THE HON PETER DUTTON MP
LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
FEDERAL MEMBER FOR DICKSON
TRANSCRIPT
INTERVIEW WITH JOHN LAWS,
JOHN LAWS MORNING SHOW
2SM RADIO NETWORK
14 October 2022
Subjects: Syrian repatriation; military support for Ukraine; the Government’s backflip on their methane pledge to Aussie farmers; Labor’s crab walking away from legislated tax cuts; Paul Keating’s comments on AUKUS.
E&OE…………………………………………………………………………………………
JOHN LAWS:
The Opposition Leader Peter Dutton is on the line. Peter Dutton, good morning and welcome to the programme.
PETER DUTTON:
Good morning, Lawsy. Nice to be on the programme. Thank you.
JOHN LAWS:
It’s good to talk to you again. Do you believe this BS that repatriating Islamic State brides comes with no risk to our national security?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I don’t believe that for a moment. I had the briefings on the individuals, many of them when I was the Minister for Home Affairs and we discussed this in the National Security Committee on a number of occasions, John. I don’t believe that the government can mitigate the risk that many of these people would present and in family units where you’ve got…
JOHN LAWS:
Ok, risks in what way though, Peter. Explain that. What kind of risk would they present?
PETER DUTTON:
Well certainly, for some of the women the advice is very clear that they’re as bad as any of the men that they’ve followed over there. They have a hatred of the West, they have a hatred of our country, and we don’t want those people or people of that ideology roaming the streets here. I mean, everybody’s heart goes out for young children. But the fact is, tragically, the parents have made a decision to take their children into a theatre of war, or the children have been born in that theatre of war. So, if you’ve got somebody coming out of jail, in Australia, for example, who has committed a terrorist offence and the police decide that person hasn’t been rehabilitated, that poses the same threat potentially, as somebody who has been in Syria fighting against our allies, and [inaudible] if they returned back to Australia, that’s…
JOHN LAWS:
Well, I’ve never been able to understand that side of it, but aren’t they Australian? Aren’t they entitled to come back to their own country?
PETER DUTTON:
There’s certainly an argument for that, John, and we’ve got to take into account the rights and interests of Australians here as well. These are people that have put themselves in harm’s way, their children into harm’s way, and there’s obviously a difficulty for them to exit the camp where they are, where they’ve been hanging out with other terrorists now for a number of years. If the government facilitates their exit from that facility, then they’re able to repatriate back to Australia. It’s like saying that if somebody’s in jail, in a particular country, and if the government here is able to negotiate the release from jail, then that person is obviously able to return back to Australia, but at the moment, they can’t return because they’re incarcerated within this particular facility.
JOHN LAWS:
I don’t understand why they’re not able to come back to their own country – it’s their country?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, they will have rights as any Australian citizen does, but there’s also been doubt about some of the family scenarios, obviously, a lot of the males have been killed in action over there and some families will be a blended family, and as I said at the start, John, in a circumstance where you’ve got a family of three or four children, aged four or five and then maybe 10 and 12, there’s obviously a decision that the government needs to make about whether you would split the family and leave the older ones there, who have obviously had all of their formative years to date living in that country, talking to terrorists in the tent next door, etc. So, I think we’ve got to be realistic. I mean, thank God we haven’t had a terrorist attack in our country for a while. We haven’t seen a 9/11, we haven’t seen an attack like in Paris or in London, but the threat hasn’t gone away and the intelligence agencies here are dealing with it every day.
JOHN LAWS:
Ok, but the threat of what?
PETER DUTTON:
Of a terrorist attack in our country and as the Federal Police Commissioner points out, it takes about $3.8 million and about 300 police officers to monitor one individual over a 12 month period. Now that is a very significant cost to the Australian taxpayer and I think that money is better spent elsewhere. I don’t want to see a terrorist attack taking place in our country, as I know every right-thinking Australian would believe.
JOHN LAWS:
It’s obviously not great that there are children in detention camps in Syria, but is there an alternative to bringing them to Australia? Is there something else can be done with these kids?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, that’ll be I suppose what the government’s contemplating whether you can split families, whether you can bring some back safely. There will be some women that they assess to be of lesser risk. The government runs an argument that some of the women didn’t know where they were going or that they were coerced into going there by their boyfriends or husbands…
JOHN LAWS:
Peter, do you believe that?
PETER DUTTON:
No, I don’t. No, I don’t. Firstly, you know that there’s a conflict going on. If you’re in a relationship with somebody I think it’s very hard to find yourself in a point where you know nothing about their ideology or their screwed-up view of the world until they take you onto a plane and you hop off in a foreign country, which is in a war zone and somehow that comes as a surprise to you. I don’t buy that for a moment.
JOHN LAWS:
Ok, so you’re saying to me that there is no alternative, no alternative to bringing them to Australia.
PETER DUTTON:
Well John, these are the decisions that the government will be making based on the briefings they are getting from the intelligence agencies. But on the briefings that I had and the most recent advice I’ve received, my judgement is that those people can’t be brought safely to Australia and the resources that are required – particularly given that the Australian Federal Police has expressed concern about a number of terrorists who have been convicted, are in Australian jails at the moment, but will be released from jail over the next four or five years – the resources that need to be allocated and there’s still no guarantee that with all those resources, they could still stop that attack from taking place.
JOHN LAWS:
Yeah. The government claims security agencies will monitor these people on their return. That’s got to be a hell of a financial cost hasn’t it? Is it really worthwhile?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, as I say, the Federal Police Commissioner has given evidence to the Senate that it’s about $3.8 million per year, per person, and 300 police officers involved in around-the-clock monitoring somebody – it’s a huge resource. You can imagine what those police officers could be doing otherwise. They could be stopping drugs coming into our country, they could be arresting people that have committed sexual offences against children or women, they could be involved in all sorts of activities and even with all of that resource, even with the professionalism and the expertise of the police, there’s still no guarantee because somebody who gets lost when they’re being surveilled or they slip out of a window in a building during the hours of darkness, they give police a wide berth or something – it’s difficult. There’s no guarantee around it and in these scenarios you’ve got to look at issues on balance and, on balance, my judgement is the protection of the Australian public is paramount. That must be the first order of business for any government and I don’t believe that we should be putting people at risk or in harm’s way.
JOHN LAWS:
Well, I would agree with that, absolutely, 100 per cent. The Defence Minister Richard Marles is considering sending Australian troops to train Ukrainian soldiers in the United Kingdom. Would you be supportive of that?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, we took the decision, when I was the Defence Minister, John, as you know, to send the Bushmasters, which President Zelenskyy had requested and we spent about $250 million in total in weapons and weapons systems. I think as a country, frankly, we should be very proud of that because it has helped the Ukrainians with their success. It’s a horrible, horrible situation – getting worse – and some of the training that has been provided should continue. So I guess, I think, what Richard is saying is a statement of common sense and I would certainly support the government in that push. There might be a classified element to it in terms of what they’re training, but if we’re sending equipment over, we want it to be used in the best possible way to maximize their chances of success and repelling the Russian forces.
JOHN LAWS:
Ok, but we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a war that’s on the other side of the planet. Is there a point when we’ve got to bring this spending to an end and quickly?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, John, I think one of the proudest parts of our history is that we have fought against dictators, and I think as people have pointed out there are echoes of the 1930s across the world at the moment, and we should stand up for our values, for our democratic values, for our allies: those people that we would expect to come to support us in our hour of need. I think most Australians are comfortable with us supporting people in Ukraine and I hope our government continues to provide that support – costly, as you say – but it also builds up our international reputation, particularly for the Defence Force because they’re revered around the world. They’re held in the highest regard and in part that’s because we’ve fought alongside the US and the UK and Canada and New Zealand in battles. We’ve been in fights with the United States over the last 100 years, which have been in our national interest to do so and, frankly, in the global interest, and that’s something that we should be proud of and we should continue to do.
JOHN LAWS:
Okay, we all care about our farmers as well – we should care about our farmers. Do you think that the government’s proposed methane tax is fair on Australian cattle farmers?
PETER DUTTON:
I would call it a farce, not fair, John. I think it’s almost laughable to be honest. I mean, we’ve had since 1991 one of the biggest reductions in methane emissions in the world, more than the United States and other comparable countries. If we’re saying to farmers that we need you to cull your stock or to reduce your numbers to make your farm unviable, then, I think that is a shocking day for farmers and for our country. I don’t support it for a moment. I think Australia does a lot in the environmental space – a lot more, frankly, than say China or India does in terms of their own emissions – and sending our country broke or sending our farmers broke is not the solution. I think Chris Bowen needs to be very clear here because before the election he gave an indication to farmers that he wasn’t going to do this and now he is. It’s like the tax cuts…
JOHN LAWS:
Well, it wouldn’t be the first time a politician backed away from a promise, would it?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, it wouldn’t but that doesn’t justify the next one.
JOHN LAWS:
No it doesn’t justify it, I agree. But it is not an unusual occurrence.
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I think the Prime Minister has contemplated very hard, the thought of backflipping on his support for tax cuts and I think that is a mistake. I think it’s a mistake that Chris Bowen, if he is now going to hang our farmers out to dry and many of them are enjoying high cattle prices at the moment and I’ve just been up through Bundaberg and Rockhampton and Mackay, I’m up in Townsville at the moment and I’ve spoken to a lot of farmers over recent days the price of fertiliser is through the roof…
JOHN LAWS:
Yes, it is.
PETER DUTTON:
…energy and fuel and diesel is through the roof and so we’ve got to try and support our farmers, not make it harder for them and that’s what the government’s contemplating. So, I hope that we can push back on it and I think the farmers will unite against it because it’s not in their interest, it’s in our country’s interests and, frankly, I just don’t think it’s a sensible idea that the government should entertain.
JOHN LAWS:
What do you think of Paul Keating’s criticism of the AUKUS and Quad Alliance. It seems pretty out of step with everybody, including the Labor Party?
PETER DUTTON:
He’s been on this bandwagon for a long time, but Paul Keating can’t stand the United States and that’s at the heart of his commentary and I think that’s well-recognised in the Labor Party as well. I suspect there are a lot in the Labor Party, John, who share his view but just don’t say it publicly and I don’t think, frankly, just given the history of what’s happened in the Second World War, in our part of the world that anybody for a moment could entertain cutting our ties with the United States. We live in a less certain world now. I think the other point is, Paul Keating would have had his last security briefing in, what, 1996? That would have been last time he had his security briefing and China’s a very different country under President Xi today than was the case back then. So, I think you’ve got to be realistic about the threats in our region and I don’t understand his logic or his rhetoric, and frankly, I think he should think more carefully before he speaks publicly.
JOHN LAWS:
Ok. Alright Peter, I’m running out of voice, so I’ve got to run out of you now.
PETER DUTTON:
I’m sorry, Lawsy, you’ll have to go to a song.
JOHN LAWS:
It’s terrible, isn’t it. Anyway, I appreciate your time. I thank you for it very much Peter and I hope we get to talk to each other again soon.
PETER DUTTON:
Indeed, mate. Thank you.
JOHN LAWS:
Ok, bye.
[ends]