SARAH FERGUSON, PRESENTER: Welcome to the program minister.
TONY BURKE, HOME AFFAIRS AND ARTS MINISTER: Hi Sarah.
SARAH FERGUSON: Now starting on NZYQ, the name of this cohort of released former criminals, did you stop to question the morality of sending a murderer and other serious criminals to a tiny, impoverished country like Nauru?
TONY BURKE: Nauru approached us. So we put forward the legislation that allowed, or made it clear that you could send people to a third country.
You have got to remember, we’re talking about people who have had their visas cancelled, there are particular reasons, different for each person, why we can’t return them to their country of origin and so, but they have no right to remain in Australia.
So, we set up laws that just made clear, if another country was willing to take them, then they would be able to be sent there.
Now, while that legislation was being debated in the parliament, Nauru came to us. They are a sovereign nation, and they made a decision that they believed that an arrangement of this sort, there was a way of it being in their national interest and I respect that.
SARAH FERGUSON: What’s the quid pro quo, how much are you paying Nauru?
TONY BURKE: As you know, you know I’m not going to answer that one, but I will explain just something on cost because the costs of arrangements like this don’t get disclosed and that’s been the case for decades.
SARAH FERGUSON: Why not, in this particular case? You are talking about sending three people, there’s 270-odd others in this cohort. It is going to be a large impost. Why don’t we have the right to know how much?
TONY BURKE: It’s part of the arrangement with Nauru that is entered into, is that these issues will be kept confidential.
But let me say just something about costs if I may which is to say, it’s not like this is cost-free now. Right now, under Operation Aegis, there is a lot of money that is spent having to monitor these individuals in the community.
Before that there was a lot of cost in them being kept in detention, before that them being kept in prison and for these individuals, the greatest cost to Australia will never be the dollars, it will be the crimes that they committed.
SARAH FERGUSON: Nonetheless…
TONY BURKE: It’s not what we are comparing..
SARAH FERGUSON: Forgive me for interrupting, none of those facts obviate a simple request to understand how much it is costing Australia to send three criminals to Nauru.
TONY BURKE: And I’m giving you the same answer that Australian ministers have given for 20 years on arrangements with Nauru in terms of the cost.
SARAH FERGUSON: Is it the right answer, though?
TONY BURKE: If I didn’t think it was, I wouldn’t continue to give it. When you reach an agreement with a country in confidence you retain the confidentiality of those costs.
SARAH FERGUSON: Let me just come back to the first question because you said that Nauru approached us but that doesn’t really answer the questions about whether or not you, faced with that offer, you stopped to question the morality of sending murderers and hardened criminals to a tiny impoverished island like Nauru.
TONY BURKE: There are some people, I’m not sure which angle the question goes to. Can I just refer to one way that people often refer to the morality here as though there’s something horrific about sending anyone to Nauru.
There’s a bit that can underlie that sort of attitude. It’s not like we’re evacuating the Nauruan population from Nauru and this concept that it’s fine for them to live there, but it would be outrageous for anyone else to live there including when they as a nation have decided they’re willing to take them.
It’s a patronising attitude. You’re right to put the question to me, because it is something that a lot of people are asking, but I do think that there’s some values there that are pretty condescending to Nauru, when some of the advocates put that argument.
SARAH FERGUSON: How would you feel if these people in question reoffended on Nauru?
TONY BURKE: The same as people who are returned even if they are returned to the country of their origin.
If people are sent anywhere in the world, where people have their visas cancelled, it’s always been the case that there’s a chance of them reoffending.
You need to remember though, these are individuals who were never Australian citizens, never. Sometimes we’re talking about individuals who have only lived in the community for a very, very short time, for some of them, and sometimes you get people who the first time they were in the community was the same time they were committing a crime.
The concept that Australia owes a particular obligation to these individuals, I really think is a stretch. We’re talking about people who were not citizens, who don’t have a right to a visa in Australia, who have committed crimes and another country, Nauru, has said that they’re willing to take them.
SARAH FERGUSON: I’d like to move on to the subject that I referenced at the beginning, which is the turmoil in the board of Creative Australia with regards to the artist, Khaled Sabsabi. Now, as I said, he’s been dumped from representing Australia at the prestigious Venice Biennale. You called him a gifted and extraordinary artist. Why has he been dumped and should they reverse the decision?
TONY BURKE: Well, first of all, I stand absolutely by what I have said about Khaled as an artist and also, Michael Agostino, who was the curator as part of their partnership. He’s an extraordinary curator as well and Khaled is an extraordinary and gifted artist. I’ve seen some of these work over the years and the work that they were preparing to do at the Venice Biennale, I was really looking forward to, as I think everyone at Creative Australia was as well.
I wasn’t involved in his selection, even though I don’t know Khaled well, I’ve known Michael for some time. I wasn’t involved in their selection; I wasn’t involved in the decision that it be ceased.
I’ve had a view for a very long time that the arts minister should, and any politician, should not interfere with decisions about artistic merit. The fact that I think he’s an extraordinary and gifted artist is my view, I don’t think that is a reason that he should be chosen or not chosen.
I think it’s really important that these decisions are made at arm’s length and I’m very proud with the board that governs Creative Australia, that it has had more artists appointed to it in various art forms than that board has had for a long time.
SARAH FERGUSON: Yes, but it is now roiled by resignations and very great distress clearly coming out of the artistic community about this decision. Just back to my question, given you have that view about Khaled Sabsabi, do you think that Creative Australia has made a mistake, and they should reverse the decision?
TONY BURKE: My view is that the decision should, the moment I give you my view on who they should choose, at that moment there’s ministerial interference.
SARAH FERGUSON: It is not a question on who they should, sorry, Minister, but it’s not a question on who they should choose. They made a choice; you endorsed the choice by saying you value the art of Khaled Sabsabi. Should they reverse their decision?
TONY BURKE: In fairness, that comment I actually made after they had reversed it. That comment that you quoted I made at the media conference I held yesterday.
So, I was not involved, nor did I make comments encouraging them, which artists they should choose. They made a decision as to not going ahead with that now. I think the worst thing could happen now would be for politicians to be adjudicating on it.
It should be made at arm’s length from politicians, I think that’s so important. I saw what happened when George Brandis tried to take control of funds for himself.
SARAH FERGUSON: Am I right in saying that you did you speak to members of Creative Australia on Thursday before their snap board meeting where they made the decision?
TONY BURKE: I have seen that published in The Sydney Morning Herald online in the last hour or two. The Herald didn’t contact my office, and if they had contacted, they would have been told saying members “plural” is completely wrong.
I contacted one person and one person only as soon as I came out of Question Time and that was Adrian Collette. He is the CEO, and the reason I contacted him was questions had come up in the Senate about a particular work which normally, I don’t get involved in the decisions, but when something is due to be announced, I get sent up a brief with what are the different works, what are the different issues that might be considered controversial.
That particular work had not been raised with me in any of the briefs and was clearly more controversial than anything that had been. So, I was shocked when I saw that it was there, and I ran Adrian to find out what had happened.
At that point, he had already determined that they were going to have a board meeting that night.
SARAH FERGUSON: Did you give him any instruction or give him any sense of your view of the decision in that conversation?
TONY BURKE: I was very clear with him. I made clear to Adrian Collette, who I have known for more than a decade, I said to him whatever you decide, I will support you and I will support Creative Australia. I was very clear in that.
SARAH FERGUSON: Clearly this story has a long way to run but on both subjects, Minister, thank you very much indeed for joining us.
TONY BURKE: Good to talk to you.
