Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull has accused Donald Trump of fuelling current US race riots and seeking “to exploit divisions for political gain”.
Turnbull, in a live interview on Monday for Crikey and The Mandarin subscribers with editor-in-chief Peter Fray, described the current nationwide riots, sparked by the death of African-American man George Floyd, at the hands of police as “terrifying”.
He said Trump had made the United States weaker during the course of his presidency. “The US is less influential under Trump, because it seeks to be less influential,” Turnbull said. “This is what happens when you withdraw from global organisations like the World Health Organization.”
But Turnbull, who is promoting his memoir A Bigger Picture, stopped well short of a ringing endorsement for Trump’s presumptive opponent Joe Biden, questioning whether he would be a “sufficiently inspiring” candidate.
“Biden is a product of the Washington system, in some ways he personifies everything that Trump campaigned against,” he said. “People may say, ‘he’s not the most inspiring guy — he’s not JFK, he’s not Obama, but he is a safe pair of hands’.”
Elsewhere, he conceded he regretted giving Peter Dutton the gargantuan Home Affairs portfolio, having concluded before the 2018 coup that Dutton “wasn’t quite up to it”.
Turnbull took predictable aim at the hard-right crescent of the party he used to lead — backed by elements of the media — that would rather see the Liberal party lose office that see it run by Turnbull.
“The right of the party does not accept the premise of a political party any longer,” he said. “A political party is where you kick around ideas and follow the majority view. The hard right is prepared to blow the joint up if it doesn’t get its way. And over time this leads the ‘sensible centrists’ to leave.”
He pointed to the three “small-l liberal women” holding Warringah, Mayo and Indi — seats that had previously been safely Liberal — as evidence of the constituency that finds the “Sky after dark, right-wing Liberal party point of view very unattractive”.
The Murdoch media’s corrosive effect on Australian democracy — that unity complaint between him and Kevin Rudd — was of course brought up, as well as the personal animus — “the sheer insane hatred of some of these characters” — aimed at him personally:
“Murdoch acknowledged to me that [former Australian editor and current Sky News CEO] Paul Whittaker was part of the group that wanted to bring my government down or cause us to lose the election, so that Tony Abbott could come back and could lead us back to glorious victory in 2022.”
Earlier, he’d said: “The Murdoch media is now a political organisation that employs journalists.”
Perhaps it was a hangover of his time in office, but in suggesting solutions to what he identified as Australia’s biggest issues, Turnbull frequently minimised the role politicians could play.
He attributed the end of Alan Jones’ career — a man he described as “vicious, misogynistic and generally disconnected from facts” — to the grassroots work of Mad Fucking Witches and Sleeping Giants.
Asked about the toxic environment women face in Australian politics, he said, “it’s far too blokey”, but didn’t support quotas.
On the apparent hypocrisy of complaining about the influence of fossil fuel companies while his own party took money from the likes of Gina Rinehart and Clive Palmer, he avoided a direct answer.
“I have long-argued that political donation should be limited to people who are on the electoral roll, as opposed to corporations or unions and have an annual cap,” he said, arguing it was difficult to enact laws to that effect.
He couldn’t stop himself from adding, “We may not have won the 2016 election if I hadn’t kicked in nearly $2 million”.
It was a great conversation. And a reminder that the very best interview is the one where the journalist lets the talent do most of the talking. (Provided the talent has talent, obv.) Thanks to Crikey, PF, and especially MT for answers that treated us like adults with brains, not partisan clickbait.
Only one question for the MT one – why the hell didn’t you DO something?
All else about him is vanity.
He did answer that. To paraphrase: ‘What, exactly? Political suicide, every other day?’
I think if a former PM does Teh Interwebz New Meeja the courtesy of direct engagement like this – in-depth, nuanced, interactive, frank, time-generous – we should reciprocate by being a bit realistic and grown-up about how electoral and Westminster politics actually works. The West Wing fantasy of charismatic Jed Bartletts winning over the party room naysayers on pure strength of character and poetry, and ‘doing something’ to a soundtrack of swelling violins and triumphant closing credits, is self-indulgent and frivolous. Politics is a dirty, messy, sapping consensual grind. You have to get and hold ‘the numbers‘: cabinet, party room, Reps, Senate (polls, media space, donors). That means eating multiple sh*t sandwiches, every single day. In the end MT’s wilful spoilers could butter them them faster than he – I’d say anyone – could and/or was prepared to eat them. If he failed to do enough, fine, but let’s be sure to blame the right people, in the right proportion, for it.
As for vanity? Why do we post our fatuous emissions here at Crikey, then – the selfless benefit of our fellow citizens?
He was never in a stronger position than the day after his triumphant 2016 “win”.
As his assassination was inevitable, he should have told the party room “Back me or sack me!”.
They would not have sacked him, then, because he would have resigned immediately and guaranteed the loss of Wentworth and government.
All he did was delay the inevitable and allow the crazies to wreak further havoc on this country.
perhaps abby…but usually these ‘crash or crash through’ moments a) only become obvious five years downstream, and more’s the point b) end in disaster, if you do happen to notice them at the time, and get seduced by the drama, and overcome by the Messiah vanity.
Democracy: not a Reality TV Show. Or so you keep hoping it will ever be thus. I give you Trump’s America!
Turnbull could have done us the courtesy of speaking some truth to us occasionally while he was PM and minister for communications.
Instead he gave us a much better quality of lies than we were used to hearing from Abbott, and are getting used to hearing from Morrison, and for that he deserved his fate….no sympathy at all.
But I do appreciate his frankness now, albeit way to late – and I hope he never gets his $2 mill back for buying an election and allowing the animals in his party to inflict more damage on us.
Malcolm Turnbull is in a better position than anyone in the world to explain how politics works in Australia, particularly the Coalition. He could explain who and how vested interests work in our country. He could blow up the neocons of the Liberal party now, but he could never run for parliament as a Liberal after that.
I don’t believe this bloke when he shrugs his shoulders and says “meh” when directly asked “what is wrong with Australian politics.
If he said something like that industry run arbitrators virtually are never independent and a massive waste of everyone’s money and time, that lobby groups must present their scenario’s to a public and government forum. That both major parties are at the mercy of those that sponsor them and this needs to change, that tax is fundamental to democracy, he could re enter politics on a higher ethical plain than his peers. Imagine an honest politician.
Malcolm you are now a loose cannon, have a go you mug, they took your money and had a lend of you. It’s payback time.
I’d likely vote for a third centrist party along Turbullian lines, as MT and PF knocked about. This is especially so given Trump’s increasingly likely re-election, and America’s subsequent acceleration into something very different to its 21st century. The LNP appears determined to clone itself along post-Tea Party GOP lines. (Morrison embarrassingly dribbling with short-pants-wetting excitement about the mere sniff of being invited to G7, even as Canada and Britain tell Bunker Boy to shove Putin up his date.) Meanwhile the ALP is simply broken and sidelined, by generations of factionalism, mediocre apparatchik succession and the incessant territorial fragmentation and narcissistic ID politics triviality of ‘privileged progressivism’. The Fed Greens walked out of the room on CPRS, and now into the NSW Greens’ future.
We do not have grown-ups running our society in a grown-up way (even though as the fires and Covid response demonstrated, we can, when we have to). I don’t want Australia to end up as either the white coolie trash of Asia or some new Quisling neo-Norway to a superpower breakdown. Listening to MT, whatever the valid criticisms of how things unfolded for him in office, was like listening to a competent, intelligent, honest and decent grown-up. I’ll vote for a political party that looks, sounds and acts, in its public stances, utterances and conduct – like that. Not one of our current ones – state or federal – does. A few independents, sure. But not a single potential governance option.
So yes, agreed Stuart: but imagine an honest political party, too. Moderate libs, RE technocrats, smart money business interests, Windsorian regional reps, independents…a Turnbull could knit 20-30-40 seats or more together over a couple of election cycles, IMO.
Could always start by revoking Rupert Murdoch’s Australian citizenship. He is at heart a Trump acolyte with all the characteristics of Trump – a power-mad geriatric and a coward, full of bluster, with a heart like a caraway seed.
Yes, agreed 100%. Or at least appeal the grown-ups in News, to let our electoral system breathe again, free of the relentless bullying of the tiny few ideologues within, who have so disproportionately distorted our political and civic conversations for so long.
Rupert started out as both an optimist, and even a halfway decent idealist. WTF happened to the rationality, the good humour, even the inclusive warmth of News..?
I believe he had to renounce Australian citizenship and become an American citizen in order to own TV stations in the US.
NB – the Rodent changed the law as soon as he could which meant that he was able to reapply and receive his Oz citizenship.
This country was, until then, one of the few that did not allow native born citizens to hold multiple passports whereas O/S born citizens had no such restriction.
Something to do with a konstationy thangy, s44 as was.
The US hasn’t got, desperately needs, and likely never will have a Labor party.
Most of the decent structure that we have left was built by them and what they used to stand for, but more has been torn down, by both parties.
The good policies and development designed by the Liberals wouldn’t fit into their party anymore.
Malcolm could drag the centre back to a reasonable equilibrium which could force Labor to drop its ‘privileged progressivism’ as you put it Jack.
It does look like one of those fleeting chances to reset the outlook of politics to something more worthy of government, Malcolm doesn’t fit into either the lib/ labor box, except for a burning desire for success and perhaps to be remembered.
If he made a stand and deliberately went after political structures that were built by and for the more selfish vested interests that demean our governments and sully our democracy , he would be the most important politician we have had for a long time.
I absolutely agree. To have elected someone of his unusual combination of capacities and personality (including his personal backstory and resulting emotional qualities) to our highest democratic office was a credit to Australian voters and our democratic franchise. To have seen him dumped him from it, without an election, is a damning indictment of our political parties and system.
Frikking mods got my comment, so I’ll try again.
Why would a guy who actually gave a toss about his Country and was already quite rich even consider hiding any of his loot in the Cayman Islands ? If same guy was overseeing something as important to his Country’s future as the NBN, why work to ensure it was a costly dud ? What sort of dick would do that ?
Talcom blew 2 mill.(having been “kissed on the arse by a rainbow” earlier on in his life , this was chump change for MT) to get the P.M. gig ,once he got it he did SFA with the opportunity.
Not even a wonderful wordsmith like JR can polish that Turdball and make it shine.
MT leading a third way Centre party … who would vote for that ?
Pseudo progressives who want to keep the franking credits/CTG/Neg.Gearing/Sal.Sac. Super rorts intact ?
Right wingers who are embarrassed by some of their fellow travellers ?
“Objective Journalists” might be attracted to it…not too left ,not too right …safe/sensible/centre … an OJ’s delight ?
If the current Oz voting split is 40%ALP, 40%LNP, 20%None of the above…how would MT’s Fence Sitters disturb those figures ?
I imagine he’d pick up a bit of all 3, which might result in a potential hung parliament, which would see a scramble to form Gov., which…thanks to preference deals would probably deliver an LNP-lite-sorta centre – mostly right wing- no real change-mess.
Oh yes, we could see some progress on AGW but probably of the Matt Keane under Gladys variety… if I may paraphrase “Yes we accept the science, yes we must take action and as soon as we’ve fracked every last bit of gas,ripped out every tree for cattle production and dried up the MD for cotton, we will do something about the CC stuff.”
Hear hear for your 8:43 am comment above, AIFK. The most complimentary thing we can say about MT is that he’s not as bad as Abbott, Morrison or Dutton. But what will his legacy be? The Home Affairs mega-Department and the knackered NBN. Thanks, Mal.
I think a few new parties- a moderate LNP – new small l liberals (economically conservative, socially progressive) and a Labor break off- economically more and socially progressive, not pandering to the likes of the bullish type unions. Then, as per Northern Europe, coalitions of parties need to negotiate to hold power….they might keep each other more honest?
“Elsewhere, he conceded he regretted giving Peter Dutton the gargantuan Home Affairs portfolio, having concluded before the 2018 coup that Dutton “wasn’t quite up to it”. ”
Why did he create Home Affairs in the first place?
“I have long-argued that political donation should be limited to people who are on the electoral roll, as opposed to corporations or unions and have an annual cap,”
Unions, of course, represent (mostly) people on the electoral roll.
Corporations represent only themselves.
Also, wasn’t there a high court decision that ruled that donations from unions could not be banned?
They would claim that they represent their shareholders, the sainted “mum & dad” battling investors, not to mention that other tory Sacred Cow, self funded retirees.