The Oakes Interview: Joel Fitzgibbon

Nine political editor Laurie Oakes presents his weekly political interview on TODAY on Sunday every Sunday from 7am -10am on the Nine Network.

LAURIE OAKES: Joel Fitzgibbon, welcome to the programme.

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Good to be with you Laurie.

LAURIE OAKES: Before we get on to yesterday's announcement, what can you tell us about the proposal for boot camp training for the young unemployed?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: You know Laurie, this is all part of the speculation over the coming budget and as always I'm not in any position to comment on that speculation.

LAURIE OAKES: If this did get the nod in the budget though, is the Defence force in a position to undertake training of young jobless people when you're loading it up with all this other stuff?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: I can say Laurie that this will be a very tough budget in the most difficult economic circumstances in round 75 years but it will be a budget focused on jobs and nation building in a sustainable way. And of course the Australian Defence force already makes a substantial contribution towards ensuring that young Australians have every opportunity to secure a job and the gap year programme is a perfect example. So you could do more, if called on?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: I think there are a range of government departments and agencies that could do more to ensure that we cushion Australia from the impact of the global recession by bringing forward Labor market programmes which help skill up and provide better opportunities for younger Australians in particular to secure employment.

LAURIE OAKES: OK, well the Prime Minister yesterday announced a massive programme to reequip our armed forces, new submarines, ships, aircraft, long range, cruise missiles, it’s a huge shopping list, and yet you're refusing to say how the government will pay for it, that's not fair to the voters is it?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: That's not true, Laurie. For the first time in the history of the federation the government has provided funding certainty over the whole period of the Defence white paper, that's a 20 year window. No, we haven’t given the absolute details. It's very unusual for a government to producing a defence white paper on the eve of a federal budget, so by necessity we found it necessary to hold the fine detail until budget night, that’s only a week away or so, and people just need to be just a little bit patient. LOL But this is going to add massive amounts to is already shaping as a huge debt because of the stimulus packages. People have got a right to be worried about you loading up a whole lot of new spending on top of that haven’t they?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: It's more Laurie, about our strategic circumstances. The Prime Minister made the point yesterday, some people are saying well in these very difficult economic times we should be spending less on defence, the Prime Minister has the contrary view and I share it, that in these difficult economic times, which is producing all sorts of uncertainty, we need to be investing more in our national security. But very responsibly, while we're adding around $10 billion of taxpayers money, we're finding some $20 billion internally. I'm reforming the organisation, finding savings, cutting wasteful management and redirecting that money into higher priorities, the sorts of things like submarines we announced yesterday.

LAURIE OAKES: You say you will save $20 billion. That is almost an entire year's budget for the Defence force over ten years, now if there's that much waste in the Defence Department, there has got to be the most incompetent department in history, hasn't it?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: No, I have full confidence in my department Laurie.

LAURIE OAKES: But it has wasted a whole years budget over 10 years, is what you are saying.

JOEL FITZGIBBON: I believe my department has welcomed the fact that they have had a minister come along who is determined to drive a reform project and I've welcomed that, that they have enthusiastically supported me and worked with me in driving those reforms. And you know, to assist us here we've engaged an independent auditor in George Pappas and McKenzies and company to help us find these savings. You have only got to take projects like the Sea Sprite helicopter, probably John Howard's largest defence debacle, a billion dollars just saved by avoiding sea sprite helicopter issues in the future. We can secure these savings and we put in place for the first time a five year rolling program of white papers, and in every fourth year we will again expose the department to an independent financial audit to do two things, to drive further reforms, further savings but also to measure how successfully we are achieving those reforms we have already outlined.

LAURIE OAKES: This Defence white paper clearly reflects concern over the rise of China and its military build up, are you over reacting to China?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Well it is not about China necessarily Laurie, there is a consensus that we’ve seen big ships in the global distribution of power over the course of the period since the last white paper, almost a decade, and while it is true and we make the assessment in the white paper that the US will remain dominant over the next 20 year period. It is also true that there will be a number of other super powers floating around, the emergence of China and India for example, the reemergence of Russia means that in the future there won’t just be one super power, there will be a number of substantial powers. And it is natural that that sort of change can lead and probably will lead to strategic competition and maybe strategic tension which in turn can turn into miscalculation. And this government is determined to ensure that we are ready for any such contingencies. That is why we are substantially building up our capability so that we can defend this station without necessarily relying upon the armed forces of any other nation state.

LAURIE OAKES: The government sent the author of the white paper, Mike Pezzullo, to China to brief them in advance of its release. Did he go to any other countries to give them advance notice?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Of course, he traveled to a number of countries in the same way as the, I think Hugh White or someone from the white paper team did in the year 2000 when John Howard released his last white paper. This is normal for us to consult our allies and our friends in the region so that they don't get any surprises and they properly understand our strategic outlook and our plans.

LAURIE OAKES: It's been reported that the Chinese were not very impressed that in fact Chinese diplomatic source is quoted as saying it looks as though Kevin Rudd wants to act on behalf of the Americans. Is that what the Chinese said and are you concerned about that reaction?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Well I've seen these reports Laurie, but I’ve spoken with Mike Pezzullo who participated in the meeting and that's not the feed back I get from those meetings.

LAURIE OAKES: Our main intelligence agencies didn't see the Chinese build up as a major threat, the Americans see it primary defensive, so why the emphasis on China?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Again, I question those reports Laurie. Of course within the national security committee of the Cabinet over the course of the last 12 months, we've had some rebust debates about our strategic outlook, our strategic assessment and how we should respond. People would expect us to be having those discussions and those debates, that's a good process. But to suggest there is any large split within the defence community in this country about how we should weight our armed forces is just an over statement.

LAURIE OAKES: You have made the point that this will be good for Australian industry, but there is some concern about page 70 of the white paper which says the twelve new future submarines will be assembled in South Australia, what does assembled means?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: There is one piece of military capability for Australia Laurie that absolutely is unique and has to be built in Australia, and that is our submarine force. Our submarines by virtue of our geography are unique to any others in the world, that means the lion’s share, the bulk of the work, the overwhelming bulk of the work on our submarine capability will be need to be done here in Australia, indeed in Adelaide.

LAURIE OAKES: There is a line in the white paper too that suggests we are not going to get engaged in any more wars along those …, no more Iraqs. How does Afghanistan fit into that?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: No we haven't said that. We've said we produced again what one would described as a balanced force, a bigger army, bigger navy, bigger air force, a force capable of meeting a whole range of contingencies, defending the continent, playing a lead role in the stabilisation efforts in the South Pacific, participating in coalition efforts in the broader Asia Pacific and in deed participating in coalition efforts further afield in places like Afghanistan.

LAURIE OAKES: So that line wasn't saying the Americans don't expect us to come with you if you do another Iraq?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Absolutely not. Look, we're in Afghanistan under a UN mandate but we are also in Afghanistan as part of our commitment to the Australia US alliance. It was invoked when the towers came down on September 11 and that's why, you know, it's one of the large reasons we are in Afghanistan. I think the Australian community recognise that the alliance is really important to us. We would expect them to come and help us if we're in trouble and they expect under the reciprocal obligation that we go and help them when their home land has been attacked and that's exactly what we did when we engaged in the Afghanistan project.

LAURIE OAKES: Well you announced on Wednesday another 400 Australian troops going to Afghanistan. Malcolm Turnbull said the opposition supported and welcomed that decision. How important is bipartisanship on this commitment?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: I think bipartisan support is very, very important, and I welcomed the support provided by the opposition. You know Laurie, Afghanistan is difficult and challenging and the longer we are there and the more people we lose, the more difficult it will be to maintain public support and that bipartisanship is very important, but just as important is our capacity to show the Australian people that we are making progress, to remind them why we are there, and that means reminding them that more than 100 Australians have lost their lives in recent years at the hands of terrorism, most of that terrorism had its beginnings in Afghanistan, but just as important to demonstrate that we do have a plan to win and a plan to come home. And that is very much what this week's announcement was all about.

LAURIE OAKES: Now why hasn't Mr Turnbull been to Afghanistan?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: I'm not sure why Mr Turnbull hasn't been to Afghanistan yet, but I do happen to know Laurie, that he does have plans to go to Afghanistan because I'm of course am the facilitator of that process.

LAURIE OAKES: Well I happen to know that he asked to go to Afghanistan last December and the government knocked him back. He asked again in March and the government knocked him back. Now if you/re …- A - why didn't you know that, and B, if you're into bipartisanship, why won’t you let the opposition leader go?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Laurie, the important thing is that I am very, very supportive of the idea of Malcolm Turnbull going to Afghanistan, I'm committed to facilitating it. Malcolm and I have a slight different view here about when he asked this question. This goes to the fact that Malcolm wanted to go at a certain time, was around Anzac Day. I can now say that I was going on Anzac Day, and it was going to be very, very difficult from a resource perspective. I wasn't able to tell Malcolm at the time that I was going on Anzac Day for obvious reasons.

LAURIE OAKES: But you had the resources to ferry journalists around, I mean David Speers from Sky News was there about the same time, you can provide resources for the press but not the alternative Prime Minister?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Laurie, the really important thing is that we don't take too many resources away from the front line just to get ...

LAURIE OAKES: What about last December, why couldn’t he go in December?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Let me finish. Just to get politicians in and out of Afghanistan. Now I think it is important that the Prime Minister go, I think it is important that I go, as Defence Minister, ..

LAURIE OAKES: The alternative prime minister?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: And I think it's really important that Malcolm Turnbull goes as well. We have just got to smooth out the demand on the resource, the resources that those visits take, I'm very supportive of him going, I will facilitate him going, I'm keen for him to go.

LAURIE OAKES: One final issue, Mark Latham was your best friend in politics. Now he's suggesting there is more to your relationship with business woman Helen Lu than you have said? What is he talking about?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: Well I reject any suggestion there's more to the relationship with Helen Lu, it's a personal relationship, she did donate to my election campaign.

LAURIE OAKES: Because what Mark Latham wrote was "The full list of largess received by the Fitzgibbon family is yet to be made public". Is there any more to be made public?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: No.

LAURIE OAKES: But why didn’t Mark turn on, I know he's turned on everybody, Gough Whitlam included, but what did you do?

JOEL FITZGIBBON: I think you just made the point Laurie.

LAURIE OAKES: OK, well thank you, we are out of time.