Sky News, Viewpoint

CHRIS KENNY: Okay, joining us from Canberra tonight is the Trade Minister Steve Ciobo. Steve Ciobo, thanks for joining us, Steve.

STEVEN CIOBO: Pleasure to be with you, Chris.

CHRIS KENNY: Look, we'll get on to trade matters in a moment, but I've got to get you on the ABC first. It's kind of fiddling while Rome burns, isn't it? They're getting - lifting their multicultural quotas here, they're pushing gender and cultural diversity. Don't they desperately need some diversity of opinion, some diversity of ideology, some diversity of ideas?

STEVEN CIOBO: Well, Chris, I was listening to your introduction. I thought, that's a good couple of minute long job application if I've ever heard one. I say in jest, obviously, mate. I say in jest. Look, I've got to say, look, I think what Australian's expect of the ABC is a reflection of Australia. I mean they expect a diversity of voices and indeed it's incumbent on the ABC management, to make sure there is a diversity of voices on the ABC. It shouldn't just be pre-occupied with representing stories or holding a particular point of view, and it should reflect the broad tapestry that is Australian society.

CHRIS KENNY: But successive governments have had trouble getting it to do that. Are you doing enough now, or through the Minister, Mitch Fifield? Is there any pressure on the ABC, under Michelle Guthrie, to try and make it a little bit more mainstream?

STEVEN CIOBO: I think we certainly have attempted where possible through board appointments and through the review that we had a couple of years back about the ABC, to make sure that it is representative. The ABC must respond to the concerns that Australians have. It's always a balancing act for them obviously, but I think that provided that there is a focus on representing the board cross-section that is modern day Australia, then I think they'll be on the right path, if they do that.

CHRIS KENNY: One more question on this, sorry I didn't plan to go down this route, but you know, you got me thinking about this again, but just on - obviously the Government is looking to save spending where ever it can. You do have a real budget dilemma to deal with. What about still having the ABC and SBS? Especially here, we're talking about the ABC pushing multiculturalism, which it's bound to do under its charter. How can we then justify, you know, $1.2 billion for the ABC and then a second public broadcaster with close to half a billion dollars, replicating that effort?

STEVEN CIOBO: Well Chris, look I'm Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment. You're really asking me to venture in to territory that's the domain of the Communications Minister –

CHRIS KENNY: Yes, I know. Trade. You could trade - you could trade the SBS away.

STEVEN CIOBO: I think, look, ultimately these are fundamentally policy questions. We don't have a policy to change these aspects now. Look, there is definitely a role for the public broadcaster. I do believe that the public broadcaster does have a role to play. But like you, I agree that there must be a good cross-section of views on that broadcaster.

CHRIS KENNY: All right. I'll go to one other issue of the day, before we get to your trade portfolio, and that is the issue around 18C. Now, of course, that debate's been going on a long while. It's got another head of steam now, because of the way the Australian Human Rights Commission is pursuing a case now, against the Australian's Bill Leak. We talked about this issue last night. Bill Leak's just been on the Andrew Bolt program before this. Is it not time for the Government to get back to the issue of repealing or amending 18C, Clause 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act? We know that was a policy of the Government's. It was put to the side when Tony Abbott was Prime Minister, but the situation has changed. There are a number of issues running here, and it needs to be addressed in the interest of free speech surely.

STEVEN CIOBO: Well Chris, I think as you identified, when Tony Abbott was Prime Minister, the policy was not to change or appeal 18C. That policy hasn't changed. Now I hear what you're saying and the concerns that people have about the way in which the Human Rights Commission, for example, is looking at that QUT case. I understand concerns that people have, but as a Member of Cabinet, as a Member of the Government, the Government's policy is for a continuation of the policy that exists and under both Prime Minister Abbott and now our Prime Minister Turnbull, and that is not to reappeal 18C. Now having said that, clearly there's a debate being had, and I think debate around the proper balance between freedom of speech, and the ability to make sure we don't have conversations which lead to racial hatred - and I'm not saying that these things do automatically lead to that. Let me reinforce that point, but I think it's appropriate that we have conversation and in fact I think that it's a good thing for the community.

CHRIS KENNY: Yeah well, even if we put the legislation to one side, that is political debate about the law, but the issue here has an Australian cartoonist being pursued by the Human Rights Commission over his expression of thought on a really contentious and important issue of Indigenous disadvantage. Shouldn't we be seeing politicians from the Government standing up and at least defending Bill Leak, and saying he should not be persecuted or in fact censored from expressing these views? This is the essence of freedom of speech and expression.

STEVEN CIOBO: Well I think a number of people have made comments to that effect, to be honest. There is a number of Members of Parliament that have expressed their concerns about Bill Leak's situation but I also delineate between someone looking at something further and it being an actually official outcome. And what I mean by that, Chris, is often we'll see people will bring legal action or there will be inquiries in to different activities that take place, but that doesn't mean that anyone is contravening the law. Now –

CHRIS KENNY: But Steve Ciobo, Steve Ciobo, excuse me for interrupting, but this is really a problematic response, because we know we've got those Queensland University students, the QUT, the Queensland University of Technology, who have been battling an 18C issue for three years. They have the spectre of being labelled racist, hanging over them the whole time. They have to engage lawyers. It pretty much takes over their lives. The process, now even if that all ended in their favour tomorrow, this has been an incredibly debilitating period for them. The same thing now applies to Bill Leak. His name is trashed. People are given licence to call him a racist. He would never - he gets the right decision, but it doesn't take away the punitive effect of the process and therefore, also critically the chilling effect, the way it just stifles other people from daring to say what they think.

STEVEN CIOBO: AndChris, I mean, to some extent there's some validity in that point, however and here's the big issue, however there is no pathway that avoids that outcome. That's a simple fact. Mate, I could make the exact same claims. I've had someone bring a defamation action against me historically. Now just because someone brings a defamation action against me, doesn't mean I've defamed anyone yet I'm still obliged to engage lawyers. I'm still obliged to deal with the allegation that's been made against me. This is the fundamental point, Chris. It's not that what you're saying isn't without merit, but I just would put to you, that it's not as if, by just repealing 18C, you overcome this problem, because you don't. Because if someone wants to make a claim, whether it's a claim in defamation, whether it's a claim under the Racial Discrimination Act, whether it's a claim under some other law, be it state-based or federal-based, the mere fact that someone can bring a claim, makes it a problem along the lines of what you're talking about. Now there's no silver bullet solution and that's why I say, we have defamation laws that exist. The same thing could be said, well if someone makes an allegation under defamation law, are we going to repeal defamation laws and say that they shouldn't exist? That's why I said, we've got to be cautious about the way in which we do this. Now the Government's policy today, on 18C, under Malcolm Turnbull, is exactly the same policy that Tony Abbott had when he was Prime Minister. We don't have plans at this stage to change it, but I certainly welcome discussion around the appropriate role for 18C, and I think that's a good way forward.

CHRIS KENNY: Okay, now the points you make about it being difficult to defend defamation cases and the like are all valid. I've seen defamation from every possible angle, and yes, it can cause legal troubles for you, even if you done nothing wrong, but it's also been a restriction on freedom of speech, and a protection I suppose of people's reputation, that has been around for hundreds of years. There are other restrictions on freedom of speech, such as contempt of court and government security issues, that we're used to. We accept - everybody has to accept some of those limits on freedom of speech. This 18C, Racial Discrimination Act though, is a different beast altogether, because this is a relatively recent addition to the armoury. It deals with the very sensitive issue of racism, because once somebody is actually pursued under this legal frame work, they are pursued, if you like, by a public arbitrator, by the Human Rights Commission. It's virtually as if a government-funded agency is saying you have a case to answer, is saying you are racist, you're being tarred and feather - tarred and feathered by authority, rather than another individual, even before you get to express your case. I mean, it's an odious thing to put up against someone and it can't do anything but stifle free debate of these contentious issues.

STEVEN CIOBO: Well look, Chris, I'm not here to argue the merits or otherwise of 18C. What I'm saying is the Government's policy under Malcolm Turnbull is the same policy we had under Tony Abbott, so there's been no change there –

CHRIS KENNY: Tony Abbott wants to go back and have a look at it again though.

STEVEN CIOBO: Well, look and maybe now since the former Prime Minister's gone to the backbench, he does, and clearly he's expressed a view, to some extent, about that. But we've still got to be realistic about the circumstances that we face in the Senate. And I notice, for example, that Nick Xenophon, one of the parties that helps to control balance of power in the Senate, has indicated that he's opposed to any changes to 18C. So I mean, the political landscape, in some respects has changed, in other respects hasn't. We still can only do what's possible with passage in the Senate, and as I said this point the Government's policy on 18C remains the same under Malcolm Turnbull that it did under Tony Abbott. No change there at all, with both former Prime Minister and current Prime Minister. Again, Chris, if I can just go back to the point you made about saying you had a tax-payer funded organisation in terms of the Human Rights Commission that's investigating this, well, look, I mean, that role is, to some extent, similar to other investigative agencies, at the end of the day, with respect to the QUT matter, there was someone who bought the allegation in the first place, bought it to the attention of the Human Rights Commission, but you know, mate, we are getting in to weeds now, in an area that's much more the domain of the Attorney General.

CHRIS KENNY: We are indeed, and you've just indirectly given me a great assignment. I need to get Nick Xenophon together with Bill Leak and change Nick Xenophon's mind on this. Look let's get on to your portfolio. You look after trade. It's been a busy agenda, both before you got the job and looking ahead. Firstly I want you to help me clear up an issue from last night's program. I had a gentleman on from the UK speaking about human rights abuses in Pakistan. He said that Australia exports uranium to Pakistan. I told him I didn't think that was correct. I couldn't check the facts at the time, but that's absolutely correct isn't it? We do not export uranium to Pakistan. Australia is nowhere near that and wouldn't even consider that at this stage.

STEVEN CIOBO: That's correct. We do not export any uranium to Pakistan.

CHRIS KENNY: When it comes to our relationship with Pakistan. Do we have a trade relationship of some kind? We certainly have a security relationship and something of an aid relationship. Do we express to Pakistan our concerns about human rights issues there? Particularly discrimination and persecution of Christians and also the treatment of women under Sharia law sometimes in places?

STEVEN CIOBO: Australia has a proud track record of being a strong advocate on human rights matters. Indeed, you'd be aware Chris, we're currently campaigning for membership of the Human Rights Council as part of the United Nation's bid that we've got. This is consistent with Australia's past form. We've always been fairly consistent on these matters and continue to be. I think we've got a really proud track record with respect to advocating for and around human rights and we'll continue to do so into the future.

CHRIS KENNY: Okay now looking at your trade agenda at the moment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership - an agreement that was struck, very difficult agreement to get 15 countries to join up to. But it seems to me that Donald Trump's antipathy towards this in the United States presidential election and the reaction from Hilary Clinton means that this deal is dead. You're not going to get the United States to ratify this.

STEVEN CIOBO: I'm not sure I would agree with that. The fact is that most of those that are students of congressional politics Chris, tell me that they remain, and I use the words 'cautiously optimistic'. That continues to be the view. The fact is there's a lame duck session, which occurs post presidential election, and prior to the inauguration of the new United States President. That lame duck session does present an opportunity for the Trans-Pacific Partnership to be ratified. And look Australia's view on this has been consistent for some time. We're certainly of the view that ratification of the TPP is good for all 12 member countries that have entered into that agreement. Gives us great access to markets. It helps facilitate trade between member countries and in this day and age, when there are so many economic headwinds, when there is so much volatility around the world, we need to have trade between countries to drive economic growth and to drive employment outcomes.

CHRIS KENNY: You don't have to convince me, but you do have to convince the US Congress, and of course because Donald Trump has attacked it so strongly, Hilary Clinton has had to rule out any support for the TPP. Even though she has previously been a friend of the deal. Isn't it then the case that post-election, that the Congress would not do a deal, will ratify this in a way that would backfire on Hilary Clinton, should she win the presidential contest?

STEVEN CIOBO: Well we just don't know Chris. The fact is, as I said, those that are students of congressional politics tell me that they remain cautiously optimistic that the TPP could be ratified. I think that's a great outcome, let me be very clear on that. Ratification in the United States of the TPP is a great outcome for all 12 countries. It's going to help to drive trade, help to drive employment, help to drive economic growth. We just don't know, because ultimately there will be a suite of senators and members from the Democrats side, from the Republican side. Some of whom have lost their seats, some of whom of course are holding on. Where they decide to go on TPP issues in that lame duck session only time will tell. Like many things in the United States Congress Chris, there will be a lot of wheeling and dealing involved with whether or not it goes through or not?

CHRIS KENNY: Okay, on the trade agenda you've chalked up Japan, South Korea, China free trade deals. Is India next cab off the rank? How are negotiations going with India, which of course is the other really rising giant in world economic terms?

STEVEN CIOBO: The next cab off the rank is our strong focus on Indonesia. I was pleased in March of this year to announce with Tom Lembong, who was then Indonesia's Trade Minister, that Australia and Indonesia would formally recommence negotiations for a comprehensive economic partnership agreement, which is just another way of saying a free trade agreement with Indonesia. We're certainly very keen for that to happen, Chris. India remains an area of focus for us. I had a bilateral meeting in Laos several weeks ago with India's Trade Minister and we decided it was time to do a stocktake on negotiations and what that basically means Chris, there's been a lot of discussions. These are big, complex negotiations and I wanted to make sure that both sides knew exactly where we stood in terms of the current environment on those negotiations. So that's currently under way and we'll continue to see how that looks in the near future.

CHRIS KENNY: That's interesting really, because the Indian arrangements or negotiations were certainly flagged earlier. Indonesia came along later, but you're saying is, definitely the focus now and the priority, which is interesting. What are the prospects there? I think most Australians are starting to realise just the potential so far we've missed out on in stronger business, trade, people-to-people links with Indonesia, because the economic development that is occurring across the Indonesian acapellago and especially on Java are quite incredible at the moment.

STEVEN CIOBO: Absolutely, and the fact is that the trade and investment relationship between Australia and Indonesia is very light on. It should be substantially more than it actually is. There are so many Australians that travel to Bali. Big numbers go there on a regular basis. Australians know Indonesia and for better or for worse, I think that the relationship should be much stronger than it should be, given the historical context of the two countries and I know that that is going to drive a beneficial outcome for Australia. The fact is, with around 250 million people, a middle class of more than 50 million people and a rapidly accelerating economy -one that's got tremendous growth ahead of it - it presents a real opportunity for Australia, because there are so many sectors, Chris, where we've got natural complementarities. What does that mean? It means, for example, Indonesia's Government has got a real desire to drive education outcomes to better equip and build capacity among their people and their labour force. What's Australia great at? We're really good at vocational education, we're really good at English language, we're really good at tertiary skills. We can have exporters of those education skills, practices, colleges, etc., in Indonesia helping this outcome.

CHRIS KENNY: Joko Widodo, the Indonesian president is due in Australia within weeks. Presumably this will be a really strong focus. You can see some sort of prospects of a deal in what sort of time frame?

STEVEN CIOBO: We agreed when I was in Jakarta most recently, that we would look to conclude a deal between Australia and Indonesia by the end of next year. We're certainly very hopeful that we'll be able to have a very good outcome, a comprehensive, commercially meaningful outcome, in terms of those discussions between Australia and Indonesia. So that's the timetable we're currently working to.

CHRIS KENNY: All right Steve Ciobo. Thanks for joining us. We did a bit of ABC and 18C but we got to some trade eventually too.

STEVEN CIOBO: Thanks Chris. Have a good evening.