manufacturers, Australian miners.

Andrew Clennell: What would an American 60 per cent tariff, as is proposed by Trump, on Chinese imports mean for Australia and the world?

Minister for Trade: Look, that obviously would also have an impact on Australia's trade. Much of the product that we export, for instance, minerals, goes into vehicles, to other manufactured goods in China. So it would obviously have an impact.

But again, look, we're not at that stage yet. Some things that are said before the election aren't the way it goes after the election. We would want to have discussions with the United States Government, seek to discourage them from going down the path of tariffs, and support the position that Australia has always adopted, which is free and fair trade.

Andrew Clennell: Because at the end of the day, from what you're saying, if the Chinese economy hurts significantly, our economy hurts significantly.

Minister for Trade: There's no doubt that there's a link between the two, but look, we're not at that stage yet, Andrew, and we shouldn't be jumping ahead of ourselves. It's a new administration, we want to have constructive, sensible discussions with the incoming United States Administration.

We've always had good relations with the United States. I'm sure those good relations will continue under the incoming administration, and I'm certainly going to be doing my best in all of the discussions that I have with my colleagues in the United States to ensure that those good, stable, sensible relations continue. And that we have a peaceful, but more importantly, a prosperous region, and that we do everything that we can to influence the United States in the direction of that free and fair trade.

Andrew Clennell: The electoral donations reforms, turning now to your job as Special Minister of State. These electoral donations reforms you're proposing, they appear, it appears like they'll get the support of the Opposition in the Senate this week; I understand there's just a couple of sticking points. It involves a cap of $20,000 per donor to each recipient and a cap on campaign spending of each electorate of $800,000.

Now the accusation from the crossbench is that this will lead to a big advantage for the major parties. Your argument, I suspect, would be it will take the likes of Simon Holmes à Court and Clive Palmer out of the picture a bit I guess.

Minister for Trade: It won't take them out of the picture, Andrew. What it will do, is create a level playing field for the first time in Australian politics. The billionaires say that there should be no cap on spending, and they should be able to spend as much money as they like on elections.

My argument is that all Australians should be able to participate in the electoral process. You shouldn't have to be sponsored by a billionaire in order to have a chance of getting into the Australian Parliament.

So what these changes do, is they treat everybody equally.  Everybody is going to be subject to the caps that you mentioned, the $20,000 cap in terms of donation, and the $800,000 cap in terms of spending on electoral seats.

I think, if you can't get your message across after spending $800,000, then maybe you shouldn't be in politics Andrew. I think these are sensible reforms. I mean ordinary people like you and me, Andrew, have to be able to participate in the electoral processes. It's not fair that the only people who get to win seats in the elections are those that are anointed by the billionaires.

And so this is a sensible reform, and it not only impacts, of course, on the billionaires, but it sets a level playing field for everybody, everybody knows [indistinct] how much you can spend ‑‑

Andrew Clennell: Okay. So when you talk about people funded by the billionaires, let's call a shovel a spade here, you are talking about the teal independents who actually keep your Liberal ‑ well, apart from Clive Palmer ‑  they actually keep your Liberal rivals at bay, so that's kind of interesting. But there's no doubt they're affected by this, aren't they?

Minister for Trade: Well, everybody ‑ everybody will be subject to these new rules. It's been decades since we've had significant electoral reform like this. The time has come to get this legislation through, and I'm hoping that I'll have broad support for the legislation when it comes on in the Senate this coming week.

But the fact of the matter is, everybody is treated equally, nobody has an advantage under these new rules, and that's the significant change for the first time in our electoral system.

Andrew Clennell: All right. Well, there was a report on the weekend that you met Simon Holmes à Court and he complained to you that your reforms would lock out anyone but the major parties, and you were said to have remarked to a small group later, "That's the f-ing point". Is that story true, and what happened at your meeting with Holmes à Court, if there was one?

Minister for Trade: I never use language like that, Andrew, you know me, I'm not that sort of person, and that's not the language I use. When that comment was put to us, we rejected it. Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to have appeared in the story.

I've met Simon Holmes à Court on a number of occasions, and I meet anybody who wants to talk about sensible reform of our electoral system, and I say the same thing as I'm saying to you now, as I've said to Simon Holmes à Court - we need to have a level playing field. It simply can't be that if you're really rich, or your backers are really rich, that you can participate in the Australian electoral system. Ordinary Australians ‑‑

Andrew Clennell: And did he say to you ‑ did he ‑ I just want to get on this point, 'cause this is the more important point out of this. Did he say to you, "Well, that will massively advantage the major parties", and if he did, what was your response to that?

Minister for Trade: Look, he put his point of view, as he always does, very, very forcefully. But what I said to him is what I'm saying to you now, and what I've said all the way along, I say this publicly and privately, I don't have one argument for private conversations and another argument for public conversations - what we're trying to do here, Andrew, is put downward pressure on the cost of Australian elections. We don't want to go down the track of the American system where you spend billions and billions and billions of dollars on an election. There has to be a cap, there has to be a maximum.

I've consulted widely, not just with Simon Holmes à Court, but with the teals, with the independents, with Mr Pocock, we've even reached out to Clive Palmer. We will talk with anybody who is interested in having a sensible discussion about Australian electoral reform. You know, this legislation is two and a half years in the making. This hasn't come out of nowhere, it's come out of two inquiries by the JSCEM Committee, it's the policy that the Labor Party took to the last election, and I'm hoping that the majority of the Senate will see that this is an overdue reform.

We'll have one chance to do this, Andrew, and that's in the next week, and by the end of that week, I want to see this significant reform to the Australian electoral system.

Andrew Clennell: Do you believe the teals operate like a political party or operate like independents?

Minister for Trade: Oh, look, I'm not going to give running commentary on my opponents. What I do say to the teals is that they've got to rise above self-interest. This is a reform that is a much needed reform in the Australian system.

If we want to avoid going down the track of the American system, then we have one opportunity to do that, and that's in the next five days. So I'd say to the teals, and anybody else who's interested in this debate, put self-interest aside, ask yourself, what is the best, the best for the Australian electoral system, and I believe the reforms that I've introduced achieve that aim. They are the best that we can do ‑‑

Andrew Clennell: What role, Don Farrell, do you think Simon Holmes à Court, other than donor, plays for the teals?

Minister for Trade: Oh, look, I'm not going to get into the inside workings of other political parties. I have enough trouble understanding how the Labor Party works from time to time, Andrew.

Andrew Clennell: I don't think you have trouble with that, Don Farrell.

Minister for Trade: So I'll leave the commentators, fine commentators like yourself to explain the other political parties.

Andrew Clennell: All right.

Minister for Trade: But what I say to all of the players in the political process is get on board, this is really good reform, come on and support it.

Andrew Clennell: All right. Anthony Albanese looks like he's going to have some more success when it comes to releasing overseas prisoners. This time it's the Bali Nine. People can be sympathetic that these young people made a terrible mistake, they did commit a crime though. Is this the best use of the Prime Minister's time in these bilateral meetings with world leaders; getting criminals released?

Minister for Trade: I'm sure that a whole lot of matters are discussed in meetings between the Prime Minister and his counterparts. The Prime Minister does try and represent the interests of Australians abroad. The proposal isn't, as I understand it, to release these people, they would continue to serve their sentence, except they're serving them in Australia.

These discussions are ongoing, and I think at this point there's very little point in me saying anything more about it. The discussions are ongoing. It's clear that the Prime Minister has advocated on behalf of these young Australians, and we'll see what happens in the days and the weeks ahead.

Andrew Clennell: All right, the Future Fund change, to require the Fund to prioritise housing and renewable energy investments and providing the Government can't draw down on the Fund till 2032-33. Why was this change made? Does it risk the country's nest‑egg, as the Opposition argues?

Minister for Trade: Look, of course it doesn't Andrew. We've got a very fine Treasurer in Jim Chalmers, he's always putting Australia's best interests forward, and this is, I think, perhaps the first time that the mandate of the Future Fund has been updated, and it's an important update, and it's an important update to reflect the interests and the concerns of ordinary Australians.

And I think you'll find, as time goes by, these changes will be very much welcomed by the Australian community.

Andrew Clennell: Can I ask about the International Criminal Court requesting an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu. Will he be arrested if he comes here? Why are we differing on the US in relation to this court? What do you make of the calls to get out of the court?

Minister for Trade: I think all of those questions are best left in the hands of our very excellent Foreign Minister, Penny Wong. I deal with trade, and she deals with foreign relations, and it's a very good arrangement and it's one I think we should stick to.

Andrew Clennell: You can't give us the Government's view on that matter this morning?

Minister for Trade: Look, I'm very much following the Foreign Minister on these things. She's made very clear what Australia's position on the decision is, and I'm very happy to leave it in her very capable hands.

Andrew Clennell: Her position seems to be that we should uphold the Rule of Law and stick with the court, although she's not being really emphatic about that.

Minister for Trade: I think you've summarised her position. She says we should uphold the Rule of Law and support the court. The important thing, I think here, beyond the issue of this particular decision is we want a ceasefire in the Middle East, we want a peaceful solution to the problems that currently arise in the Middle East, and the Anthony Albanese Government at all times is working to achieve that outcome.

Andrew Clennell: Just finally, Don Farrell, why is gambling advertising reform proving so hard to land?

Minister for Trade: Look, we've got a terrific Minister in Michelle Rowland; she's been working very hard on some of the issues that you talked about in your introduction, and also on these issues, but when you try and consult with people, when you try and get sensible outcomes, sometimes it takes longer than you think.

I've been surprised in the two and a half years that I've been in this job at just how long some things take. But Michelle is an excellent Minister, she knows what she wants in this area, and she'll continue to have discussions with ‑‑

Andrew Clennell: Just on that ‑‑

Minister for Trade: ‑‑ all of the relevant stakeholders. Yep?

Andrew Clennell: Yeah, just on that and just briefly, what's your view of the Opposition and Greens blocking the misinformation bill?

Minister for Trade: Well, look, both the Opposition, the Opposition in a former iteration, said that they wanted that legislation, the Greens said that they wanted to support that legislation. They've joined forces now to stop the legislation.

Unfortunately that's the end of it. There will be no legislation, the misinformation and disinformation, there will be no legislation until ‑ well, there simply won't be any legislation, Andrew.

The opportunity to support that legislation was going to be this week. The Coalition and the Greens have joined forces to block it. That's the end of it.

Andrew Clennell: Don Farrell, thanks so much for your time.