KEVIN RUDD, MP  Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, Trade and  International Security  Federal Member for Griffith



TRANSCRIPT of DOORSTOP INTERVIEW - Radisson Plaza, Sydney.

DATE: - 20 January 2006

E & OE - PROOF ONLY

Subjects:  Appointment of Robert Hill; Corby Appeal; Mark Latham; East  Timor.

Note - List of 19 Howard Government Political Appointees attached (Attachment  A).

KEVIN RUDD:   In the midst of Australia’s worst corruption scandal  ever, what does the Howard Government do?  It decides to give jobs for the boys  to another one its favoured mates.  This, I think, represents an extraordinary set  of priorities on the part of the Prime Minister.

You see, we in the Labor Party don’t have a problem with the principle of using  political appointments to oversee diplomatic posts.  What we have a problem  with is the pace and scale at which the Howard Government is doing this.  What  we have had in the nearly ten years of the Howard Government is them  employing nearly double the number of politicians as diplomats than ever  occurred under previous the Labor government over thirteen years.

During Labor’s period in the office of thirteen years we made a total of some ten  appointments of five former politicians to two diplomatic posts and what we’ve  had with the Howard government by contrast is in a period of ten years in office  they have appointed nearly twenty of their own to senior diplomatic  appointments abroad.  It is basically double the number and more than twice the  rate of appointments that ever occurred under the Hawke and Keating Labor  governments.

That’s the problem here - the Howard Government is turning the Australian  Department of Foreign Affairs into a Liberal Party employment agency.



That is just not on.

There’s a further factor here as well.  When it comes to the particular  requirement of the post of Australia’s ambassador to the United Nations, based  on our research we can find no-one, so far, who has come as a politician, to that  most senior and complex post of Australia Ambassador to the United Nations.   You see it’s a position which requires particular skills.  It is a position which is  relevant to Australia’s multilateral diplomatic interests.  It is a complex position  requiring the skills of a diplomatic professional.  That’s why in the past,  governments, both Liberal and Labor, have consistently appointed professional  diplomats to that position.  That was the process during the previous Fraser  Government.  Unless we can find some evidence of someone in a much earlier  age having served in that position as a politician. Our claim remains that the  requirements of this position today in the 21st century, given the particular  demands of multilateral diplomacy in New York is that this is a proper position  for a diplomatic professional. Instead John Howard has appointed a politician.   That is not acceptable when it comes to this particularly sensitive post as far as  Australia’s diplomatic interests are concerned.

In the Australian Foreign Service there are at least a dozen people that I can point  to who have the skills and diplomatic experience which have qualified them  eminently for this position of appointment to New York.  John Howard can’t  advance the case that no other comparable talents are available.  That’s simply  not the case.  What John Howard is doing is in fact trying to solve a problem of  the Liberal Party in South Australia and using the Australian Foreign Service as  his employment agency to do that.  That’s what‘s I'll this is about.

You see by taking Senator Hill out of South Australia that removes a strong  potential supporter of the Costello base in South Australia.  It’s designed to  weaken the Costello forces in South Australia and to advance instead Senator  Minchin to the position of leader of the Government in the Senate, thereby  advancing the forces around the group who don’t want to see Peter Costello  become leader.  That’s the bottom line here.  This is a fix for the Liberal Party in  South Australia.  It’s about keeping the Costello forces on the defensive in South  Australia.  It’s about advancing the anti-Costello forces in South Australia and  the Australian Foreign Service has become a recruitment agency or an  employment agency for the Liberal Party as a result.

Finally I’ll say this - if you’re a career diplomat these days and you’ve spent  twenty or thirty years in the Australian Foreign Service, this sort of rank abuse of  the Australian Diplomatic Service as a Liberal Party employment agency is  frankly professionally pretty dispiriting.  A lot of people spend twenty or thirty

years training through multilateral posts like Geneva and New York to be  qualified for positions such as this.

What’s the government do?  They going around and appoint one of their  political mates in an attempt to solve a political problems on the home front.  In  fact I’d say this.  If you look at the composition of the government’s most recent  appointments and you’ve got the likes of Senator Alston who’s gone to London;  Senator Herron who’s gone to Dublin; former Senate Alston who’s gone to Los  Angeles and now to New York to be Consular General; and now with Senator  Hill going to the United Nations in New York.  Frankly, it’s a bit like this - if  you’re an Australian diplomat and you want a senior diplomatic appointment,  the best thing to do now is to find yourself Liberal Party preselection for the  Senate because the Senate’s a much surer bet when it comes to getting yourself a  diplomatic appointment abroad.

So far this government has appointment 19 of its mates to senior diplomatic  appointments abroad.  They’ve done that in less than ten years which is double  the rate and double the number under of that which occurred under Labor.  We  don’t oppose the principle of a a political appointment where the person is right  for the position but frankly it’s now got beyond a joke.

REPORTER:  Mr Rudd, how do you think Senator Hill will perform?

KEVIN RUDD: I have grave doubts whether Senator Robert Hill has the  skills necessary to discharge the task at a complex, multilateral diplomatic post  like New York.  That’s why governments both Liberal and Labor in the past have  appointed professional diplomats to that position.

REPORTER:   Do you know of anyone in particular you think would be a  better person for the job?

KEVIN RUDD:  I don’t want to give the kiss of death to any Australian  professional diplomat by telling the Howard government that X, Y or Z or A, B  or C would be better. But what I do know is this, having formerly worked for the  Department of Foreign Affairs myself, there are at least a dozen senior officers  from the Department who are well-suited to being appointed to this important  and prestigious and diplomatically complex post to Australia.  Very soon we are  going to have these very sensitive questions concerning Iraq debated at the  United Nations concerning Iran’s nuclear policy and the referral which is likely  to come from the International Atomic Energy Agency to the United Nations  Security Council.  At present we have a professional like John Dauth there who is  a 30 year foreign service professional.  They’re packing him off to Wellington and

putting instead Robert Hill. Well this is chalk and cheese in terms of the level of  professional skills involved.

REPORTER:   Inaudible.

KEVIN RUDD:  I haven’t had a chance to read the text of the judgement by  the Indonesian Judge.  I will do so during the course of today when a translation  becomes available.  And I will make an appropriate statement later on when I’ve  done that.  I think I’d just rather reserve my statement until I read the text of the  judgement.  I think it’s important to be measured about this and I will be  consulting with Mr Downer and his Department about this and other cases  which are currently of relevance to Australia.

REPORTER:   Mr Rudd, you’ve been the receiving end of one of Mark  Latham’s attacks in this book he’s brought out.  Do you feel for the photographer  who’s suffered a similar fate?

KEVIN RUDD:  I think the best I can say about that is Mark Latham’s about  the past, we’re all about the future. And we all hope Mark will just get on with  his life.  We hope that Mark will just get on with his life.



REPORTER:   Inaudible.

KEVIN RUDD:  As I said in a statement yesterday that this is a 2,500 page  report which I haven’t read and I doubt that the Australian Government has read  yet either.  I think it’s important to take this step by step.  President Gusmao of  East Timor is presenting a report to the United Nations in New York.  They’ll  deliberate on its contents and recommendations.  Let’s take it step by step.  But  what I’d also say is look, blind Freddy can tell you that in a 25 year period  between 1975 and 1999 massive widespread human rights abuses occurred in  East Timor.  That is a plain fact.  In terms of the details of the contents of this  report I’d rather wait and have time to examine it and for the United Nations to  have examined it as well.

REPORTER:   Inaudible

KEVIN RUDD:  No.

Ends 20 January 2006.

Media Contact: Alister Jordan 0417 605 823

Attachment A:



Howard Government political appointees to diplomatic posts:

1.  Michael Baume    New York (Consul-General)  1996

2.   Andrew  Peacock    Washington     1996

3.   John  Spender    Paris      1996

4.  Jim Short    London (European Bank)  1997

5.   Tony  Messner    Norfolk  Island    1997

6.   David  Connolly    Pretoria     1998

7.  Bob Halverson    Dublin and Holy See  1998

8.   Alan  Rocher     Los  Angeles     1999

9.  Bill Taylor    Cocos and Christmas Island 1999

10.   Jim  Short     Cyprus     2000

11.   Ken  Allen     New  York  (Consul-General)*  2001

12.  Peter Reith    London (European Bank)  2001

13.   John  Olsen     Los  Angeles     2002

14.  John Herron    Dublin and Holy See  2002

15.   Grant  Tambling    Norfolk  Island    2003

16.   Richard  Alston    London     2004

17.   Bob  Charles     Chicago     2004

18.   John  Olsen     New  York     2005

19.  Robert Hill    New York (United Nations) 2006



Therefore in less than 10 years in office, the Howard Government has made 19  political appointments - an average of one nearly every six months.

The Hawke and Keating Governments had over 13 years a total of 10 political  appointments.

In other words, the Howard Government has made double the number of  political appointees than the Hawke and Keating Governments and over a  considerably shorter period of time.

*Ken Allen was not a Member of Parliament, but was nonetheless a political  appointee by the Prime Minister to New York.



