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.
ABC News 24 Business Today -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) have collided in Switzerland injuring at least 40 people, five of them seriously. The crash happened about 50 kilometres south-west from the capital Bern.It's the third crash in Europe in less than a week. 79 people died after a train derailed in Spain while 38 were killed when their bus plunged off a fly over in Italy.And a mass has been held in northern Spain for the victims who died in that train crash. The service was held in the city of Santiago de Compostela where the train derailed last week.Members of the Spanish royal family and the government were among the mourners. The train's driver has been charged with reckless homicide.One of the UK's major supermarket chains is threatening to stop selling what are known as lads mags featuring topless and bikini-clad women.The cooperative said group said unless they start sealing them in sealed bags they will take them off the shelves.The heat is on and the publisher of lads' mags are making the most of it. Adult titles like these are available only on the top shelf. But the cooperative group says they will be removed from their 4,000 stores completely if the publishers don't start covering them up in sealed modesty bags.Our members and our customers have raised concerns with us that when they go into our stores there are certain types of covers they don't think it's appropriate to be on display where children are.Not all customers agree the measure is necessary.Well something like there's nothing
that, I mean, no, I don't think there's nothing wrong with
it.I think they're offensive really.Don't have an issue with that. I think if anything it looks worse having a black bag put around it.Women's magazines like these are not being targeted.The problem is what co-op is proposing is a half measure that allows them to continue profiting from sexist lads mags but a bit more discreetly.The co-op has already placed these black covers in front of some magazines but the company says that's not enough because what's happening is that people are picking up the magazine, having a quick flick through and then placing it back on the shelf for anyone to trade body, the Professional trade body, Publishers Association, Publishers publishers support the guidelines on the appropriate
display display of men's magazines which have been drawn up with the national federation of retail news agents and endorsed by the Home Office. If the co-op campaign succeeds, lads who want to flick through these magazines will soon have to start actually paying for them.Now last night's Helpmann awards Kate Grenville won the award for best new Australian work and best play for secret River rr. It's an historical fiction about Australia's early colonial days.Andrew Bovell adapted the novel for the stage and afterwards they both spoke to our arts reporter Anna-Maria Nicholson.I started the book as a family history for the archives. It grew into a novel but you sit in your room in isolation for so long writing it you can't believe it's ever going to go into the world. For me it's been the most moving experience to see it going into the world as a play. I saw the play 7 times and I cried every time.And I guess there came that collaboration with Andrew, taking your words and moulding them to something else and I guess that must have been odd for you as the original writer as well?It was odd, I didn't think it was possible. I many - my first impulse was amazement that Andrew had been able to do it at all. My next was he was able to do it brilliantly. A novel is a big, baggy creature, a play has to be very concise and somehow he managed not to lose a thing and yet to bring it down to a play scale.Andrew, what you did do, I guess, was add another layer of indigenous life to the story on stage?Yes, I mean given that we're telling that story through the work of actors, you know, we needed to create the world and the language for the actors to use, indigenous actors to use and that was one of the research and the rehearsal of this show is to of the great pleasures of the
research this show is to work with those research and the rehearsal of indigenous actors to really discover what that world was.Interestingly, I mean you were up against 'King Kong', which has been reversioned by Australians, but I guess the 'Secret River' is much more of an Australian work but does it matter when you're creating things for the stage?No, it's all good work and we should make work as...As that's where we are going to leave that discussion with our Helpmann award winners, let's go to Tony Burke.Thanks very much for coming in today. Today is the day that Tony Abbott effectively admitted that turning back the boats won't work. Up until now they have been talking about how quickly they thought that the current flow of boats could stop. Today, for the first time, with their new announcement they have started to acknowledge how the problems of today are different to the challenges of a decade ago. In the announcement today, and I don't want to get into their game of trying to find a political angle on everything, what I'd rather do is look at what they've announced today and work through how what they've announced would have to be changed if it was going to be effective. There's some fairly dire errors that the Coalition have made in today's announcement and my approach very much is to try to turn their announcement into something that can be part of a more mature and professional discussion. They've had similar conversations on Nauru to what I had last week. Last week I had conversations with both the Justice Minister who I know Mr Morrison has met with and I presume he's also met, as I did, with the President. In those discussions we talked about the possible expansion of capacity on Nauru. The difference though isn't in the conversations we had in Nauru, it's the response and how it's been handled subsequently. Their concept has been no matter what conversations they have or whether they know what they're doing or not, to quickly rush out for the announcement, quickly rush out for the sound bite, quickly rush out for the front page. We saw it after the PM and I first returned from Papua New Guinea and they were out there in the media saying "See, they haven't agreed on anything" only to find a few days later there was an agreement. They then, after the arrangement had been misrepresenting
signed, were rushing out misrepresenting private conversations they'd had with the PM of Papua New Guinea only to have the PM of Papua New Guinea subsequently correct the record last night. And similarly with this, they've rushed out with the idea of expanding accommodation on Nauru, which of itself does had
make sense, and as I say, I've had similar conversations but they made some fairly fatal errors in the way they've done it. And I think if they'd been thoughtful and worked through the issues sensibly and had a policy strategy rather than only a media strategy they these errors. The first, probably wouldn't have made it's a
these errors. The first, and it's a dire error, is to put a figure on what the capacity figure on what will be. Be figure on what the will be. Be in no doubt, smugglers want to know what the
figure is that they could then overwhelm. They want to know that. To put the figure of 2,000 on it at a time where people smugglers in the current surge have been getting more surge have been than 1,000 people in a week, means that effectively the Coalition are putting up in lights if you want to overwhelm the policy here's how. Grossly irresponsible and I don't think they would have had to have thought about it for long to realise what a grave error that was. Similarly, they have shifted the language, and I presume they've done this accidentally because I'd hate to think they've done it deliberately. But shifted the language from saying if you you
arrive by boat without a visa you won't be settled in Australia to saying there's no guarantee you will be settled in Australia. Now that effectively leaves a window open to settlement which I think is very unwise. If we've learnt anything in the way people smugglers have changed their operations in recent years and the way in which they have been willing to put at risk the lives of people on the high seas, it's that ultimately not
the difference is whether or not people smuggers have a product to sell. That product is the chance to live and work in Australia and as long as the window is left open that that product might be available then people smugglers are able to get out in the market and people will pay money for them and people will end up drowning in the Indian Ocean. That's the consequence of not going to the source of this the challenge is do people source of this challenge and smugglers have a product to sell or not? Now if you take away those two errors, if instead of saying we'd only go to 2,000 and you say we will go to whatever capacity is required and secondly, if you wosh d work on the principle that people who now come by boat will not be settled in Australia, then you have a situation where the people smugglers do not have a product to sell. Now some people have wanted to frame this as being a thump the table, hardline let's be as tough as we can policy. Let's be in no doubt about the good and decent motivations for a policy of this sort. We want to stop people from drowning. We want to make sure that the most vulnerable people to fill our humanitarian quota are chosen in consultation with the UN, not self-selected by people smugglers and we want to make waiting
sure that the people who are waiting in refugee camps around the world for up to a decade are actually able to get access to our humanitarian quota in Australia and that that humanitarian quota is getting bigger rather than smaller. These are good reasons to pursue the policies that we've pursued and that we are continuing to implement. But it also goes to the heart of the dangers of rushing to the announcement without thinking things through. I don't doubt in terms of a media strategy what Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison have done today is first class. But in terms of doing something about people drowning on the high seas it's childish. You don't set a limit on capacity. The moment you do that you give people smugglers a target to fill and instead of it being a policy for 5 years by putting that limit on capacity it's effectively a policy for a fortnight. Similarly, you cannot leave the window open to settlement in Australia. That gives people smugglers a product to sell. And if they have a product to sell we all know the tragic consequences that will follow. Australia is still working with both Papua New Guinea and with Nauru and we will continue to work with Indonesia as we get closer to the summit that is being hosted by President Yudhoyono. We have significant problems in our region. They are not identical to the problems of a decade ago and we need to make sure that we - that in our policy responses we are flexible, mature, professional and dealing with the policies at their source.The Papua New Guinea PM says that there's even more aid on the way, what discussions have you had with him about extra funding on top?The principles that are agreed to by Australia and Papua New Guinea were found in the first document, when the two PMs had their sign ing, the Friday before last, the first document they signed dealt with some specific aid issues, the second was the arrangement with respect to processing and settlement of asylum seekers. In that first one and the carriage of this is with Bob Carr and Melissa Park rather than with myself but on that first document there issues such as the Lae hospital, a number issues such as the hospital, a number of specific development issues hospital, a Australia's agreed to work
through in terms of the policy

through detail of the implementation of through in terms of the that, that detail of the that, that resides in someone
other than that, that other than me.Do you think this is a random policy this is a random announcement from the Coalition loose
or are they boasting about some loose talks they've had with Nauru?If I can say one thing in all of this there is no doubt Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison really enjoy the politics of this. I don't. I think we've got a really serious problem and a really serious challenge. And I also believe we are now putting the policies in place to be able to fix it. So I'm not going to rush to the opportunity to try to tear down or pull apart anything that they suggest. Scott Morrison has clearly had similar conversations on Nauru to some of what I had but he's rushed to announcement without thinking through some of the detail and some of what he's put forward would have the exact opposite consequences to what I honestly believe that he would want in terms of the policy. So what they've done in today's announcement, aspects of it, and some of the ideas there are reasonable and similar to some of the conversations the Government's already commenced. The difference is they haven't cared about the detail and in doing so some of the details that have appeared in today's papers, if implemented, would be exactly what the people smugglers want and the consequences of that would be disastrous.What aspects have you discussed with the Government?Unlike the Coalition, I don't meet with the heads of foreign countries and run off to media conferences before we finalise arrangements and that meant a couple of weeks ago we put up with three or four days of Scott Morrison and Tony Abbott getting a good run in the media saying we'd completely failed to reach an agreement with Papua New Guinea on our return. I'm still going to question but I'm explaining the
difference in approach because approach does
I think the difference in approach does go to whether or not people are actually ready for government. If you're ready ready
for government - if you're not ready to deal with our nearest neighbours in a mature way, then it would be a very strange thing to be running Australia. Now, in terms of the discussions that I've had with the Government of Nauru, there are a number of issues still under discussion and still having details finalised. The concept of expansion, yes, discussed. The concept of restoring the facilities that had been damaged, yes, discussions about that. Similarly, we also had very direct discussions about the people who were on charges under the law of Nauru and I made clear that the view of Australia is that we are not asking the Government of Nauru to do anything other than implement the law of Nauru for people who broke their law. They have some additional issues with prison capacity as a result of that where there are now a large number of people being housed in prisons that are not designed to take that number of people. But most importantly the Government of Nauru wanted an assurance from me that in the wake of the riots that had taken place Australia was not about to walk away from the arrangements with Nauru. And that's an assurance I gave them.Surely the Government of Nauru has some say as to how much of a capacity is increased. Can you assure you expand capacity that there would be a limit?We don't only have the capacity to expand on Nauru. We also have the capacity to expand in Papua New Guinea, specifically within Manus Island and there's a number of announcements of particular sites that when they're ready I will make. But I'm not going to start announcing things just as thought bubbles. I'm waiting for everything to be properly agreed before we get there. But it's essential that no matter how many people test our resolve, no matter how many there are, the capacity is found. You have to do that and the reason you have to be willing to make that commitment is you need to think through what the alternative is if you don't make that commitment because the moment you do what the Coalition have done today as a government and put a limit on capacity, people smuggle ers can game it and they know exactly how many people they have to push across and at which point they can go back to business as usual because offshore is full and that's why you will never find me either in public or private language limiting the capacity at these different sites. Be in no doubt they will test our resolve. Also be in no doubt the number of spaces for accommodation will always be more than the number of people requiring it you
and we'll make sure of that.Do you foresee setting up an arrangement like that of PNG and Nauru, by that I mean there as a permanent resettlement and processing there as a alternative?There's been very
broad - there is a discussion of broad of the Papua New broad - there is a of the Papua New Guinea arrangement and I was being asked how that operates. We've made clear though we're asked how that operates. made clear though we're not
going to asked how that operates. We've
made clear though going to go around the shopping going to go around the Pacific
shopping the idea around trying shopping the idea around and
trying to leverage countries into agreeing trying to into agreeing to arrangements. Papua New Guinea raised the concept with us originally and the PM's previously said that. PM Peter previously said that. PM O'Neill came to PM Rudd wanting to find ways of helping. And so our approach with the rest of our regions is the same, which is people are aware of the problem, we are working cooperatively within the region but we are not going around trying to sell the arrangement to Nauru or to anyone else. But the nations in the region are well aware that this is something that is helpful to Australia and they're also aware that the arrangement with Papua New Guinea has been drafted in such a way to leave open the possibility of it being an even broader regional approach.Can PNG rely on it being a broader approach?Yes.Under your policy when will the first group of asylum seekers go to Manus Island and how many will there be in that group?My approach has always been that, and I said this the day we announced the new arrangement, which is that that you can't send people until their health checks are complete. Tony Abbott has daifred - dared me to send people on time frames that would not allow health checks or inoculations to take place and as I said previously that was grossly irresponsible of him and another example of them not thinking through things before they say them. At least in radio there's what, a 5 or 7-second delay before it going to the microphone and reaching the public. I don't think member of the Coalition have that 5 or 7-second delay in their own heads between the thought bubble and when they talk. So my approach has always been we will not send people until their health checks are complete. Health checks in the ordinary course take in the order of the time frame for me order of about 2 weeks. the time frame for me is not a deadline that I believe under all circumstances it just must be met, the time frame that matters to me is when health checks are being complete, then people can start going across for different cohorts of people, different groups of people. My view is for each group we need to make sure that they are safe, that accommodation is appropriate and that services are appropriate. And I'm keeping it within a policy frame rather than a deadline frame.After the initial spike in arrivals there has been a slowdown in recent weeks, does that suggest the policy is working to you?I don't read too much into the slow down. My view is people smugglers will actively try to overwhelm us and they will

test our resolve.There are

test our resolve.There are Will you tell us there's a group going over?We've done this when we've done returns to Sri Lanka, bhen we've sent people for processing, when people arrive at various sites that's always made public. There will be nothing secret when people arrive or anything like that. But, you know, with health checks there are a number of different issues that come together for different individuals and I'm just not going to get into a game of any deadlines other than the policy ones.What's your response to the report today about women and young children and anti-Ma lairial medications and the risk posing on Manus Island?If you go back to the principles I've applied and they are that people need to be safe, that there needs to be appropriate accommodation and appropriate services, there is a reason why I won't define it further than that. People will often come up with an example of someone and say well, if it's someone this say well, if it's someone of out sending them in a this description will you rule try to out sending them try to get you to have a compassionate response to that individual. But you can't limit your compassion to the people who are in the line of sight. If, for example, I carved out children of a particular age, it would take about a fortnight before we saw boat loads of children of that age being children of that pushed across the Indian Ocean. And that is not a compassionate way to behave. So my policy principle is that people will be - everyone will end up being sent offshore. But they will be sent at a time that I am confident they are safe, that their accommodation is appropriate and that services are appropriate.And that suggests months, surely it's no more or less compassionate to send young women and children into a country where there's a known health risk?And you can draw whatever inference you want on these issues, I'm not getting into arbitrary time frames. I'm making sure that the policy principles that I've been consistent on the whole way through are what applies and I will certainly never, and might I say I don't think it's in the interests of any Australians or of the media to ask me to do something where the consequence, if you think its through, would be an increase likelihood that that would become the exact type of person who people smugglers had been pushing on to the high seas.Whaps if you could detail to what measures you will take that Manus Island is a safe place for pregnant women and young children.The challenge is difference depending on the individuals. There can be a series of different health ailments people arrive with and different level of services are needed to be provided depending on the state of health of particular individuals. Depending on disability of particular Similarly, there can be very different experiences that have led to different mental health outcomes that require a different standard of mental health service for people. If you have somebody who is making a refugee claim but under any definition, even their own version a refugee claim but under version of events has no definition, even their history of torture and version of events has history of torture and trauma,
then the level of history of torture then the level of services that you would provide for them is quite different, quite different to what you provide from somebody who on their own version of events has in fact experienced severe torture and trauma. And this is where when you get into generalisations beyond the actual individuals, you end up setting some artificial benchmarks. The principles need to be the people are safe, that accommodation is appropriate and that services are appropriate. Health services are part of that and the safe - the issue, the primary issue of people being safe goes to health advice as well.Minister, you've said earlier this is Tony Abbott admitting that turning back the boats won't work, something to that effect, hasn't he always said it's turning back the boats when it's safe to do so, so there's still a bit of scope there?Well, he's now talking about thousands where he's already decided it's not safe to do so. I think we know where thebook - boat turn back policy is left.The Foreign Minister was critical of the PNG policy yesterday, are you concerned about our relationship with countries in the region?The comments out of - that I've seen in the papers out of Fiji basically presume that Australia is out there selling the policy and trying to pressure kun trurk - countries to be involved. As I remarked earlier, the opposite is true.What conversations have you had with the PNG government about social discord and what is the Australian Government doing or committing to doing to kind of help resolve the issues?The first thing, there are specific accommodation issues that we're working through on different locations within Manus at the moment. And a lot of the social issues go to the extent to which there are local employment opportunities out of Manus and there has been a frustration from some within Papua New Guinea that Papua New Guinea generally wanting to make sure there are enough local jobs coming from it. On Manus Island there is a specific issue as to whether the jobs are coming from people who are Papua New Guinean but not from Manus itself. And that's effectively the tension. So I haven't been just meeting with government officials. I've also met with the governor of Manus, Governor Benjamin. And I've also met with the other member of parliament for their there, Ronnie Knight and had discussions with each of them about these issues. Some of these issues go with where we end up with settlement arrangements. We're have not arrangements. We're at a have not been sent arrangements. We're at a point
right now where have not been sent there. Once they're sent there they're need to be processed. Ft they're sent there their claims claims are need to be processed. claims need to be processed. Ft their
claims are valid and they have a fear claims are valid and they a fear of persecution under the a refugee convention it's at that a fear of persecution point we're looking at refugee convention it's at settlement arrangements and settlement arrangements they aren't necessarily on Manus.Do we have that in the Budget yet for any of these announcements, do we know how much all thez th is going to cost?The actual cost depends on how many people decide to test our resolve. What happens in the ordinary course with budgets is estimates on all of that are done and appear in the budget update which the Treasurer has said he will be releasing.By wanting to expand Nauru, aren't you and the Opposition conceding that the boats can't be stopped or at least significantly reduced because why else would you expand capacity?Really simple, because I'm confident, and I was from the day of the announcement that people smugglers will test our resolve and that's exactly what they've been doing. So when you know they're going to test your resolve you need to make sure that you have a capacity - you're able to expand your capacity and make sure that there is no upper limit that they feel if they reach then they've won. That's my concern and why I think in all honesty if the Opposition had spent more than a few seconds thinking about this before they went to announcement, they never would have put an upper limit on the accommodation figure.When do they stop testing your resolve?I think the truth is that the key people who we need to reach here are not the smuggler, it's the customers, I think that's the truth of it. Smuggers the truth of it. Smuggers are running a business that they know is illegal, that they know causes know is illegal, that causes people's' deaths. I don't think they're going to be highly engaged in rational policy discussion. But for the customers themselves there are campaigns being run up and down the pipeline from source countries through transit countries but most importantly the issue that it keeps coming back to for the strongest point of contact and strongest source of advice for people who are considering paying a people smuggler, it's friends, relatives and contacts back in Australia and that's why the domestic campaign is so important.The PNG policy has also been criticised by a female Afghan MPs who say that Afghan women facing danger in Afghanistan will face more danger in PNG, isn't that a reason to revisit the policy?I heard that interview today and it goes once again to why I'm making sure that we keep the 3 commitments and decisions are made based on the 3 commitments, which is to say that people need to be safe, they need to have appropriate accommodation and appropriate services. I might say though some of the arguments that have been running with some of Papua New Guinea would imply that we should evacuate everyone from Papua New Guinea from that country. I struggle with the argument that say s conditions for our nearest neighbour are such that somebody who has travelled across the world could not

quite OK for our friends on the other side of the Torres Strait to live there. I find that a disappointing argument when it's run in those terms.Do you know if Indonesia has stopped giving Iranians visas on arrival?My understanding is the date for that is latest next month. So I would not expect that we would have seen an impact on that yet. certainly I would expect that people who are in Iran certainly I would people who are in Iran are
starting people who are in Iran starting to realise that the starting to realise that rules have changed.Just to confirm Mr O'Neill also said last night confirm Mr O'Neill last night that the costs of all asylum last night that the costs all asylum seekers coming from or going to Australia or going to Australia would be borne by Australia. borne by Australia. Is that your understanding and how far will those costs be your understanding and how will those costs borne?Well, some people have raised this concept of how long raised this concept of how Australia will keep paying a bill. Let's not forget, at the

possibly live there but it's