SUBJECTS: Interaction with China in the South China Sea; Chinese Naval Ships off the coast of Australia; Bankstown nurses; Citizenship
NATALIE BARR: Australia has deployed Navy and Air Force patrols to monitor the activity of several Chinese warships off the Australian coast. The three vessels have not breached International Law but are being closely monitored by authorities.
It comes as it was revealed a Chinese fighter jet released flares in close proximity to an Australian aircraft this week, similar to an incident last year which Defence Minister, Richard Marles, said was completely unacceptable.
For their take let’s bring in Education Minister, Jason Clare and Deputy Opposition Leader, Sussan Ley. Good morning to both of you.
JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: Morning.
BARR: Jason, China has responded to this fighter jet incident which many say could have been very, very dangerous. China says we deliberately violated Chinese sovereignty. What’s the Australian Government response to that?
CLARE: Well, wrong. It’s international air space. I know this is contested, but this is international air space. The actions of that Chinese pilot were wrong. When you fire off flares within 30 metres of another aircraft, it’s very, very dangerous, people could have got hurt, and that’s why we’ve made an official complaint to the Chinese Government about this.
Militaries, aircraft and warships will always come into contact with each other, but they need to do that in a safe and a professional way. Just as this is international air space, the Chinese frigates that are off the coast of Australia are in international waters, they’re legally allowed to be there, we’re also legally allowed to monitor them and to shadow them, but to do it in a safe and a professional way, and that’s the way this should have occurred with these aircraft.
BARR: So where’s the line, we’re trying to sort of, you know, make sure our trade deals with them are on track, and then this happens.
CLARE: We agree where we can, and we’re doing a good job when it comes to trade, making sure that for Aussie farmers we can get all those products back into China, but we disagree where we must, and as I say, this is international air space, there’s a right for Australian aircraft to be there, militaries will always come into contact with each other, but they’ve got to do it in a safe and a professional way.
BARR: Sussan, this is the second time we’ve had this sort of virtual clash of the jets. What is the response of the Coalition?
SUSSAN LEY: It is totally unacceptable, Nat, and the People’s Liberation Army of China have form on this, as you said an incident last year, sonic flares in front of our Navy divers.
The problem here is that if a flare had been ingested by an aircraft engine, it could have had devastating consequences.
Australians need to know this morning that the Australian aircraft, and Australia are in the right and this Chinese jet is in the wrong.
But my question, Nat, is where was the Prime Minister on this? This happened on Tuesday. No statement was made to Parliament, which we’ve just risen from, no statement at all, and Parliament finished, and something was said by the Defence Minister with this weak Prime Minister and this part‑time Defence Minister not having a sufficient show of strength.
I mean Jason’s in the Cabinet. Did you know about this previously, Jason? There are a lot of questions to be answered here.
BARR: Jason, should the Prime Minister have made a comment on this earlier?
CLARE: Now of all the topics where people expect the Labor Party and the Liberal Party to rise above the sort of the pettiness of politics, surely this is one of them, Sussan. Come on, you’re better than that, you really are, or at least I thought you were.
You know, this is a time where we come together and send a message to China, we don’t have a fight on Sunrise at 7 o’clock in the morning. Come on.
BARR: Okay. Let’s move on to something that ‑‑
LEY: We need leadership from the Prime Minister on something so serious.
BARR: Okay. But can you just answer a question though, should the Prime Minister have made a comment on this when we’re talking about something so serious?
CLARE: Well, the Deputy Prime Minister ‑‑
LEY: He’s made no comment; I can’t find a single comment from the Prime Minister.
CLARE: ‑‑ of Australia, the Defence Minister, has made a statement, and we make statements in accordance with advice from the Defence officials who help to keep this country safe, and we shouldn’t be having a political fight about this on Sunrise of all things.
BARR: Okay. So your answer is no, it’s fine that the Prime Minister didn’t make a comment?
CLARE: Exactly right.
BARR: Okay. Let’s move on to this one, ’cause a lot of people are talking about this, Peter Dutton has flagged making changes to our citizenship regime after it was revealed that one of the nurses filmed in that horrific antisemitic rant was granted citizenship to Australia nearly five years ago.
The Opposition Leader is demanding an investigation as to why Ahmed Nadir gained citizenship, but at that time Mr Dutton was actually the Home Affairs Minister.
Sussan, should the previous Coalition Government have better vetted people?
LEY: Well, one thing Jason and I will agree on, Nat, is the hideous and sickening nature of this video, which I can’t even begin to discuss or view more than once, just absolutely horrific.
This happened five years ago. I think I agree with Peter; we need to look carefully at the character settings in our visa test. One of these individuals Australia gave a home to, and one of them grew up here. So there is home‑grown hate here as well.
We do need to look carefully at what we can do to be better, that we don’t have these incidents happening inside our country in such a horrific antisemitic way.
BARR: So is this something that Peter Dutton is just thinking about now or that maybe should have happened before in years gone by, when he was actually in charge?
LEY: Well, as I said, the individual came here five years ago.
BARR: Yeah.
LEY: The point here is we should all reflect, we should all reflect on the character settings within our migration system, where we offer the most precious thing to people, which is a home in Australia, and it’s just not good enough when somebody who has received that support behaves in this manner. I think all Australians would reflect similarly.
BARR: Jason, what do you think about the extra vetting or the citizenship regime change?
CLARE: First, I think the comments of those individuals have been utterly condemned by every right‑thinking person in the country, as they should be, it’s just absolutely vile, and there’s no place in our hospitals for people who talk about threatening to kill people; the job of a nurse is to save lives, not take them.
At the moment, the way the law works is that your citizenship can be taken off you if you’re a dual citizen and you’ve committed a serious offence. That’s the law of the land because of this Labor Government.
Now I think what Peter Dutton is saying, that he wants an investigation here into how this person became a citizen, as you rightly pointed out, the reason this person is a citizen today is because of Peter Dutton.
BARR: So should there be an investigation how he was let in under Peter Dutton?
CLARE: Well, I’d defer to the Minister for Home Affairs here on this. There might well be an investigation into that, but the short answer is this person is a citizen because of Peter Dutton.
BARR: Okay. Thank you both. We’ll see you next week.
ENDS