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.
Australian Agenda -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) marriage, also talking to

Qantas CEO Alan Joyce about

today. Stay with us. the restructure announced

Hello, welcome to the

program. I'm David Speers. The Government could have

been forgiven to for feeling

somewhat sesedge ed - -

besieged today. The main action was around the front

of the building where around

4,000 assembled to protest

against the carbon tax. A

similar protest earlier this

year did see some ugly and

well, quite sexist placards targeting Julia Gillard.

Today the signs were mostly

toned down but the extent of

the anger towards the

Government was not. I spoke

to a lot of people at the

rally today. They couldn't be easily pigeonholed as just a

bunch of angry 2 GB listeners

from Sydney. They heard from

much the same speakers as

last time. Tony Abbott

addressed the crowd. He was

careful to point out he

didn't agree with all of

their views. Barn bi-Joyce

though made no such

qualification as he revved up

the audience. They thought

we went quiet. They thought

we went quietly into the

night. Julia, Wayne, all the

rest of them, it's just half

time and we're still going.

Well, that was going on

outside, inside in the great

hall, in fact, another rally

was taking place, almost

1,000 people assembling to

raise their concerns about

any move to legalise gay

marriage. They booked out the

great hall and it was

standing room only inside. Barnaby Joyce also addressed

that rally. He spoke about

wanting to protect the rights of his daughters to marry

men. The guest speaker all

the way from the United

States warned about the evils

of gay marriage and the need

to protect humanity. The

oldest institution of any

kind created and defined by

God himself is under attack.

There is no greater evil.

This war we find ourselves in

is a war for the very future

of the rule race. Coming up

we'll be debating this issue

of gay marriage with one of

the organisers of today's

antigay marriage rally and

also a spoke man for marriage

equality, a group in favour

of gay marriage. We'll also

take a closer look at that

anti-carbon tax protest as well. Meanwhile the

Government was also under

attack in the parliamentary

chamber itself. As parliament

resumed for the spring

session the Opposition went

straight into attack, not

just over the carbon tax,

reminding everyone it was one

year today that the pledge

was made there would be no

carbon tax under the Gillard

Government but also over the

Government's plans to return

the budget to surplus which

has gone from a promise to an

objective and today to

something that will happen only when it's economic

responsible. Is the Prime

Minister promise of a surplus

in 2012/13 going the same way

as her promise that there

will be no carbon tax under a

Government I lead. We're

determined to come back to

surplus as soon as was

responsibly possible. So

we'll return to surplus when it's economically responsible

which is fair enough but

perhaps something the Government should have been

saying all along. There was

also a fair bit of focus here

in parliament today on the

shake-up at Qantas announced

today by CEO Alan Joyce.

There is a five year plan to

set up a new budget airline

out of Japan, Jetstar Japan

Japan airlines and Mitsubishi done in conjunction with

and also a new premium

carrier with a name yet to be

revealed. There will also be

about 1,000 job losses here

in Australia. As part of this

plan Qantas will also cut

back on some of its routes to

London but open new routes to

Latin America. The Qantas

chief executive Alan Joyce

says this is all about making Qantas international competitive and profitable.

It's been losing money for

years. Here was his argument

as to why these changes are

now necessary. A five year

plan has the objective first

of returning Qantas international to

propertiability in the short

term. And our aim is that in

five years the Qantas flying

business, both domestic and international combined with

exceed the cost of capital on

a sustained basis. Qantas's

announcement today is an

outrage really, it's an

attack of Australian jobs and

it really brings into

question whether Qantas is

truly an Australian airline.

You can't properly call

Australia home, lent

legitimately call Australia

home just by putting ads into

newspapers. The announcement

today by Qantas means 1,000

or so jobs at least in this

instance will go. The unions

certainly aren't happy. The

Government says it's a

commercial decision. But it

will be looked at to ensure

that it complies with the

Act. Independent Minister

Nick Xenophon is also unhappy

with this nov. He also fears

this is a motor vehicle by

Qantas to side stepthe Qantas

sale Act when does require

operations to remain here in

Australia and for Qantas to

remain 51% Australian owned.

What will this shake-up mean

for the future, what will it

mean for jobs, is the company

simply trying to cut costs by

moving some operations or

trying to set up new

operations offshore? I spoke

a short time ago to the

Qantas executive Alan Joyce.

Thanks for your time. You've

announced planses today to

launch Jetstar Japan and also

a knew premium carrier based

out of Asia. Why can't we

services be offered under the

Qantas brand? Very clearly

the Jetstar Japan operation

is a Japanese company, we'll

own 33% of it. It will be

flying domestically in Japan

and will be flying from Japan

into Asia. This is all about

I think a great Australian

iconic company creating

businesses in Asia and doing

very well in the Asian environment and it's

something the miners are

doing, the banks are doing

and there we have our biggest

airline vesting and

succeeding in Asia and I

think it's something all

Australians should be proud of. But it's also a cost-cutting exercise where

labour is cheaper, your

operating costs will be

cheaper by shifting some of

these services into a new

brand, new location. These

are all incremental flying

business opportunities. The

Japanese venture is all new,

domestic Japanese plying, we

don't fly there today, we

have no operations operating

into the domestic Japanese

market. This new Asian

venture we're talking about,

a premium airline will offer

premium services from

Australia into Asia as

incremental services on top

of the Qantas services. Why

can't you offer those with

Qantas services? Because we

can't do it today because we

don't have an Asian hub. If

we put freaks into Asia we

don't have the traffic. This

is about protect leg the

existing Qantas jobs, about

us adding more frequents for

the Australian consumer. You

are talking you said about routes from Australia in and

out of Asia. Why can't you

base those out of Australia

with the Qantas brand? We

can't because I'll give you

an example, we put on an

extra service, we can only

pick up traffic from

Australia to that

destination, we need to have

the ability to fly the

traffic on to other

destinations in Asia and have

an intra Asia network. We can't do that today with

Qantas. We can only do that

in a venture that we'll own

less than 50% of, that has to

have a new brand name, a new

premium product. That

improves the competition in

the Asian mark. Because

business traffic that travels

can travel back or there on

Qantas. It's actually

protecting Qantas jobs by us

doing this. This is nothing

to do with offshoring jobs

because there's no jobs that

will be offshored as a

consequence of this. There's

no ddge that your operating

costs will be lower, staff

costs will be lower than what

you face basing flights out

of Australia. But that's

irrelevant. That's all about

us competing in the Asian

market against other Asian

carriers and Japan isn't a

low cost environment, it

isn't a low cost country.

There's actually no benefit

for us creating an entity up

there on the basis it's going

to be cheaper. We all know

Japan is an expensive

country. This is taking an

opportunity in Japan of

flying local traffic rights

and local business. It's what

the banks are doing, the

miners are doing, this is a

very positive announcement

for Australia. This shows

Australian iconic brands of

Qantas and Jetstar are doing

well in Asia, willing to

invest in Asia. Today we've

ordered the largest aircraft

order because we're confident

of our position in the Asian

markets. I want to get to

the changes in the fleet in a

moment. The accusation here

is you're trying to side

stepthe Qantas Act which

requires Qantas to have its

operational base and

headquarters in Australia and

be 51% Australian owned. By

setting up under a different

brand name are you trying to

side step the Act?

Absolutely not. Again this

comes back to the unions with

a head in the sand not

recognising that there is a

global market out there and

that we need to challenge on

a global scale. The fact that

Qantas can successfully set

up a carrier in Japan to fly

from Tokyo to Osaka, trying

to say that somehow should be

done with Australian labour

terms and conditions is

nonsense. We can only do that

with a Japanese venture and

entity. It's the unions

deciding to raise issues on

the table that just a block

to changing Qantas and if we

had the unions' way Qantas

wouldn't be around for the

next 90 year. We're talking

about a survival of the Qantas brand. Qantas

management is doing what we

can do to turn this business

around. All we're hearing is

no, no, no and no solutions.

There will be a thousand jobs

lost under this plan here in

Australia. These jobs are

lost because your European

operations can't make money.

They're not being operated by

any other entity that were

created. They're completely

separate. The Asian ventures

have nothing to do with the

job losses. The trouble with

us not starting the Asian

ventures, if we don't go down

that path there will be more

job losses in Qantas because

our economic business, it's

losing $200 million a year.

It is a problem for the

business overall. We need to

change it, do things that are

different. We can only equate

new carriers like this to

improve our position, and a

positive for Qantas, not a

negative. Still the unions

complain that under these new

business you will be opening

in Asia staff will be lower

pay and conditions. And

that's what we're going to be

fighting. Are you prepared

for an industrial fiat on had

this? We're prepared to do

whatever it takes to ensure

that Qantas survives for the

future. Again it's a red

herring. It's like saying

that ANZ when it has a bank

in Asia. It's like saying

when the mining companies

open a mine in Asia, that

those mines should have

Australian terms and

conditions and should be operated by Australian

employees, that's a nonsense, for an Australian company to

be successful in these

markets it has to have

businesses and entities in

these markets that employ

local terms and conditions,

employ local people, but the

profits we make in knows

businesses we repatriate back

here to Australia, great for

Australian jobs, great for

Australian jobs in Qantas and

protects the 35,000 jobs that

we have in Qantas, and this

is a positive for Australia

and Australian jobs. As you

start up these new internationally based

businesses, can you give a

guarantee about the long term

future of Qantas international. There's no

guarantees in this world

David. But what I will say is

that what we're doing today

aensuring that we turn around the Qantas international business so it's successful

going forward. I have people

telling me 10 years ago that

the Qantas domestic business

was a dinosaur that was going

to go out of business, be

replaced by Jetstar

domestically. We turned the

Qantas business around,

management turned around and

today the Qantas domestic

business is the most

profitable business, Jetstar

is the second most profitable

business. We'll do the same with Jetstar international.

We'll put the right investment into this

business. Today we also

announced that we're spending

$400 million on new product

and investment for that

international business to

make sure it's a premium carrier going forward. We

also announced that the

extension of partnerships and

extending our network through

gateways into South America,

into North America and into

Europe which is a big

enhancement for our

customers. We're all about

building this brand up,

improving its economics,

making sure it's around for

the next 90 years. You

deferred the delivery of 6

A380s and you're purchases

more of these smaller A320s.

Tell us why you dieded is to

do that Because of the

network changes to our

European operation, we

decided not to invest that

capital. We are deciding to

is invest in the short haul

businesses where we do make a

return on the invested

capital and that can allow us

to make more investment in

our business going forward.

As I say, today is the

largest aircraft order in

Australian aviation history.

It's a great vedit to Qantas

that we have a successful

business that people all over

Asia are looking at becoming

partners with Qantas, Mitsubishi want to invest

with us in Japan because we

have the knowledge, the

intellect, the expertise in

setting up a low cost carrier

and they're investing heavily

with us in a Japanese

business, that's going to be

great for tourism in

Queensland, tourism in far

north Queensland and

improving the economics of the Australian operation

overall. We think that's

great news for Australia and Qantas. Appreciate your

time, thanks so much for

that. Thanks David. Qantas

chief executive officer Alan

Joyce talking us to us a

short time ago. After the

break we're going to turn to

the issue of the gay

marriage. We'll be debating

it with someone against and someone for. Stay with us.

Before we get to the issue

have same sex marnle we're

going to check in on the

latest news headlines. Here's

Vanessa. The father of

Sydney bomb hoax victim

Pulver has thanked NSW police

for their dedication after

the arrest of an Australian

man in the United States

Madeleine Pulver - - the man

is expected to be charged

with kidnapping, break and

enter and other offences. The

pilots union says Qantas

chief executive Alan Joyce is

out of touch with Australia

and will jeopardise safety by

moving jobs to Australia. Australia's biggest airline

has announced it plans to cut

1,000 jobs. Australian and

international pilots association spokesperson

Nathan safe is a calling on

the federal Government to

take action saying they have

a responsibility to ensure

that the Qantas sale Act

provisions are ensured. Opposition leader Tony Abbott

has joined about 4,000 protestors outside Parliament

House in Canberra calling for

a fresh election on a carbon

tax. Flanked by people

carrying sign vill fying the

Prime Minister, Mr Abbott

says he didn't necessarily

agree with all of the banners

but he supported the rally's

intention. He said the

Government itself has

admitted that carbon

emissions will continue to

rise even with a carbon price

followed by an emissions

trading scheme. Police in the

UK have released CCTV footage

of being knocked down by

looters in a car. The

officers were hit as they

were responding to a robbery

at a mens wear shop. The case

is being treated as attempted

murder. West Coast Patrick

McGinnity has been ruled out

of this week AFL clash with

Essendon after making comments about another

player's mother believed to

be of a sexual nature.

McGinnity has been suspended

for one match, fine ed and

will undergo counselling. A

look the tomorrow's weather

forecast. Windy with showers

in the south-east, becoming

sunnier in the west. As we

saw earlier there wasn't just

the anti-carbon tax rally happening outside parliament

today. Inside the great hall

of parliament a rally of

almost 1,000 people gathered

to voice their concerned

about moves to legalise same

sex marriage. Julia Gillard

says she's opposed to gay

marriage but plenty in the

Labor Party disagree with

her. Indeed most of the State

Labor conferences have passed

motions . The Greens has prompted these concerns

against the various groups

that gathered for the protest

rally here in Parliament

House today. To look further

at the issue I'm joined by

one of the organisers,

welcome. And also joining us

from Sydney, Malcolm

McPherson from Australian

marriage equality who himself

is a Christian, he released

findings of a Galaxy poll

today saying 53% of Australians who identify

themselves as Christians

support gay marriage. Welcome

to you as well. Mary Louise,

I might start with you,

outline for us what is the

main objection to same sex

marriage. The main objection

to same sex marriage is that

it completely runtures the

relationship between children

and their biological parents.

So we believe that children

have to come first in this

debate. They must be central.

I don't believe they're being

looked at properly. We're

concerned priermarily with

the structure of the family

unt . Isn't that an issue

more about whether gay

couples should be allowed to

have children rather than an issue about whether they

should be allowed to marry?

They have to be kicked. To

sever those two ideas is a nonsense because they are

connected. Marriage is about

the nurturing of children,

about the furthering of

society and so if you're

going to sever that, then I'm

sorry, you're - you've just

sort of changed the whole

sort of history of our nation

and of society and what it's

been built on. Malcolm, are

these two issues inherently

linked here, the issue of whether same sex couples have

kids and whether they should

be allowed to marry? I don't

believe that the issue of

children actually comes into

it at all. People are allowed

to marry without the

intention or the ability to

have children. It's not a

criterion for allowing people

to marry at all. But the

point is that part of being

married, the concept is about

having children. That's the

argument Mary Louise has put. Certainly having

children is an important part

of marriage for those people

who are able and willing to

have children, but it's not

all of marriage. Most people

would recognise that marriage

is about love between the two

people. And it creates a lot

of social capital and muteual support for the individuals

involved. Is there, Malcolm,

a concern - this is the concern that's often

expressed in this argument,

about whether children should

be entitled to have a mother

and a father, and we've heard

references to the riots last

week in Britain and whether the social problems there

were created because too many

kids don't have a

father-figure in their upbringing, what do you make

of that argument? Well, I

think it has very little

bearing on the case.

Certainly there are lots of

children being brought up in

single parent families and

that's not a particularly

good thing. But at the same

time two loving patients, or

three loving parents really

are far better than one. Is

that a fair point too? No, I

totally disagree with that. I

mean, children have a

connection with their

biological heritage. If we

want to runture that we

runture the whole sort of

thing of society. What we

base our society on. Now, you

know, two men can be a good

father and two women can be a

good mother, but men cannot be mothers and women cannot

be fathers and children need

both. They absolutely need to

know that they need that love

and support of both of mother

and the father. The reality

is that a lot of people,

including myself, were not

brought up by their

biological mother or father.

My biological mother died

when I was born. That's just

the reality of life. I don't

think that I'm any less of a

person or less well adjusted

because of that. No, I would

- it's not about that though.

You lost your parent through

a tragedy or some

circumstance. We're talking

about legitimating this, - -

legislating this, saying to children, it doesn't matter,

you don't need a mother or a

father, they're not important

in your life. And we're

overstepping the mark I

believe in completely

dismantling children's rights

here. Children have a right

to a mother and a father.

Yes, suddenly it's all

about... Have to be intord

nate ed to that. Suddenly

it's about children's rights,

whereas when I was much

younger, 30 or 40 years ago,

people were quite happy to

have children adopted out

freely, those single mothers,

their children were adopted

out. So children's rights in

this context is something

that's been recently discovered. Just on that

point, that's an interesting

point, should Mary Louise, if

the concern here is about

kids being brought up without

a mum and a dad, should the

number of single parent

families be allowed to

continue or should we rurn to

a situation where it's not

good to be in a single parent household, according to your

position, should they be

adopted out to a family where

there's a mum and a dad? I

think we're getting mistaken

here. Children are brought

into a single family, it's

not the best place, these

things happen. But we can't

legislate to say it's the

best place for a child, the

best place is with their

mother and father. I just

think that we're using false

arguments here and really

deniesing the whole biology

of the family. Getting back

to the argument that Malcolm

makes about a child being in

a loving household. They

might have a mum and a mum or

a dad and a dad but if they

have the love and support

that every kid needs why

isn't that good enough? In a

house hoed with two women,

where's the dad. There's a

biological reality there.

What difference does that

make. Those mothers can't be

a father to that child. What

does that mean. That means

the child does not have that modelling and the different

type of relationship that a

child has with both sexes,

they're bodes important, both

equal. You can't just say one

half doesn't matter. This is

a nonsense. Malcolm? But

it's actually not just this

concept of a nuclear family

where there's one mother and

one father. What we really

need to get back to is more

of an extended family and a

community where there are

lots of supports for those

children. Aunts and uncles

and friends are as important

in the up bringing of

children, and I've brought

up, with my ex-wife, we've

brought up two young adults

who we're very proud of and

part of that was to make sure that they had connections

with lots of other people. Not just their immediate

parents. Mary Louise - Even

so we're talking about a

direct connection between

marriage and children and

there simply isn't one. Mary

Louise, at the rally today we

heard from a number of speakers, it seemed there was

a sentiment here of antigay

relationships, as much as antigay marriage. Is that

fair to say, a lot of the

people there today were

opposed to the very fact of

gay relationships, as much as

gay marriage The rally today

was just to send a strong

message to our policy makers,

don't meddle with marriage, we want to put children

first, they're the centre of

the family structure in that

sense, they're the focus of

the nurture and love. And

we've got to look at their

needs and their needs are for

a mother and a father. There

was also a comment by the

guest speaker about this

potentially allowing

paedophiles to groom their

young victims so that when

they are of age they can

marry them. Is that sort

of... No, I don't think she

went down, I think you've

misquoted her or you've got

the wrong idea of all. She

was saying that if we change

the definition of marriage

and just make it open to all

sorts of relationship,s, that

anything can happen and you

could effectively be... She

spoke about Pedrosa files.

She was saying - -

paedophiles. She was saying

a paedophile would love to

marry a young boy or girl and

to marry them. Does that

have anything to do with this

debate. I believe that's a

bit off the track of what we

were there focussing to do

today. And that's to send a

strong message to our

politicians that main stream

Australia says no. I don't

care what this Galaxy poll is

that has come out. We have a

Galaxy poll that says 86% of Australians believe that

children should be raised by

their biological mother and

father. They are facing a...

this other come, come on,

throw it out. I guess

Malcolm, it does come down to

the question that you ask

with any opinion poll.

Certainly it does depend on

the question that you ask,

but I would come back to the

point that marriages exist

between gay men and between

lesbians and these marriages

exist whether or not the law

or the church recognises

them. And it's a matter of

social justice and of equity

that those stable committed

loving relationships be

recognised in the same way as

any other committed loving

relationships. We are going

to have to wrap things up

there. Malcolm McPherson from

the Australian marriage

eequality, Mary Louise

Fowler, thank you for your contributions, stay with us

after the break. Woo e'll

look at the other pro test

with us. anti-carbon tax rally. Stay happening here today, the

We're going to take a

closer look now at the

anti-carbon taxle rally. Some

4,000 people came from across

the country to voice their

concerns. There was a similar

rally held earlier in the

year. A lot of the placard

and banners grabbed a fair

bit of attention. They were

toned down today. Perhaps

epileptic is aing the carbon

tax will get through

parliament in the next couple

of months, the main call was

for an early election to get

rid of the Gillard

Government. Who was there.

Certainly some of the Fringe

of the debate, people who don't believe in the global

warming theory. Pauline

Hanson was there too. Also

plenty of ordinary mums and

dads, a lot of them from

Sydney, I spoke to them at

the rally today, genuinely concerned about the carbon

tax and what it will do to

the economy. Also plenty

there with issues beyond the

carbon tax, other areas of complaint against the Gillard

Government. After five weeks

of the midwinter break here

in Canberra, clearly there's

still a lot of angry out

there in the community not

just about the carbon tax but

about a range of policies

that have been implement ed

by the Gillard Government. Today several thousand people

have made the journey here to

the lawns outside Parliament

House to protest the Gillard

Government's carbon tax and

to raise their voices against

what they say is a lack of

democracy in this country to

call essentially for another

election. We'll have a chat

to a couple of people in the

crowd now. Hello there, can I

ask you what you're doing

here and why you came. I'm a

self-funded retiree, we're

going through our money so

quickly it doesn't matter,

woo eget no choices, we

didn't vote for this carbon

tax, we've come out way to

get here today, I've only got

one leg, I want to see this thunge stopped. Have you

been to a rally like this

before. We came to the first

one, many more here today.

In the first one there was

quite some action against

some of the signage and Tony

Abbott appearing in front of

that. Do you think that was

fair. Not fair at you will

a. Most of the people were

like this crowd here today. They're a complete mixed

crowd. What about you, can I

ask why you came here today.

Yes, I'd like to see

Australia being handed on

back to the Australian

people. We need to have a say

in what happens in our

country. We will not be

spoken down to. Way can't

have a lady standing up there

saying "This is what I want

so you have to take it". This

is not how we run a country.

We work hard. My parents were

migrants, they came here,

they started work the day

they came here. We've worked

hard, in university, we've

worked bloody hard for this

country, we will not allow

this Government to

destroyering we have built up

over the last 50, 60 years,

it is intolerable to be

spoken down to like we are

half wits and we're not

prepared to take it anymore.

Is it just the carbon tax

that you're angry about. No,

it is everything they touch

they muck it up. There is definitely an jurnt current

of communism in there, I

don't care what anyone says,

its 99% of the people here

agree with that. They're not

a democracy at all. I really

and truly, I am frightened

for my grandchildren, I'm so

furious that I built up a

business and my sister has a

business and she's just about

hitting the wall and she's

been in business for 38

years, the same type of

business and she's now in

tears it's so bad out there.

Thanks for your time. You see

you're holding up a sign. You

want something to say. Yes,

I would. I'd like to say that

these words have woman out of

my mouth of my 91-year-old

mother who is here in a

wheelchair today. That's how

dedicated she is to come out

protesting the way this Government is handling

Australia, not just the

carbon tax but everything

else she's done. Her words to

me were in Howard had not

been voted out how rich would

Australia be. Do you think it

would be one of the richest

countries in the world and

not the third wracking up the

most debts since 2007. Thank

you for your time. As you can see clearly still a lot

of heat in the debate and not just about the carbon tax, a

range of policies implemented

by the Gillard Government, this first day back to

parliament. And it's quite a

welcome from this crowd.

David Lipson at the rally

earlier today. Finally let's check what's been happening

in business. Moira, how did

the market go today. The

benchmark index ending the

session down, it closed

around .8 of a per cent into

the red. The big banks on the

broadest sentiment. Despite

those numbers coming in line

with expectations, investors

selling the stock down quite

heavily ending over 4%

weaker. We heard earlier in

the show the comments from

shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey,

that's also coming as

analysts, earlier today RBC

strategists issuing a report.

Of course a backdrop of

weaker global growth likely

to prevent that surplus from

being achieved. Moira thanks

very much for that. We'll

check in how things go it

tomorrow. We're out of time

for today's show. Back at the

same time tomorrow. Stay with us.

Live Captioning by Ai-Media.