ABC Insiders: The Prime Ministers

DAVID SPEERS, PRESENTER: I'm joined now by two former Prime Ministers who were once political opponents, but I'm pleased to say they have come together for us this morning. Malcolm Turnbull and Kevin Rudd, thank you both very much for your time. Look, let's just start with where we are at. It is an unusual situation - Joe Biden has been declared the winner. He's certainly claimed victory. Donald Trump, as we have seen again in the last hour or so saying he has won. Kevin Rudd, let me get your thoughts on this first. What happens from here? Do you think there'll be a smooth transition of power ultimately?KEVIN RUDD, FORMER PRIME MINISTER: Um, it really does depend on two factors, I think. One is what President Trump does personally and whether he decides to put on his big boy pants, as someone said recently in the United States, and act like a grown-up in this period of transition. And, two, the attitude of the Murdoch media and the Fox network in the future because this is the media base of the entire Trump and far-right Republican phenomenon. And so those are the two critical dynamics here. I think before taking that further, though, David, it's important for us all simply to say as people who are members of the world-wide democratic family, congratulations Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. This is a great win and for those who seem to have inferred that this is going to be a narrow win, if you look at the outstanding states, Joe Biden is on track to, in fact, end up with more of the Electoral College votes than Trump did in 2016 and certainly a bigger slice of the popular vote. So he's been elected legitimately and it's time for everyone in the United States and around the world to move on because the challenges facing the world with a pandemic, with climate change, with global economic recovery, are massive.SPEERS: I want to come to some of those.RUDD: Two dynamics - Trump and Murdoch.SPEERS: I'll come to some of those issues. Malcolm Turnbull to you, you did Tweet this morning, "What a relief", in relation to this declaration of victory for Joe Biden. Why is this moment a relief? And again what do you think might happen from here?TURNBULL: Well, it's - look, it's a relief to have a return to normal transmission, to have an administration that is going to be consistent, that isn't going to be, you know, making decisions by wild Tweets in the early hours of the morning, that isn't going to be walking out of global treaties and alliances, you know, discombobulating friends and foes alike. It is the - four years of Trump have been a very, very disruptive period. I mean, it's left the United States, the most important, you know, democracy in the world and the most important country in the world much more divided than it was at the beginning of four years. I mean, you know, as Kevin, I'm sure would agree, one of the principal roles of a nation's leader is to unite the nation, is to try to bring people together.What Trump sought to do was to further divide - supported by his friends in the media like Murdoch - support the - or to exacerbate divisions in the nation to his own political advantage. That weakened America. I mean, that's what America's foes want to happen to America - they want America to be more divided. So a more united America is a huge advantage for everyone, not least of which of whom, of course, are the Americans. From our point of view, we have, as Scott Morrison has said, we have a very strong relationship with the United States, it goes well beyond individual PMs and Presidents - you know, I was after - I had some pretty blunt conversations with Trump, but we managed to - we managed the relationship well. So I had good - I had a good dealings with him in a pragmatic sense, but the destabilisation of the international - you know - order, the rules-based order that the United States itself put in place after the Second World War was being undermined by the Trump Administration. Now, that will now come to an end and hopefully the, you know, consistency and greater stability will be the order of the day.SPEERS: You mentioned the division. Kevin Rudd, we do see in this result from this election, yes, Joe Biden has received more votes than any candidate in history. Yet Donald Trump, he may not have won, but he also received more votes than any Republican candidate in history. The numbers are staggering. In fact, he increased his vote from 2016 by some 7 million votes or so. It shows, doesn't it, that Trumpism is still alive, it's not dead, it thrives. How will this continue to shape American politics?RUDD: Certainly the underlying phenomenon which gave rise to Trumpism, if you like, are two-fold. Underlying economic inequality in the country whereby huge slabs of America no longer felt like they had a future stake in the American economy or democracy as it was traditionally conceived. And so they became willing cannon fodder for an appeal by demagogues that somehow they could, by, through an appeal to nationalism make their material circumstances better. So the core of I said of Joe Biden's agenda is to deal with not just economic equality in general, but how it affects regional and rural America where so much of this Trump base has been. But there's a second element too for the future. And that is, what we have seen with Murdoch's Fox is the amplification through this rolling daily megaphone of the Fox network in the United States of division and difference in America as opposed to unity for the country's future. So, therefore, there's a responsibility for the Democrats now they have won to deal with the economic cause of this inequality in America which gives rise to this level of nationalism, but secondly, a whole need for the Fox media network to have a long look at itself in its role in pulling America apart. They are the two core elements of the future as I would judge it.SPEERS: And I want to come back to your push for a royal commission in News Corp here, just quickly on what Scott Morrison, how he's handling this. The current Prime Minister, he has congratulated along with other world leaders Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Malcolm Turnbull, should he be doing anything more? If Trump refuses to go, should he pick up the phone? How would you deal with this?TURNBULL: Oh, I think that the best thing to do is to behave conventionally. Congratulate the president and Vice-President elect. Have a conversation with them, if they're open to talking to foreign leaders before the inauguration. Sometimes they don't like to do that. But just play it by the book. I wouldn't be giving Donald Trump advice on the US Constitution and his rights. I think Arthur Sinodinos is absolutely right. Look, the most important thing, the most important message that a number of world leaders gave, and Jacinda Ardern did so very elegantly and eloquently was - count every vote. That was the most important thing. Now the votes are being counted. If Trump wants to go to the courts in the United States, well, you know, that's a matter for him, as Arthur said. They've got a legal system. It doesn't... I can't see any evidence that there is much to appeal about. But he's entitled to the courts of law which are open to him, so he's entitled to do that if he wishes. But ultimately, I have no doubt that he will go. There is no way that he is going to try to barricade himself into the White House. That's too absurd, even in the rather surreal environment of the Trump Administration.SPEERS: OK, let's turn to what a Biden administration means for Australia. You both know him. What are going to be the major differences we notice? Kevin Rudd - climate change? Trade? The relationship with China? What can we expect under a Biden administration?TURNBULL: Let me focus on climate change to start with. The bottom line is that this chalk and cheese, Trump v Biden on climate. And the Democratic Party in the United States over the last four years has evolved even further on climate change activism at home and abroad. So this has huge implications for Morrison’s current minimal approach to climate change action. You see, now with the election of the Biden administration, 70% of Australia's principal economic partners will have accepted a mid-century target of carbon neutrality. That’s where the US is going, that is where Japan is going, that is where China is going, albeit 2060, the Republic of Korea and others and the Europeans. So the excuse from the Morrison administration here in Australia that somehow, we can hide in the shadows, I think has disappeared overnight with Joe Biden's win. And the second element of climate change, apart from the mid-century target is this - we are now up for the fifth anniversary of the Paris Agreement. America is going to come storming back into that agreement. The expectation and undertakings at Paris that we would provide new commitments as Australia, and all states, through to 2030 - again, Morrison has been hiding from that. It's critical that Australia now sees this opportunity, forced upon it by actions in the international community to get real. My appeal to Morrison today is - use this change in Washington to swallow your political pride and get real on the mid-century target of carbon neutrality and a new trajectory to 2030.SPEERS: Just to be clear, you mean a higher emissions target for 2030, beyond the 26% to 28%?TURNBULL: Absolutely. And you see, you cannot get to mid-century carbon neutrality unless you’ve got a more ambitious trajectory to 2030. It makes no sense.SPEERS: Is that message to Labor as well? Labor is still debating this. Should Labor take a clear position on a higher emissions target by 2030?RUDD: Before the Labor Party gets to the next Federal Election, they will have to. But they will be working their way through this in the meantime. Morrison’s the Government now. He has nowhere to move on this. He must act and I call upon him today to do so.SPEERS: Just on this climate question, Malcolm Turnbull, - do you think what's happened in the United States means Scott Morrison, necessarily, does have to commit to net zero by 2050, and indeed a higher short-term target?TURNBULL: I think it really provides the opportunity, as Kevin said, for Morrison to pivot. I mean, look... I can speak with some authority on this. Morrison's concern is that the combination of the right wing of the Liberal Party and the National Party, and the right wing media, mostly owned by Murdoch, will go after him, as they when after me, if he is seen to do anything that suggests he is taking climate change seriously or too seriously. So he is basically walking on eggshells. Now, Trump has lost. Murdoch's man in the White House has been defeated. The Americans are going to be taking a leading position, globally, on climate action once again, and Biden has flagged that this is going to be part of America's international trade agenda as well as the Europeans have. Now, we have the opportunity in Australia to be a clean energy superpower. We have the opportunity to be much more ambitious in reducing emissions and to have cheaper electricity, and from zero emissions sources because of our extraordinary solar and wind resources. Now, we've got some good building blocks in place. We've got a lot of solar going in. There's a lot of wind. We’ve got Snowy Hydro 2.0 under construction. The battery of the nation pumped hydro scheme in Tasmania is not yet under construction but should be with a bit more energy - excuse the pun - from the Government. We've got the building blocks. Now is the time for Scott Morrison to say - right, the global landscape has changed, the people that have been holding us back, holding the Coalition and the country back on this issue are out of the way - I don't have to go on with all this BS about a gas-led recovery which is, honestly, just political piffle. Focus on cutting emissions, cheap electricity, zero emissions. This is the time to pivot, otherwise, he's going to look like he’s out on the extreme with Saudi Arabia, for heaven's sake, as some kind of a carbon economy, I mean really, we can do so much better than that, and now is the time for Scott to move.SPEERS: I want to deal with China as well here. Because while we've been very focused with what's happening in the United States, the trade relationship between Australia and China has deteriorated further this week. More of Australian exports are apparently being banned entry to China. What can be done? We know the reasons why China is upset with Australia from our position on things like Huawei and the South China Sea, to the foreign interference laws that you introduced, Mr Turnbull. But Kevin Rudd to you first – what actually can Australia do about this situation right now?RUDD: I think, together with Malcolm, we'd both agree, and with Mr Morrison, that dealing with the China relationship for any Australia prime minister is a really difficult challenge. That's because Xi Jinping's China has become more powerful and assertive. That's the reality. However, the way in which we've gone about it, I think, under Mr Morrison, leaves many questions to be answered about what can now be done. I think David, it's worth reflecting on this. About late September, early October, the Chinese sent out a couple of olive branches. There was a speech by the Chinese ambassador and an interview with Fu Ying, the former ambassador to Australia, and later foreign vice minister of China, and influential in Chinese foreign policy circles, about finding a way through the current impasse in the China-Australia relationship. But we get to mid to late October and into early November - China has now doubled down in the trade measures you've just referred to. So for me, the key analytical question here is - what happened to the olive branch? Was it rejected in Canberra? And what can now be done? A couple of thoughts from me. Number one - Mr Morrison, and I've said this a few times before, needs to understand the absolute difference between having a hard-line operational policy and strategy in dealing with China on the one hand, as opposed to a rolling declaratory strategy, which turns every day into a media opportunity to say something loud and provocative about Beijing. Take the example of Japan. Japan, next door to China, a horrible relationship historically with China, an ally of the United States, a fellow democracy like Australia. With outstanding territorial disputes with China for god’s sake, with boats and planes flying at each other every day of the week in Senkaku Diaoyu Dao in the East China Sea, but we see a managed diplomatic relationship between Tokyo and Beijing which does not go through this massive rollercoaster that we see with Australia, because there is a maturity in the diplomatic management of it. So Morrison should look to Tokyo in the way in which we model this Australia-China relationship in the future. And finally, with Biden's election, there will be an opportunity for a certain type of strategic reset between the US and China. It won't become a soft strategy by the Democrats - far from it. As Malcolm has indicated and I think Arthur Sinodinos before. There is a bipartisan, hard-line posture towards Beijing in the Congress. But there will be an opportunity for some level of strategic reset. If I was Morrison, even though they put all their eggs in the past into the Trump basket, I would be beating a path to the door of the Democrats to find a way of using any recalibration in the US-China relationship to recalibrate the Australia-China relationship at the same time.SPEERS: Here's a question to the two of you, as two former prime ministers, two who have met and discussed issues with Xi Jinping. Would you be willing to go as special envoys? I have no idea if Scott Morrison would invite you to? But would the two of you be willing to be special envoys to try and achieve what Kevin Rudd is discussing there? Malcolm Turnbull?TURNBULL: Look, I wouldn't speculate on that, David, I don't think that’s very helpful. Let me comment if I may, on what Kevin said. Broadly, I agree with what Kevin said. I think he’s a bit harsh on Morrison - actually quite harsh on Morrison, but he’d probably expect me to say that. Let me make a couple of points in addition to what Kevin said. Firstly, what the Chinese Government is trying to do is to make Australia more compliant. Its trade sanctions if you call them that, and outrage from time to time, is entirely instrumental. It's designed to get us to change our position. When we introduced the foreign interference and foreign influence legislation, there was a lot of pressure of this kind to try to get us to drop that legislation. A lot of pressure on the Labor Party to vote against it. None of that was successful, and once those laws were passed, the pressure subsided. So the only thing an Australian government can do is to stick to your guns in the sense... That's probably not a good metaphor.SPEERS: Hold its position!TURNBULL: But what you've got to do is be consistent, stand your ground. There is no point getting into rhetorical, gratuitous, hyperbolic language. I don't think Morrison has done that, but I think that Kevin is right as a matter of principle. Play a straight bat, be calm and considered, but stand up for Australia. Do not take a backward step. If you take a backward step with bullies or people that are trying to stand over you, whoever they are, they will simply want more concessions. So we have to be calm, considered, strong, stand up for our sovereignty.SPEERS: Final issue, and you've both touched on the role of News Corp when it comes to the US election. And it's an area that you both agree on here as well. Kevin Rudd, your petition for a Royal Commission into News Corp has now achieved more than half a million signatures in Australia, including that of Malcolm Turnbull. What specifically do you want to see change in Australia? Is it a change to media ownership laws that you're ultimately after?RUDD: Well, I want to achieve two things in this national debate on the future of the Murdoch media monopoly in Australia, David. The first is to bring a razor sharp focus in our national conversation about how the Murdoch bullies try to dominate Australian politics. The fact that we're here with Malcolm this morning - Malcolm and I disagree on a multitude of things, but Murdoch's treatment of Malcolm Turnbull in 2018, directly interfering into the internal politics of the Liberal Party, to do what he could through his editors to bring about a leadership change to Morrison and/or Dutton at the time, is a disgrace. And it needs to be called out. But it's symptomatic of a broader cancer on our democracy. And my principle motivation in putting this petition together has been to bring to the surface this national conversation - rather than people being too frightened to talk about it. Murdoch has engendered a culture of fear in Australia about this discussion because he goes after people individually who raise this question. Including myself, including Malcolm, including others. The second objective in this national petition, and I thank Malcolm for signing it, is to establish a Royal Commission so that all appropriate and alternative media models from other democracies can be examined and sorted to maximise media diversity. So we don't end up with a situation, for example, in my state of Queensland, where nearly 100% of all the papers are owned by Murdoch. 70% of the print readership nationally. Monopoly is bad for democracy, like it’s bad for the economy. So they're the two objectives and the petition will be tabled in the week ahead in the Parliament.SPEERS: Now Malcolm Turnbull – the same question. What, ultimately, needs to change here in your view? Is it laws that would force more diversity in media ownership?TURNBULL: Look, I think that that can be part of the picture. I just want to say, I listened carefully to what Kevin said and I very much agree with it. I think he's summed it up very well. I'd just add a couple of points. I'm not normally a fan of Royal Commissions. However, I do think that there is a profound problem with the way the Murdoch media in particular, and media more generally, is operating at the moment. The old media models of curated media has been shattered by the Internet and social media, and as Paul Kelly said to me a few years ago, and I related in my book - what's happened is that crazy bitter partisanship of social media has taken over much of what we used to call the mainstream media. So the Murdoch press that used to be a journalistic operation, a news operation, that tended to lean more to the right than the left, has now become a vehicle of propaganda. It's just a political operation. Now, by comparison, and Lenore Taylor is here, the editor of The Guardian, and one of the best things I've ever done in the media business and I've had a lot to do with it over the years, was encourage the formation of The Guardian Australia. But The Guardian is an avowedly, small l liberal left of centre publication. And at election time, you can be pretty sure they are going to recommend a vote for the Labor Party. But they don't make stuff up. They done engage in vendettas. They don't encourage conspiracy theories. They don't cover up the misdeeds of their friends in politics or hammer, vindictively those who they regard as their enemies. It is a legitimate, professional news organisation. Now you cannot say that about News Corporation any more. We have to work out what price we're paying, as a society, for the hyper-partisanship of the media. Look at the United States and the terrible, divided state of affairs that they're in, exacerbated, as Kevin was saying, by Fox News and other right-wing media. It is the outcome... The outcome is dreadful because we've got to have, in a democracy, we've got to be able to have shared facts. We've got to be able to essentially agree on what the context and factual environment is. And then differ as colourfully as we like on opinions and policies and measures. But what we've got at the moment is, we are seeing people are being able to live in a siloed echo chamber that just reinforces their prejudices, that appeals to the worst demons of their nature rather than their better angels. And if you want to see an example of what that does to a country, look at the United States. So I reckon we've got some very big issues with the media. It has changed dramatically the whole environment. And again, I'm not a fan of Royal Commissions, but I do think that we do need to have an open inquiry, and someone like yourself, David - you should have the opportunity to tell the truth about what it was like working in Sky News. Because you were there in the belly of the beast. You couldn't bear it any longer and you left like so many other honest journalists and they should be entitled to have their say.SPEERS: I will always tell the truth, Malcolm Turnbull, and that's not quit as dark and dire as you characterise there.TURNBULL: I'm sure that you do, {crosstalk}SPEERS: I am very happy to be here at the public broadcaster. Years ago, I would have doubted there would be so much agreement between the two of you. But I do appreciate you coming together!RUDD: So would we!TURNBULL: We had agreed on an Emissions Trading Scheme I seem to recall, a few years ago…SPEERS: You did once upon a time. I appreciate you both joining us this morning on a big news day globally. Thank you Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull.