Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
9am with David and Kim -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) scoot off. We'll see more in the

news at 11 o'clock and a full wrap

in Ten's news at 5:00. Imagine being

Imagine being a politician, having

to with stand a hammering in the

polls, a threesh remember

thresening to carp and a rollicking Opposition leader whose strip club

shenanigans seem to have enhanced

his reputation. It's tough enough

without the arrival of a fleet of

world leaders, ready to howl for

blood if the traditional APEC shirt

once again resembles a pyjama top. once again resembles a pyjama top.

Some of the most influential

leaders are coming to Sydney to

discuss world affairs. It's costing

millions in security alone. Will

the cost be worth it? Joirpbg us

this morning is filly Ruddock. Good

morning. Great to see you both here

in Sydney. You're from Sydney,

aren't? I am. On the north side.

For a north side? Always a Sydney

boy? I was born in Canberra.

Somewhat prophetic. You're the only

person I know aside from me born in

Canberra. There are two members of Parliament actually born in

Canberra, Warren Snowdon and myself.

I lived there till I was five and

then came to Sydney with my family

and from there school, legal career.

Since we're talking about Canberra,

why not have APEC in Canberra? Why do you have

do you have APEC in Sydney? It's

going to disrupt the whole place.

People are screaming about it. Why

do you have it in Sydney? Well, why

not have it in Sydney? I mean,

Sydney is, I think, to say it to

somebody from Melbourne, but it's

really - Careful. It's really the

icon city of Australia, with the

bridge as you can see. Why not

Sydney? We want to show case

what Australia. We want to show case

what Sydney has to offer. We want

to bring people. We see APEC as an

opportunity to leverage economic

growths and benefits for Australia.

It's important to have a safe and

secure APEC and that's what we're

about doing, but Sydney is a great

place and it's - when you think

that they've been to Manila,

they've been to San Diego, --

Santiago, they've been to places

like Korea and Japan, why not Australia?

Australia? Why not Sydney? Well,

one of the things that people are

saying - obviously there's a

disruption to the city, that's one

thing. But there are clear security

issues here, aren't there? There

are security issues wherever 21

world leaders go and I think it

would be preposterous if it were

thought that security issues could

not be adequately addressed in a

place like Sydney. Australia. They

do it throughout the rest of the

world. I mean this is the first

time that we've had an opportunity

of show casing Sydney in this way

and we should see it as a

marvellous opportunity to be able

to, as you've talked about Sydney

and your experience here, to have

others see and want to come. Will

security be in any way - we've

heard about the police horses being

definitely out. Will that impact

don't security? They do play a vital role,

don't they? They play a role in

relation to crowd control but

they're not the only way in which

you manage crowds and in the way in

which you deal with these issues,

you build in a certain amount of

redundancy in terms of the capacity

that you have and obviously it does

affect the way in which you plan

and intend to manage the crowds,

but there are a lot of other

aspects of it

aspects of it that are well managed

and appropriate and measured and

responsive. What's on the agenda?

What does it need to be? What does

APEC need to snb I mean Paul

Keating has come out this week and

criticised APEC for what it's

become, like a trade show, he was

sort of suggesting. What should it

be? Well, it does play a very

important part in terms of growing economic opportunities and

integrating economies that can

function effectively together. In the time that I was Immigration function effectively together. In

Minister, we put in place

arrangements through APEC, which

was the APEC business travel

arrangements, to enable business

people to be able to move between

economies more efficiently and

effectively. The business forum

will be a major part of the APEC

conference. Of course, it brings

together people who can deal with

issues of security in the region.

The Prime Minister's made it clear

that we'll be talking about climate that we'll be talking about climate

change and that's a very important

issue that, if you can get a

consensus, will enable the world to

look at these issues is a for more constructive way. It's not

something Australia can do in

isolation. So you're saying it's

taken extremely seriously worldwide.

It's thought of as a serious summit.

I don't think Australians really

look understand what it is. Well, you

look at the leadership that is

coming. The President of the United

States, the leaders from China,

Russia, Japan, as a major economy

in our region. I mean this is 21 of

the world's major economies. It's

something like 60% of the world's

GDP. It's something like 40% of the

world's population that is

represented in

represented in APEC and it is an extraordinarily positive

opportunity for us to be able to

shape the way in which people address important issues that

relate to economic development,

relate to trade, but also relate to

security and, as I said, climate

change, which is something that has

been very much on the agenda here

in Australia. So what would you

push for there? Do you know? Would

the agenda? Well, international carbon trading be on

the agenda? Well, what we know is

that unless all of the economys of

the world are preyed to take steps

to reduce -- prepared to take steps

to reduce carbon emissions,

measures adopted in isolation in

Australia won't achieve it. I think

we're about 1% of the world's

emissions and so, if you're going

t have a substantial to have a substantial

to have a substantial impact, you

need to bring economies like China

into any of the into any of the discussions and,

while I can't pre-empt where those

discussions might go, I know the

Prime Minister has taken a very

positive role in ensuring that

there can be informed discussion

and dialogue which might well help

advance the move to address

greenhouse emissions. Clearly

having all of these world leaders

in Australia in the lead-up to an election must be good election must be good for the

Government. It's seen as a strong

show of force, isn't it? No, I mean

this was for Australia. It's not

for the Government. And the point

I'd make is that some people argue I'd make is that some people argue

that it may be a negative for the

Government. Nobody knows how these

matters really play out. But I

would think that, in the long term,

it is enormously beneficial for

Australia when people are able to

talk about Australia, they have a

better knowledge of Australia, when

you've got the opportunity to be

able to influence so many decisions

that impact upon our future in this

world, I think it's a grand

opportunity to show case Australia.

We've seen the APEC meetings, shots

of the APEC meetings beforehand,

several regions around the world -

You're going to speculate as to

what they wear. I've got no idea. You were You were saying earlier, a

tracksuit. That would look

fantastic. A Prime Minister's

tracksuit. Look at these shockers.

Are we expected to provide a shirt

like this as the host nation? I had

the great opportunity of going to

the Paralympics and meeting with

the Australian Paralympians and I

had a very distinctive Australian

dress. There were mole skins,

dress. There were mole skins,

Drizabone, the acube ra hat. You

know, it decked you -- Akubra hat.

It decked you out in something that

is distinctively Australian. I is distinctively Australian. I

don't know what it d/n't know what it will

don't know what it will be. Really?

The Prime Minister tells us a lot

but doesn't tell us about the APEC

dress code or the election date.

Let's go there. When Let's go there. When will the election be? Some time between now

and the end of the year. Definitely

before the end of the year? I don't

believe the Prime Minister will

leave it beyond November. But in

saying that I'm smek lating. I

heard him today asked the same

question and he said, "I don't know

myself." When we talk about it, he

says he hasn't decided and I think

that is right. As a Government, do

you take notice of the polls? Do

you watch the polls? Do you see

there's a surge for the Government?

Frankly, the Government's taking a

pounding. Do you think we sit out

there and say polls are totally

irrelevant and none of us are

observing them? Look, of course you

do. Taking a pounding at the moment,

14 points or something. Look, the

point I made and I made it a few

days ago is that I think we just

about polled out. I

about polled out. I have never seen

so many polls. I've never seen so

many corporations doing it. There's

one every day, seemingly. Just

about. And it depends upon the

questions that are asked. They

often influence the outcomes that

you see. If they're questioning

about a particular issue on which

people are leaning in a particular

way, that can have an impact. I

don't argue that we're oblivious to them,

them, but you look at them, you

take them into account but at the

end of the day, you have to do

what's right for Australia and I

argue the case every day for the

economic benefits that we've been

able to deliver for Australians. able to deliver for Australians.

They give people more opportunities.

I've sat there in the Parliament

when we've had unemployment over

10% when that has been the major

issue which people have driven

every day - why have you every day - why have you allowed

unpliment to be at these

extraordinarily high levels? Today

we're looking at unemployment that

is below what we saw in the late or

early 1970s. I mean, this is a

fantastic outcome for those people

who have jobs that weren't able to

get employment before and I think

that when you look at an economy that is delivering those

opportunities for all Australians, for for young Australians, older

Australians, it's a remarkable

outcome. Change tack for a second.

Mohammed-man yeef, was he denied

the most basic of civil liberties?

The presumption of innocence? Well,

he certainly wasn't denied that,

was he? He was detained for two weeks without even being charged. Well, he was Well, he was charged. Eventually. And he, under the counter-terrorism

laws, was able, when we received

information from the United Kingdom,

to be questioned and it was the

process of questioning where we

needed to take into account the

time zones, which were different

between the United Kingdom and

Australia, the complex issues that

arose from looking at arose from looking at computer-

generated data, something of the

order of 31,000 pages of data that

had to be analysed and about which

he was to be questioned, that led

to the police seeking extra time.

And he was detained for questioning,

because there was an expectation

that if he wasn't detained, he

might leave the country. He was

certainly planning to do that. And

to ensure that he was available for

questioning, he was detained. But that

that was supervised by a court. And

the law doesn't allow people to be the law doesn't allow people to be held without that judicial

supervision. Now, the issue in

relation to immigration is always a

different question. Of course, when the Director of Public Prosecutions

determined that there was not

sufficient evidence to satisfy one

element of quite a complex charge

of offering material support

of offering material support to a terrorist organisation, the Director of Public Prosecutions

would have had to prove that, when

Haneef gave a SIM card to a

relative abroad, that it was to a

terrorist organisation that was

known at that time. It wasn't known

at that time. If was known to be

there later. But we couldn't prove

that it was there back in 2005.

That's the reason the charges That's the reason the charges didn't proceed. But Kevin Andrews

had to make a decision in relation

to character and what is important

that people understand is that

issues relating to character go to

possibilities. They go to whether

or not you reasonably suspect that

a person is of good character when

ministers allow people to be

entered into Australia for

migration purposes. And it's not a question of question of proving beyond

reasonable doubt that your

character is suspicious. It's

character is suspicious. ECO I

whether you have doubts as to

whether you are suitable for

migration selection. There's so

much more I want to ask you about

that but we're running out of time

and I do also before we go want to

ask about family law reforms. Why

amend them? Well, look, the family

law reforms need to seen in the

context of the changes context of the changes we expected

in 1975 and that was to get the

blame game out of family

relationships, where people had

relationships, where people had to

get a private detective to go and find out what their partner was

doing in order to be able to get a

divorce. We thought we were getting,

with no-fault divorce all of the

acrimony out of the system. What

they've done - and maybe my profession is partly responsible

for this - is to enable parties to

fight over property and to see whether they

whether they can blame them in

relation to those issues. And at

worst, children have been seen as

an item of property every which

people dispute. And what we're

seeing is a situation where

children's right to know both of

their parents is compromised. And

what we want to see is a situation

in which people in a less

acrimonious environment will be

able to deal with issues in

relation to their relationship but,

if not, if it's going to go

separately and apart, they can put

in place arrangements that best

suit them without having to get an

adjudication, without having to go

to considerate and that's why we've

set up family relationship centres.

That's why we're funding them.

That's why we've resourced them

with something like $450 million

over four years. There are 40 open

already and 25 again in July already and 25 again in July of

this year and there'll be another

25 next year. That will make 65

Australiawide. So they're like

dispute resolution centres? No.

They're about where people can go

and get advice and assistance in

dealing with relationship questions.

So it might be, you know, before

they get married. It might be -

LUKE JENSEN: It's family

counselling, essentially, isn't counselling, essentially, isn't it

-- It's family counselling,

essentially. They'll be the place

where you go where you can be

pointed in the right direction.

They may well be able to deal with

dispute resolution and help you

produce a parenting plan which will

help you deal with children's

issues but, if it's going to take a

long time, you might have to go and

see some other organisation that is

better equipped to do it and they will

will know where you should go. It

sounds like a terrific idea. The

children need to be protected so

much more. I think we all agree

with that. There is a view and I

hold it strongly that children have

a right to know both parents,

provided they are safe and secure.

That's right. And we should point

out that any children in danger are

dealt with immediately in the

system. Look, if children are going

to be at risk, you might have to be at risk, you might have to

keep them away from one parent or

parent's partner, but those have to

be substantial questions and they

need to be looked at properly and

the relationship centres are

required to take those matters into

account when they're dealing with

families. It's lovely to see you

again Mr Ruddock. Thank you for

joining us. Come back to Sydney

again. We'd love to. If you turned

that tie into a shirt, that would be perfect for APEC.

be perfect for APEC. It's a great