THE HON TANYA PLIBERSEK MP
MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES
E&OE TRANSCRIPT
TV INTERVIEW
ABC INSIDERS
SUNDAY, 29 JUNE 2025
Topics: Middle East; defence spending; 1 July; family violence; gender quotas.
DAVID SPEERS: Tanya Plibersek, welcome to the program.
TANYA PLIBERSEK, MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES: Good morning.
SPEERS: So, you were the first Minister to publicly support, on behalf of the Government, the US bombing of Iran on Monday morning. Would you support another bombing if Donald Trump decides it's necessary?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, that's certainly not a question for me to answer on a program like this without any sort of context, David, you understand that. I think understanding what's happened to date is very important, but as Isabella said a moment ago, it's what happens next that is absolutely vital. We have consistently said that what we want to see in the Middle East between Israel and Iran is the ceasefire holding, de-escalation and dialogue.
Australia's interest in this is predominantly in making sure that Australians who are caught up in this conflict are able to get safely out of Iran. We've still got about 3,000 Australians in Iran at the moment. It is very difficult to assist them to safety. And as well as what's happening in Iran and between Iran and Israel, our focus continues to be on helping Australians out of Israel, making sure that in Gaza and Israel, hostages are returned and humanitarian aid can get into Gaza. We've seen continued extraordinary numbers of civilian deaths in Gaza.
So, across the region, what we want to see is reduced conflict and those ceasefires holding, and in the case of Gaza in particular, humanitarian assistance at much greater scale than it's been able to get into Gaza in recent times.
SPEERS: Okay, but look, it does also matter how Australia decides what it's going to support in terms of the use of force from one country against another. You were a strong critic a couple of decades ago of the US decision to go to war in Iraq on the grounds that, you know, Labor's concern at the time was that the United Nations hadn't sanctioned the use of force. I mean the UN hadn't sanctioned the use of force here either. Has your thinking changed on when it is appropriate for one country to strike another?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I think the world has been saying for many years that Iran can't be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. If you ask the International Atomic Energy Agency, the head of the agency has said clearly that Iran was enriching uranium almost to weapons grade, enough to build several nuclear weapons. We know that Iran is the cause of great instability in the region. It is a state sponsor of terrorism. Its own human rights record domestically is appalling. I think there's pretty broad agreement that Iran can't be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.
SPEERS: That’s true. But under international law the threat has to be imminent to justify anticipatory self-defence. And I don't think the IAEA or anyone as far as we're aware was saying that the threat of Iran using an atomic bomb was imminent. So, again the question is...
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: And it would have been much better, David, it would have been much better if Iran had agreed to cease its nuclear enrichment program as it's been asked to do and pressured to do by the international community for many years.
SPEERS: That's true, but it's not alone in that regard. Coming back to the question, is your view on how the UN should be involved in these things changed over the last couple of decades?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I think it's clear that the UN through the International Atomic Energy Agency has been saying that Iran is enriching enough uranium to almost weapons grade to build several nuclear bombs. I mean, there has been UN concern about Iran's nuclear program for some time.
SPEERS: So, that's enough, that's adequate? UN concern is enough to justify this?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: I think the important thing is what happens next here. And our focus is on urging de-escalation and urging the ceasefire to hold and getting Australians out, getting Australians out. We weren't involved in this action as your panel have pointed out. The Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister have made it very clear that this was a unilateral US action coming on top of the original intervention of Israel. But it's not an action that Australia has been involved in. We found out about it after the fact, as you've pointed out. And our interest as a pretty small player in this conflict is to make sure that Australians are able to get out and to do what we can with the international community to say to Iran that they mustn't have a nuclear weapons program and that the best way to resolve these things is diplomatically, if we possibly can.
SPEERS: Yeah. And can we just come back, I'm interested in your opening remarks about Gaza as well. Is your message that given what's happened over the last couple of weeks, Israel now needs to turn its attention to ending that war in Gaza?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, absolutely. We want to see a return of Israeli hostages. Absolutely we do. But when you look at the catastrophic consequences of the ongoing conflict in Gaza, the humanitarian aid being prevented from, you know, entering Gaza and being distributed, the number of deaths we continue to see, I think it's important most people see that these two conflicts are related and we need to make sure that we are urging peace in both circumstances.
SPEERS: On the question of defence spending, we know the Trump administration wants Australia to spend a whole lot more. Labor this week will be spruiking some of the extra spending that will flow from July 1 on a range of things that you announced at the election and so on. Why are these measures a higher priority than more defence spending as the US might like?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, we are doing more defence spending. We're spending $10.6 billion extra over the short term, $56 billion over 10 years. We're doubling our surface fleet, for example. We're investing in long range missile capability. We are investing in defence. We don't pick a number and then work out how to spend it. We work out what we need and then work out what it's going to cost.
But yeah, we're doing some really important things that start on the 1st of July. So, from the 1st of July, on Tuesday, you'll see wages go up, you'll see the superannuation guarantee go up. You'll see expanded Paid Parental Leave, more money and more time and Paid Parental Leave attracting superannuation for the first time. You'll see $10,000 apprentice sign on bonuses. You'll see paid prac for teaching, nursing and social work students. You'll see expanded, a bunch of things in women's health Ged Kearney did a great job in longer consultations, more support for menopause and a whole lot of women's health issues. And subsidised batteries for the family home if you've got solar on the roof. I mean, all of these things start on Tuesday and they will all make a huge difference to the lives of Australians.
SPEERS: And just to be clear, you don't want to sacrifice any of those things to pay for more armaments as the Spanish are saying when it comes to the pressure they're facing from Donald Trump on defence spending.
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I think the way the Spanish government is talking about it is for them. We don't see this as a trade-off. We are absolutely committed to making the investments we need to make to keep Australians safe. I mean, we inherited the oldest surface fleet, Australian surface fleet, since the Second World War, when we came into government, we're doubling size, we're modernising the service fleet. We are doing all of these things.
SPEERS: It's very clear we're not doing, we're not committing to the sort of spending that the Europeans are or that the US would like us to. That's clear.
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, we're not Europe, we're Australia. We make decisions in Australia's interests. We did a very substantial defence review under Sir Angus Houston when we came into government, we determined what we need to keep Australia safe and we are investing more than ever before.
SPEERS: But Sir Angus Houston says we need to spend 3 per cent?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, in fact, the last year of spending is the highest year of investment in defence spending ever in Australian history by a factor of an additional $2 billion. And then next year we're going to spend more than that again.
SPEERS: In dollar terms, okay. Look, I want to come to the measures in your portfolio, particularly on domestic violence. The $5,000 payment for women fleeing a violent relationship. It was introduced as a trial by the Morrison Government that now will become a permanent scheme. $5,000 obviously doesn't go as far as it did some years ago. Is it enough, do you think, to help victims who are making that difficult decision on whether they can leave a violent relationship?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, the first thing to say is, too often, where there's domestic violence, people say, why didn't she leave? When they should be asking, where would she go. This $5,000 is not the only assistance available, but it's a very important start. Like, if you're making a decision about whether you can pack the kids up in the middle of the night and walk out the door knowing that you've got access to money that will help you with the groceries, furniture, or if you're staying home and the violent partner has been removed, help you change the locks or put in some security cameras, that absolutely makes a difference. We know that women go back to violent relationships because they can't afford to leave. So, making that permanent is a really important first step.
We're also doubling the National Partnership on Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence. So, from the 1st of July, funding to frontline services will increase substantially. The Commonwealth contribution to that funding has doubled. We're investing about $4.4 billion in 122 measures in family, domestic and sexual violence since 2022. And that means there is more assistance becoming available.
Is it enough? I will never say it's enough. Until we stop losing women and children to violence in the family home, I'll never say that we are doing enough. But we are making a substantial difference. And, sorry, one other thing I should say about this payment, David, is it's not the only financial assistance available either. There are emergency relief payments and there are other payments available. This is a start. This is the thing that gives you the confidence that you can walk out and there'll be some help available to you very quickly. It also comes with safety planning and counselling and other supports as well. And, of course, we're investing $1 billion in crisis and transitional housing for women and children who are escaping domestic violence. I went to a fantastic, beautiful new refuge opened just recently by the Muslim Women's Association.
SPEERS: This is the thing, though, you point to never, you know, resting until those numbers come down, because the numbers clearly are still so concerning. 36 women have been killed so far this year, according to Australian Femicide Watch. That's more than one a week. And on top of that, an estimated more than 1,000 women are turned away from legal services every week. So, there's just not enough capacity. So, are there more measures that you're looking at, considering beyond what you've just spoken to there?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Absolutely. And you might recall that when Mark Dreyfus was Attorney General, he very substantially increased funding to family violence legal supports and other legal services that support women who are getting the advice they need to safely leave a violent relationship. We will continue to work right across Government to do that in legal services, in housing, in my own portfolio for those frontline services. And we need to work with states and territories as well. This is not just a question for the federal government.,
SPEERS: I was going to ask you about states and territories because there's this story this morning about technology being used for coercive control. So, things like, you know, a smart fridge being locked or a thermostat being turned up and down, and these sorts of, you know, can be really menacing things as well. Some states have brought in laws, others haven't. Is the Federal Government going to put some pressure on the laggards to do more?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Yeah. So, most states either have coercive controls laws, or are working on them. And there's been some really important work done by the Standing Committee of the Attorney Generals to try and make those laws more uniform to, you know, to show what best practice is in coercive control laws. Because the early states that moved, of course, the technology moves on so quickly. So, we see more abuse, like financial abuse using banking systems, we see more hidden tracking devices, we see more use of electronic devices to spy on or control. We need to keep updating our laws because the way that abuse is happening continues to evolve.
And one other thing, I guess I'd say about this, David, is we're doing an enormous amount. The frontline people who are working in domestic family and sexual violence are an incredible workforce. They're working extraordinarily hard. We're backing them to do that. We continue to do more. But there are all these countervailing forces in society as well. So, you see these young men being fed a diet of violent, misogynistic pornography. They are seeing, you know, rape in pornography before they've had their first kiss. Unless we really work with young boys and men in particular, to challenge some of the ideas about what healthy relationships look like or what a good relationship looks like, we're not going to succeed if all we're focused on is helping women safely leave violent relationships. We're going to keep doing the same thing. We have to do that, we have to do that better, but we have to change the attitudes that allow this violence to happen in the first place.
SPEERS: That's a good point. Look, finally, you've been critical of the Liberal Party this week when it comes to whether they should or shouldn't be embracing quotas to get more women into Parliament. Angus Taylor's not a fan of quotas. He suggested they have subverted democracy in the Labor Party. What's your response to that?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, the Liberal Party do support quotas. They've got a quota of National Party MPs that have to be on the front bench. So, they're happy to have quotas for National Party MPs. It's just quotas for women that they're not prepared to use. Look, this is the problem with the Liberal Party. Does Angus Taylor really want people to believe that the 28 most talented Liberals in the whole country are the people who've made it into the federal parliament? The Labor Party and the Liberals in 1994 had around 14 per cent female representation in the Federal Parliament. We're at 56 per cent now. They're still around 30 per cent. And it's because they refused to take it seriously. You know, they've got a target, they've got a 50% target, they introduced it in 2016. They've done nothing to deliver.
SPEERS: They do have, however, a female leader now in Sussan Ley. It's, as you would recall, Tanya Plibersek, 12 years and two days since Labor dumped its last female leader. It's been three men in the role since then. Should the next Labor Leader be a woman?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, the next Labor leader is a long way off, David, so that'll be a matter for the party in many, many years to come.
SPEERS: When it does come, though, should it be a woman?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, we'll see at the time. It's a long distant future.
SPEERS: How distant?
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: I'm sure it's a very long distant future.
SPEERS: Alright, Tanya Plibersek, thanks for joining us this morning.
MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Thanks, David.
ENDS
