E&OE TRANSCRIPT
ABC SYDNEY MORNINGS WITH THOMAS ORITI
MONDAY, 23 JUNE 2025

SUBJECT: Middle East conflict, Growth and Productivity Roundtable, PFAS.

THOMAS ORITI, PRESENTER: Samantha Maiden, political editor for news.com.au joins us now. Morning to you, Sam.

SAMANTHA MAIDEN, POLITICAL EDITOR FOR NEWS.COM.AU: Good morning.

ORITI: And also from one proud Blue Mountaineer to another, Susan Templeman, the Labor Member for Macquarie. Good morning to you.

SUSAN TEMPLEMAN, FEDERAL MEMBER FOR MACQUARIE: Hi, Thomas.

ORITI: Thank you very much for joining us. Let's start with you. We're going to talk about domestic issues as well. I appreciate this is a global issue, but of course it would be remiss of me not to start with these extraordinary developments over the weekend. Susan Templeman, the Australian government, quite swift to respond to this yesterday, calling for a de-escalation. I feel like listening to Penny Wong this morning, she took it a little bit further in offering the Government's support now. Just can I clarify, what's the government's position on these attacks?

TEMPLEMAN: Well, I listened to Penny this morning as well, and it is very clear that we do not want to see Iran develop nuclear weapons. And this was a step that was taken, and we support it in that context to prevent Iran from further developing its nuclear weapons programme and that is something the world does not want to see Iran with nuclear weapons. That is a really specific big deal. I think it's very clear this morning that we support the action that's been taken. But the conversation you've just had with the Australian Iranian community demonstrates why no one wants to see this escalate. We want to see it de-escalate because there's the potential for many lives to be impacted. And that is now our focus to join other countries in urging de-escalation of this.

ORITI: Samantha Maiden, I’m keen to hear your thoughts on this, right? Because, you know, I was covering this yesterday on the news and there was a call for de-escalation quite swiftly from the Australian. Australian government, acknowledging the risks posed by Iran's nuclear programme I felt like it stopped short of endorsing the strikes yesterday. Now Penny Wong seems to suggest the government actually does support what happened. Am I reading this wrong or has there been a subtle change overnight?

MAIDEN: Well, I saw you on the television yesterday and I concur with your analysis. Look, I think it would be unfair to suggest the government's been all over the shop on this, but they certainly haven't been clear. And I noticed a really distinct difference between the statement that the British government put out yesterday and the one that the Australian government put out. So, yes, of course, they said that Iran's nuclear power ambitions represented an ongoing threat. But only that morning, the Defence Minister Richard Marles had been on Sky News where he was directly asked, you know, how far away is Iran from building nuclear weapons or is that their intention? I can't remember the exact question, but it was of that flavour. And he basically said that he wasn't going to answer that question. Now, this is a bit of a shift where this morning the lovely Ms Templeman is telling us that, the reasons why this bombing has occurred is because of that. Yesterday morning, the Defence Minister couldn't tell us what his position was on this at all. So I think it was quite surprising that nobody put their head up yesterday. Yes, they released this statement, but Anthony Albanese didn't hold a press conference. Penny Wong didn't hold a press conference. The Defence Minister spoke before the bombings. In fact, he was urging de-escalation as the bombs were being dropped on Iran on Sky News. And so it looked like the government had been blindsided and now they're trying to play catch up. And, you know, I just don't quite follow it because it was. It would seem that,, that they are in this position where they have to, you know, have ongoing discussions with Donald Trump. They're trying to get a meeting. And I just think that if they look wobbly on this when the end game is that they actually say that back it, I just don't understand why they didn't say that more clearly on Sunday.

ORITI: I want to ask you about that side of things in a moment. Of course, the NATO summit coming up this week too. But, Susan Templeman, I feel like I need to give you, I should give you a right of reply for that. Has the government, I mean, this did come as a shock, right? But has the government been caught blindsided by this? And is there a bit of a recalibration going on at the moment in terms of its position?

TEMPLEMAN: Well, we're responding to events that have happened rather than pre-empting something. But I think it also goes to a perception perhaps out of kilter with the reality in terms of the role that we play in Middle East. We haven't been involved in negotiations and diplomatic talks in the way the UK has, for instance, with Iran. So, you wouldn't expect us to have a role other than that, we have been informed about what's happened. There are much bigger countries playing much bigger roles here, so let's keep that in mind as well.

ORITI: Samantha Maiden, just back to something you flagged a moment ago. Does this create a difficult situation though now when it comes to that relationship between Anthony Albanese and Donald Trump. So the Prime Minister was already robbed of an opportunity to meet with the US President at the G7. It's not happening at the NATO summit this week either. That starts tomorrow. The PM's not going. He didn't initially at least back the US perhaps as fulsomely as Donald Trump might like. I mean, what could that do to the relationship or does it matter? Could the US care less at this point what Australia thinks?

MAIDEN: Well, I suppose we're going to find out. Look, all of the indications are, which is not necessarily a good thing for Australia at the moment, is that Donald Trump just doesn't think we're very important, right? You know, it's a bit like that movie, He's Just Not That Into You. And so basically there's this suggestion, you know, I mean, And, like, surely just to help Anthony Albanese save face, he could have, you know, allowed to, like, have a photo or shake his hand or instead of making him look like Shag on the Rock at that conference, then there was this sort of frothing about that he might go to NATO. Then he didn't, and there was almost a sense that he didn't want to go because if he, like, didn't get another meeting, it would just be humiliating. Obviously, the Coalition is urging, you know, said he should have gone to NATO. Yeah, they may well be doing that for their own political purposes. Do you know what I mean? I think that you know, you've got to go to NATO with a purpose.

ORITI: There was this idea that if he went it would be viewed through this prism of will he or wont he get a meeting with Donald Trump.

MAIDEN: Look, I am being a little bit too facetious this morning but building on my He’s Just Not That Into You theory, someone did suggest to me recently it was like when Carrie Bradshaw went to try and find Mr. Big in the Napa Valley. Like if you sort of turn up and you're not invited, it's just going to look a little bit...

ORITI: I was not expecting the Israel-Iran conflict to turn into a Sex and the City reference. There you go.

MAIDEN: But on a more serious note, we'll just reverse hard out of that little observation. Indeed. right? The more serious question and interesting question that Penny Wong won’t answer is whether or not Pine Gap was involved. So she's been asked this question twice, once on the Today Show by Karl Stefanovic, once on the ABC. And, you know, she gives this kind of very kind of opaque answer where she says, you wouldn't expect me to comment on that. I won't discuss what happens with Pine Gap. Now, of course, Pine Gap does involve the US monitoring drone attacks, all sorts of things. We don't know whether the Pine Gap facilities were used. They may well have been. And then she goes on to make the point that, of course, the attack was unilateral that’s an obvious point to make and doesn’t actually answer the question

ORITI: Which makes me want to ask, this is ABC Radio Sydney Mornings. My name is Thomas Oriti, joined by Samantha Maiden and Susan Templeman at the moment. Susan Templeman, is there a chance, I don't expect you to reveal anything about Pine Gap in the interview now, but is there a chance Australia could be pulled into this? And do you know how far the government would go?

TEMPLEMAN: Well, look, I think that's very clear that we want to see this de-escalate, not spread. So, you know, obviously no one comments. I can’t recall anyone ever commenting in operations about the role of our intelligence capacity here – so I know journos are trying to find things to talk about but the reality is something has occurred and we are responding to that. Our response is to urge for diplomacy and de-escalation, and that’s what I want to see an Australian government doing – I don’t want to see us talking up any other options. I want to see us using the voice that we have to support other countries that are urging de-escalation.

ORITI: If that’s the priority should the Prime Minister have gone to the NATO summit?
TEMPLEMAN: the Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister is an absolutely apt person to be at the NATO summit. If we’re conflating going to NATO with meeting with President Trump, that’s really a separate matter quite frankly. And I have heard the opposition talk about deepening our relationships with other European countries. It’s clear we have in our first term really anchored those relationships with Europe with the UK with France, the Prime Minister has really great relationships with those people. How can it not be appropriate for a Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister to be our representative at NATO, I think it’s entirely appropriate.

ORITI: Samantha Maiden, Arthur Sinodinos was saying there’s a chance of Australia fulfilling quote “backup roles” in this. Do you have a view of how reluctant the political establishment in Australia might be as a whole, doesn’t matter what side you’re on, to get involved in a conflict in the Middle East?

MAIDEN: I think we need to be a little bit cautious about racing down that laneway because there’s no suggestion yet that this is where this is going to go. I’m not suggesting this is the case, or that it will be the case, but obviously the US is trying to suggest this is a one and done scenario, but they’ll back it up if they need to. I think it would be absolutely preposterous to suggest for example that Australia might send boots on the ground or something to Iran, there’s not even any suggestion the US would do that. I think we need to be a bit cautious about getting a bit too overwrought about all of that. The one thing I think it is relevant for Australia and particularly domestically – when you look at the role of the US having access to this military hardware, this bomb that Israel didn’t have which is why it needed to call on the US, this bomb that could penetrate into the underground bunkers in Iran, there’s a huge debate right now about Australia and it’s defence spending and it’s readiness and what it may or may not need in it’s own region to defend itself. I think this really does highlight the issue of why the United States spends so much money on defence and even though that may be at many times controversial, sometimes they’re very glad they spent that money and that raises questions about Australia's own preparedness.

ORITI: And issues that we've been discussing at length over time, and I guess that idea as to whether, and some people are making comments about this on the text line this morning, whether Australia does need to reconsider its position and where it's placed in the world as a sovereign nation. I want to move on to some other issues, but Susan Templeman, we heard from a member of the Australian-Iranian community a moment ago, as I'm sure you heard on the line. Is there much going on behind the scenes to help Australians caught in the conflict zones? Is the Australian government offering support?

TEMPLEMAN: Well, there's an absolute focus on trying to support in whatever way we can, getting the more than 2,900 Australians and their families who were in Iran registering and wanting to depart. You know, it is really hard when we made the decision to close down our consular activities there that we're urging people to get to the Azerbaijan border. So it's really tough stuff. Although if there is an opening in the airspace for people in Israel who are wanting to come home, that might provide some opportunities. So everyone should know there will be non-stop work by our foreign affairs officials to be looking for problem solving here, as there has been throughout this whole really difficult period in the Middle East, whether it's Israel or Lebanon or Gaza. There's been a heap of activity that is ongoing and will have ramped up because of this latest event.

ORITI: You're listening to Mornings on ABC Radio. Sydney Thomas Oriti with you. Joining me on the line, Sam Maiden and Susan Templeman. Let's chat some domestic issues now because they're, of course, easy to miss at the moment with what's unfolding overseas. Samantha Maiden, more hints in the past week from the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, that he'll use tax reform to improve productivity. This came out of the Press Club. He wants a roundtable in August to put ideas on the table here. What do you think is in the works?

MAIDEN: Well, I think probably the first order issue, issue, and he's kind of flagged this, is having some sort of national road user charging arrangement.

ORITI: We're actually, just for our listeners, we're chatting about that further in the next hour, so stay with us. It's going to be a topic of conversation this morning. But yes, please go on.

MAIDEN: Yeah, so I mean, New South Wales is the only state that really has sort of legislation in place. Victoria tried it and got toppled by the High Court. And there's this ongoing concern that basically electric car drivers, bless them, you know, doing their bit for the environment, but they're not really doing their bit to contribute to the cost of road upgrades. And so that's paid for, not completely, but in part by fuel excise and you know there's this whole question of how we need to shift to a new system so what does that mean I don't know the answer to that it's going to be pretty interesting because there's all sorts of constitutional you know curly questions but that's one issue, I don't think he has ruled out any changes to the GST. He's basically said, I don't really like the idea of changing the GST. I've traditionally been opposed to it, but I think the states may have something to say and I'm not going to shut them down. So there’s that.

ORITI: Thank you. But actually Susan Templeman, there’s a bit to unpack there but is this road users tax is that a good idea particularly when I imagine your govt is trying to incentivise more electric vehicles to hit the road

TEMPLEMAN: Well none of this is going to be straightforward or easy but my favourite line from the Treasurer at the press club was about not ruling things in and not ruling things out so let’s have this discussion and its good that people are weighing up the different sides and the pros and the cons of a whole range of things. And that’s the discussion Australia hasn’t been very good at having, we’ve had ideas floated then quickly knocked down or dismissed and criticised so this is going to be a really interesting process for Australia, I don’t think I’ve seen this kind of stuff happen almost since the Hawke days of tax summits and the like where we actually do have a proper conversation.

MAIDEN: Death taxes and negative gearing debate all the way.

ORITI: On that note, the government has a mandate now one would argue, how brave is the government going to be here? Should we expect huge reforms to the tax system under this government? I know there’s all this talk about rule in rule out questions at the moment, but how brave is the government going to be?

TEMPLEMAN: I think we are a brave government, but I think we want to bring people with us and go on a journey with the community not necessarily branch out somewhere on our own as it were. These are things that have to be done collaboratively, in conjunction with business, unions, across the whole board, I’ll use that old Hawke word – consensus – you certainly need to be able to have a conversation that allows discussion, compromise, all those wonderful words, that I think we’ve been pretty terrible at and I’m really looking forward to the conversation. Also people having the opportunity to put in some really creative ideas not from one interest group and that’s the other big message. This is not about what’s good for your state or one group, this is about trying to find a way that has some win wins for us all, but that always involves compromise.

MAIDEN: can I just jump in on this question of a mandate, the government may have a big majority, it has a mandate to deliver the promises that it went to the election with, it doesn’t have a mandate to do whatever it wants. It has a mandate to have the debate, have a discussion, consensus, it may with the big issues need to put it to another election. But it doesn’t have a mandate to do whatever it wants just because it has a big majority

ORITI: Important point, even the word mandate has been a sensitive topic for people in the wake of the election. Susan Templeman, before I let you both go there has been a lot of talk about PFAS water contamination in the Blue Mountains, you are the Member for Macquarie, a community Information day is happening this coming weekend in Katoomba, now there’s talk of a class action to improve medical care, for blood tests, to ensure the cause of all this is being properly investigated as well – do you support that?

TEMPLEMAN: I encourage people to learn more about PFAS, this is not the first PFAS incident that has occurred in my electorate, we have obviously got the RAAF base in Richmond with a slick of PFAS under that base, so this is an opportunity for people to be more educated. I’d encourage them to take whatever opportunities there are to learn more and that includes looking at the advice from the NSW Government. It is an important issue to understand, so for people particularly at the top of the mountains there’s an opportunity to learn more and I think people should have a whole bunch of different inputs in what helps form their personal understanding of the PFAS contamination that we’ve seen in our water supply.

ORITI: And as I say, from one proud Blue Mountaineer to another, Susan Templeman, thank you very much for joining us this morning.

TEMPLEMAN: Thanks Thomas.

ORITI: And Samantha Maiden, always a pleasure thanks so much for being with us.

MAIDEN: Thank you.

ENDS