Speaker 1: I'm Daniel James and you're listening to seven AM in Canberra.
Speaker 1: Accountability is often promised in moments of crisis. Much harder
Speaker 1: is what comes after. Matt Canavan has taken over the
Speaker 1: national sharpening his party's ability to confront one nation. Former
Speaker 1: ASIO boss Dennis Richardson has walked away from the government's
Speaker 1: Anti Semitism Royal Commission, raising fresh questions about a process
Speaker 1: already under pressure, and years after robodet devastated thousands of lives,
Speaker 1: a final reporters landed with a reminder of just how
Speaker 1: hard real accountability can be defined. Today, Press Gallery journalist
Speaker 1: Karen Middleton and what Canavan's rise means for the Coalition,
Speaker 1: while Richardson's resignation matters to Anthony Albanesi and what the
Speaker 1: robodebt findings tell us about whether the system is capable
Speaker 1: of holding anyone to account. It's Saturday, March fourteen, Karen.
Speaker 1: This week we saw yet another leadership change from the Coalition,
Speaker 1: which had the echoes of the great political philosopher melman
Speaker 1: Ninger's brief brush with politics in two thousand and one.
Speaker 2: I was just a person out there making sure that
Speaker 2: I was I'm buggered I'm sorry, that's right.
Speaker 1: I like to resign Nationals leader David Little Proud declaring
Speaker 1: this week.
Speaker 3: I'm buggaed I'll have enough to lead this great party
Speaker 3: would be the wrong thing for me to do.
Speaker 1: I love it. Matt Canavan, the new leader, is a brasher,
Speaker 1: more right wing character than a Little Proud. So will
Speaker 1: we see a change in direction under his leadership.
Speaker 4: I don't know that we're going to see a total
Speaker 4: change in direction. I think we'll certainly see a change
Speaker 4: in the way the National's positions are communicated, probably less
Speaker 4: chaotic approach, I think. I mean, we saw under David
Speaker 4: Little Proud the coalition split twice and that was really
Speaker 4: his instigation. So he sort of was a tantrum thrower.
Speaker 4: And Matt Canavan is not that he's an economist. He's
Speaker 4: a fact based arguer, so he's a lot more what
Speaker 4: you see is what you get, and I think you
Speaker 4: will get from Matt Canavan a pretty sort of straight shooter,
Speaker 4: albeit somebody who's definitely on the right and has firm ideas.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what are some of his ideas? What are some
Speaker 1: of the things that he's stand for during his time
Speaker 1: as a parliamentarian.
Speaker 4: He's very opposed to the target for net zero greenhouse
Speaker 4: gas missions, which the Coalition has already dumped.
Speaker 5: Apparently we're not getting a good deal from net zero.
Speaker 5: It's been a bit of a scam where bankers and
Speaker 5: big business makes money and small business.
Speaker 4: He's long talked about that, but he sees that his
Speaker 4: focus is on cheaper energy.
Speaker 5: Power prices have gone up forty percent since we signed
Speaker 5: up to net zero. Both electricity and gas prices have
Speaker 5: gone up by that much. It's not a good deal
Speaker 5: for us, right, So something's got it.
Speaker 2: He says.
Speaker 4: He's agnostic about the kinds of energy. He's very pro
Speaker 4: fossil fuels.
Speaker 5: We need more astrainaned babies. We need more Australian humor,
Speaker 5: more Australian jokes. We need more Australian barbecues, sometimes often
Speaker 5: fueled by fossil fuels.
Speaker 4: He's big on the family unit. He's got five kids
Speaker 4: and a wife who raised the kids as a stay
Speaker 4: at home mum, so he's big on things like income splitting,
Speaker 4: parents being able to split their income if one parent
Speaker 4: stays at home and doesn't do paid work, so that
Speaker 4: they pay tax across two people rather than the primary
Speaker 4: bread When they're being taxed. He's very anti abortion and
Speaker 4: he's supported measures to try and restrict access to abortion
Speaker 4: under particular circumstances. He's a practicing Christian and he talks
Speaker 4: about that, but he's also a person who argues on FATS.
Speaker 1: He's a guy. He's also acted as a bit of
Speaker 1: an attack dog and a provocateur for the NATS. What
Speaker 1: will his approach be to One Nation as a threat
Speaker 1: and do you think he's better or worse place to
Speaker 1: handle it than little Proud?
Speaker 4: Well, this is going to be fascinating now that we
Speaker 4: have Barnaby Joyce in One Nation. It's a head to
Speaker 4: head contest not only between Matt Canavan and Pauline Hanson
Speaker 4: the leader of One Nation. And it's also interesting that
Speaker 4: the NATS will now be led from the Senate, which
Speaker 4: is highly unusual, and that's where paul and Hanson also is.
Speaker 4: But we've got the contest between Matt Canavan and Barnaby Joyce. Now,
Speaker 4: Matt Canavan was a protege of Barnaby Joyce. His first
Speaker 4: job in politics when he left the Productivity Commission where
Speaker 4: he was a longtime economist, was working for Barnaby Joyce.
Speaker 4: And you know they're good mates and they share a
Speaker 4: lot of things in common, and Barnaby Joyce says that,
Speaker 4: but I think there'll be some fascinating internal discussions because
Speaker 4: Matt Canavan has some very firm ideas and while he
Speaker 4: doesn't throw tantrums like David Little Proud, he will assert
Speaker 4: himself and he will probably communicate more clearly and prosecute
Speaker 4: the case against One Nation. And he's very strong against
Speaker 4: some of the things that One Nation has advert and
Speaker 4: particularly that Pauline Hanson has advocated issues around race. He's
Speaker 4: very opposed to the way she comments on issues around race,
Speaker 4: and particularly recently her comments on Muslims suggesting there were
Speaker 4: no good Muslims. He has shredded that in public.
Speaker 5: Totally un Australian for someone to say that eight hundred
Speaker 5: thousand Australians, of those eight hundred thousand Astraians for a Muslim,
Speaker 5: there's no good people among them. That's what Pauline said.
Speaker 5: Now clearly I think she went too far, and now
Speaker 5: she won't apologize because she doesn't do that. She never
Speaker 5: admits that.
Speaker 4: He's got the courage to say no, no, that's wrong.
Speaker 4: We're one country. We don't want to be divided. There
Speaker 4: are good people in Australia of all faiths and we respect.
Speaker 1: Them when it comes to Barnaby Joyce. He even got
Speaker 1: to mention in Canavan's first speech.
Speaker 5: We tucked ourselves in for the night and then I
Speaker 5: remember that I hadn't called my wife, so I got
Speaker 5: out my phone and texted my wife, Hi babe, love you,
Speaker 5: Missy Lotts. At least I thought that text went to
Speaker 5: my wife instead. I had been to Varnaby so much
Speaker 5: it went to him by mistake.
Speaker 1: So they are pretty tight. Is that going to be
Speaker 1: an advantage for Canavan knowing the enemy of sorts?
Speaker 4: I think that's a very interesting point. And potentially, yes,
Speaker 4: he knows Barnaby Joyce's vulnerabilities, he knows how he thinks,
Speaker 4: and he knows where he will be agreeing with Pauline
Speaker 4: Hanson and where he will not. Now, for example, he
Speaker 4: knows that Barnaby Joyce was uncomfortable with what Pauline Hanson
Speaker 4: said about Muslims. Barnaby Joyce has said that basically, and
Speaker 4: Matt Canavan has pointed to that. So he won't be
Speaker 4: afraid to try and point out divisions within the One
Speaker 4: Nation team because that will be a way of the
Speaker 4: Nationals seeking to pull back some of those votes that
Speaker 4: the Polsters tell us have gone to one nation. So
Speaker 4: I don't think you'll be shy about trying to split
Speaker 4: them and show that they are not a party of government.
Speaker 1: Yeh, Popcorne, I reckon, Yes, coming up the overpaid foremost
Speaker 1: by chief he walked away from five and a half
Speaker 1: grand a day Karen. Former AJA by Stennis Richardson has
Speaker 1: resigned from his job as a Special Advisor to the
Speaker 1: Royal Commission on Anti Semitism and Social Cohesion, saying he
Speaker 1: believed he was surplus to requirements. What were the reasons
Speaker 1: he gave for stepping away.
Speaker 4: Well, he's basically said he's become well. I think the
Speaker 4: phrase us was a grossly overpaid researcher.
Speaker 2: Very very simply. I felt I was the fifth wheel.
Speaker 2: It's a very legally.
Speaker 4: If we step back, remember how this all came about.
Speaker 4: After the terrorist attack on Bonde Beach on December fourteenth,
Speaker 4: the Prime Minister announced an urgent review of the role
Speaker 4: of intelligence agencies and law enforcement. The Prime Minister appointed
Speaker 4: Dennis Richardson to run that. Now he's a former head
Speaker 4: of AZO, but the government came under pressure to hold
Speaker 4: a Royal Commission and folded those two inquiries together, but
Speaker 4: they weren't a very good fit. The model of the
Speaker 4: Royal Commission just hasn't been able to accommodate the kind
Speaker 4: of inquiry that Dennis Richardson was doing. It's going to
Speaker 4: take longer. There are now all sorts of rules around
Speaker 4: accessing documents, the agencies of lawyer up. It's a different
Speaker 4: kind of investigation. He makes the point and he wants
Speaker 4: to emphasize this that it will still get a result,
Speaker 4: but it's going to take longer.
Speaker 2: It will still be a valuable document. The Royal Commission
Speaker 2: will go on to have hearings and I'm sure the
Speaker 2: Royal Commission will will will at the end of the
Speaker 2: end of the day do a highly professional job.
Speaker 4: And so I think we can expect that the interim
Speaker 4: report that the Royal Commission hands down at the end
Speaker 4: of April that was meant to be when Denis Richardson's
Speaker 4: report was coming, won't have as much detail, won't be
Speaker 4: as sharp, and won't have as many recommendations as it
Speaker 4: might have done if it was the Dennis Richardson version.
Speaker 1: So does it seem like it was a mistake to
Speaker 1: combine these two investigations, the Security Investigation and the Royal Commission.
Speaker 1: Does it seem like there was an ad hoc approach
Speaker 1: that just hasn't paid off.
Speaker 4: I think it wasn't well thought through. I think the
Speaker 4: Prime Minister got forced into that by the political pressure
Speaker 4: and the public pressure he was under. But Dennis Richardson
Speaker 4: has made the point that they're really in retrospect, needed
Speaker 4: to be more detailed conversations about how the two processes
Speaker 4: could work better together.
Speaker 2: So the interim report that will now be done by
Speaker 2: the Royal Commission will be a very different document to
Speaker 2: the one that I would have done when I was
Speaker 2: doing the review prior to the Royal Commission being announced.
Speaker 4: In the end, I think what we were getting was
Speaker 4: he risked having reports come out with his name attached
Speaker 4: to them in which she hadn't really had a lot
Speaker 4: of involvement. So he's making a slightly complicated argument trying
Speaker 4: to say it's not that he doesn't have confidence in
Speaker 4: what they will find. It's just that he's not sure
Speaker 4: how much role he would have, and he can't be
Speaker 4: certain about things, and he didn't want to be involved
Speaker 4: in something where he had his name on it, but
Speaker 4: he may not necessarily have been deeply involved in the drafting.
Speaker 1: So what does this now mean for the Royal Commission
Speaker 1: and for Alberanesi? Given the whole process has been fraught
Speaker 1: from the get go and that Albanesi tied himself to
Speaker 1: the expertise from the outset. Now that he's gone, what
Speaker 1: does that mean for the Royal Commission.
Speaker 4: Well, these are good questions and certainly we've heard from
Speaker 4: the Jewish community in the last couple of days that
Speaker 4: they were blindsided by this and that they were concerned
Speaker 4: that it undermines the credibility of the Royal Commission. And
Speaker 4: the opposition also has pointed to those comments from Albanesi
Speaker 4: originally suggesting that Dennis richards Woman was a crucial person,
Speaker 4: that he was integral, that he was the person that
Speaker 4: the best placed person to do this inquiry, and suddenly
Speaker 4: now he's not there. So that poses a sort of
Speaker 4: a political complication for the Prime Minister and it does
Speaker 4: look all a little bit messy.
Speaker 3: We know the Prime Minister didn't want this Royal Commission
Speaker 3: in the first place, but now that he's finally been
Speaker 3: dragged kicking and screaming to calling it. It has to
Speaker 3: make sure it's a success, and I have grave concerns
Speaker 3: that it will not be a success if Dennet Richidon
Speaker 3: is not involved.
Speaker 4: There are people in the government sort of saying privately, well,
Speaker 4: you know, we told you we wanted a Richardson inquiry.
Speaker 4: You all wanted a royal commission. This is what we've
Speaker 4: got now. I think, sure, that's one argument, but in
Speaker 4: the end, the Prime Minister did decide to have a
Speaker 4: royal commission. So it's on the government to have made
Speaker 4: sure that those two structures that they put together could
Speaker 4: work together, and that is something that they're going to
Speaker 4: have to answer for. We've seen plenty of royal commissions,
Speaker 4: some of which have been accused of being political. This
Speaker 4: one is not. So I think in the end people
Speaker 4: will get behind it, but the opposition in the short
Speaker 4: term is going to put pressure on the government and
Speaker 4: raise those concerns about whether it's being undermined, and so
Speaker 4: we'll have to see how that debate plays out in
Speaker 4: short term.
Speaker 1: I think finally, Karen, this week we also saw the
Speaker 1: release of the Robo Debt Report, three years after initial findings.
Speaker 1: Former Prime Minister Scott Morrison was cleared, but two public
Speaker 1: servants were found to have engaged in serious corrupt conduct.
Speaker 1: Why did this take so long and what's the reaction being?
Speaker 4: Well, remember the Royal Commission made findings against a number
Speaker 4: of people and made recommendations that they be referred to
Speaker 4: the National Anti Corruption Commission, and there was a huge
Speaker 4: controversy a year or so ago when the Royal Commission
Speaker 4: came out and decided it would take no further action
Speaker 4: on any of it. The decision drew more than one
Speaker 4: thy two hundred complaints, with some.
Speaker 3: Consider Commissioner Briton should ask himself whether him remaining in
Speaker 3: that position is good for the National Anti Corruption.
Speaker 4: People said, well, hang on a minute, you know, where's
Speaker 4: the transparency and accountability? There was not a sense, i
Speaker 4: think in the public demain that there was appropriate accountability,
Speaker 4: that the process had really been gone through as much
Speaker 4: as it should have been. Now, what we've got this
Speaker 4: week after that report came out was that the government
Speaker 4: then published tabled in Parliament the sealed chapter that the
Speaker 4: Royal Commissioner had published that detailed all of the referrals
Speaker 4: that she had made. So we got a little bit
Speaker 4: more background information about what the Royal Commission thought. But
Speaker 4: this whole process gives rise to questions about what the
Speaker 4: point of the National Anti Corruption Commission the knack really is.
Speaker 4: Now it's important to say that police looked at one
Speaker 4: of those public servants and they found there wasn't enough
Speaker 4: evidence to go forward with the prosecution, and that's ultimately
Speaker 4: what the NAC has found as well. So there's the
Speaker 4: general public reaction to this, and then there's the reaction
Speaker 4: of the families of people who were most personally affected.
Speaker 4: We saw people who took their own lives as a
Speaker 4: result of that robodebt process, which was atrocious, and those
Speaker 4: families I'm sure will be feeling deeply sad that there
Speaker 4: isn't more that comes of this.
Speaker 1: In the end. Karen, thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 4: Thanks Daniel.
Speaker 1: Seven Am is a daily show from Solstice Media. It's
Speaker 1: made by Atticus Bastow, Aria Richards, Chris Dangate, Crystal Calla,
Speaker 1: Nicole Johnstone, Travis Evans, Zoltenfecho and me Daniel James. Our
Speaker 1: theme music is by Ned Beckley and Josh Hogan of
Speaker 1: Van Balote Bordio. Thanks for listening to seven Am. Please
Speaker 1: have yourself a great weekend,