Doug PollardDigging Deeper with Martin Foley MP, Member for Albert Park
DOUG: This hour we’re Digging Deeper – as we always do, with one special guest and my special guest today is Martin Foley, the MP for Albert Park. Let’s delve into your life a little bit. Where-abouts where you born?
MARTIN: I was born in the Mornington Bush Nursing Hospital as it then was. It still exists but it’s not longer “Bush”.
DOUG: No. We’ve suburbanised - - -
MARTIN: Yes.
DOUG: - - - so much of the Peninsula now but what was it like in your earlier days when you were living down there?
MARTIN: Ah, it was semi-rural – m’mm, in my street which was I suppose, then the ‘ends’ of the suburbs there were still paddocks and cows. It was a small community, nowhere near as big as it is now. The further you get away from it the more idyllic it looks in retrospect.
DOUG: M’mm [laughs] probably wasn’t, though. A bit primitive, perhaps?
MARTIN: Yeah. Yeah, m’mm – now, looking back it was a very closed community in a way. I think our most exotic neighbours were the Latvians. That was about it. Other than that, it was very white. It was very middle class, it was in retrospect a very insular kind of community. It reflected an insular society, I think.
DOUG: How many children in your family?
MARTIN: We’re a good Catholic family us Foleys, there were five of us and all within about eight years - - -
DOUG: Ah, ha.
MARTIN: - - - so it was an endless battle to get fed and make sure you were noticed.
DOUG: Do you think it’s different being in a bigger family as opposed to a small one, an only child – do you think it makes you different?
MARTIN: M’mm, I would imagine it would have to be - - -
DOUG: I mean, the emphasis on sharing and having to make do - - -
MARTIN: - - - yes, exactly. I think that that must have some affect - - -
DOUG: Whereas spoilt brats like me, didn’t have a sibling until I was eight – you know?
MARTIN: [laughs] I think it would have to have an affect ‘cause – you know, family and early rearing have such an impact in whatever culture you’re in. So, I think it must have had an impact on me.
DOUG: What were your parents like, what did you father do for a living?
MARTIN: He was an engineer, civil engineer and that was civil engineer land down there – m’mm, you know – surveying and doing whatever it is civil engineers do - - -
[laughs]
MARTIN: - - - all these years later I’m still not exactly sure.
DOUG: Build things, don’t they?
MARTIN: Yeah. Build things – m’mm, that was a kind of a building things place and he built things and ultimately, ‘cause it was a little – small firm, he worked his way up and ended up owning the firm and being the boss after generational change in the place. So – yeah, he was from a farming background himself. So he was relatively conservative but strong on family, strong on education – extremely strong on the value of education – and a pretty smart cookie in his own right.
DOUG: How ‘bout your mother?
MARTIN: She was from inner-Melbourne, she was a nurse. Her family were railway people and they weren’t conservative. They were Coms(sic) and – m’mm - - -
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: - - - members of the Communist Party, her uncle was Secretary of the Railways Union for many, many years, J.J. Brown. How they ever got together to this day, I don’t understand - - -
DOUG: Well they do say opposites attract, don’t they?
MARTIN: - - - yes. Yes.
DOUG: You don’t expect someone who’s running a civil engineering business, building things, running his own company to be taking up with a commie-unionist - - -
MARTIN: No. No, you don’t – or niece, m’mm – but I think they met when they were students - - -
DOUG: Yeah.
MARTIN: - - - and he never finished his engineering degree, by the time he got married. He made her a promise later, before she died, that he’d finish his degree. So with five children on his own, down the [indistinct] peninsula working full time he still managed to find time to go back and finish his degree and kicked-on from there.
DOUG: ‘Cause you lost your mother quite early, didn’t you?
MARTIN: I did. Today is the 40th anniversary of her death so I was eight years old and that was – you don’t remember much from eight but in retrospect it was clearly, a big and traumatic affect on our family.
DOUG: But your father still managed to keep you all together and bring you all up, obviously - - -
MARTIN: He did, he’s - - -
DOUG: So, a strong man?
MARTIN: - - - yeah. A very strong man. He had help from my Nan, my mum’s mum. She came down from Elwood where I now live, I live in her old house. Funny, the way these things go ‘round. Together, they not only held the five of us together actually, they did pretty well. All of us got through tertiary education, some have done post-graduate degrees – we’re all still alive - - -
DOUG: M’mm.
MARTIN: - - - that’s an achievement and – m’mm, we’re all relatively sane.
DOUG: Was religion a big part of your up-bringing?
MARTIN: Ah, yes. This was a traditional, working-class – particularly on my mother’s side, Catholic family and it was very strong particularly from my Nan but in a very pragmatic way. My Nan was incredibly selective as to which parts of Catholicism she’d - - -
DOUG: But isn’t that true of most Catholics, I think?
MARTIN: - - - yes. I think so.
DOUG: I mean, I’ve been reading an awful lot of things lately about the Pope’s visit to the UK and these surveys of English Catholics who said – well, basically ‘we ignore what the Church says - - -’
MARTIN: [laughs]
DOUG: - - - and we do what we want.
MARTIN: Exactly. I think that’s a fair description of the brand of Catholicism I was brought-up with but you get to the point in your life, you think ‘what is this’ and you dispense with it.
DOUG: So, you’re not religious now?
MARTIN: No. I’m afraid me and the one, true wholly-Catholic apostolic Church parted ways a very long time ago.
[laughs]
DOUG: Was that when you went to uni?
MARTIN: No, it was before then.
DOUG: Before then?
MARTIN: I remember a stand-up debate with my dad. I was going to join the Labor Party and not go to Church anymore and - - -
[laughs]
DOUG: Interesting that you bracket the two together - - -
MARTIN: - - - I think so.
DOUG: The Labor Party was a strongly-Catholic party at that time, wasn’t it?
MARTIN: Yes, indeed. It still has a bit of a tendency in that direction but – no, they were two very conscious decisions - - -
DOUG: Yes and we discovered yesterday, we’ve a remnant of the old, Democratic Labor Party still marching on. They’ve got themselves a senator.
MARTIN: Yes. Bizarre.
DOUG: Let’s go back a little bit, again. You’ve said in the notes you gave me before this interview that you thought your grandmother in particular and her highly selective version of Catholicism as it were, had given you values that you still hold-on to, today - - -
MARTIN: Yes.
DOUG: - - - and you mention in particular, helping other people in need regardless of your own circumstances.
MARTIN: Yes.
DOUG: Is that the kind of thing she did?
MARTIN: It sure was. M’mm, being a railway family they never had much money, to my recollection. But there was never a time when anyone was knocked back for anything let alone, the active participation she had in some strange groups now looking back on it; the Good Neighbour Society. I’m not exactly sure what the good neighbour society would translate as – but actively going out and helping new migrants settle in, feeding them. Showing them around the St. Vincent DePaul Society, any number of issues that she was always involved with. They always had an aspect of feeding people, in my recollection.
DOUG: That was a kind of traditional, female role at that time wasn’t it - - -
MARTIN: Yeah.
DOUG: - - - I suppose; but, it has a political edge to it, too. Doesn’t it?
MARTIN: Absolutely, it sure does.
DOUG: You also mention the power of doing things collectively rather than individually - - -
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: - - - as being something else you got from her?
MARTIN: Definitely; on your own you had very little chance of achieving much, it was community – it was union, it was school. It was any group was going to be more effective and more powerful than what you could do, as an individual.
DOUG: You mention also, education is the way out of poverty - - -
MARTIN: Yes.
DOUG: - - - of you know, a restricted background?
MARTIN: Yeah, she’s a child of the Depression and the effort that she went to, to work. To put her kids through – her kids, my mum and others – through the Catholic education system. Saw my mum a nurse, her sister a social worker. Her brother ended up doing his PhD in Theology - - -
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: - - - ended up being a handyman. But – you know - - -
DOUG: [laughs] Strange training for a handyman.
MARTIN: - - - absolutely. But just the whole focus on the value of education both in its own right but (also) as an empowering thing. A pathway out of hardship.
DOUG: Yeah. It’s all sounding Billy Elliot, actually - - -
[laughs]
MARTIN: Without any artistic flair, whatsoever.
DOUG: Without the artistic bits, yeah. That’s of course, always another way out - - -
MARTIN: Yes.
DOUG: - - - because you’ve got education, you’ve got sport and - - -
MARTIN: Yeah - - -
DOUG: - - - you’ve got the Arts. The three ways out, the three ways up.
MARTIN: - - - m’mm.
DOUG: You went in to Politics.
MARTIN: Yes. It’s strange, the way things happen.
DOUG: ‘Cause you’re not from a political family.
MARTIN: No.
DOUG: Was it the experience of seeing union organisation and what that could achieve, that moved you in to Politics?
MARTIN: I joined the Labor Party before I got into being a union official – m’mm, I think it was just the value of what you could do on your own versus what you could do as part of a broader group. I joined when I was 18 – indeed, before I went to university. But the university experience and the opportunity to get involved in a range of different activities of which politics was one was what really drove me down that path of the importance of good policy, good activities and – m’mm, the opportunities that it can bring.
DOUG: What was uni like at that time?
MARTIN: Oh, it was fantastic. They paid you to go to university in those days - - -
DOUG: M’mm, m’mm?
MARTIN: - - - it was wonderful and I could kick a football in those days – and that was fantastic. The world opened up, whether it was the Arts ‘cause I was an Arts student. The opportunity to indulge anything you liked, it was just liberating in the extreme. Again, the further away you get from it – such an important and great time in my life.
DOUG: There’s a whole generation of people who had the advantage of a free education - - -
MARTIN: M’mm?
DOUG: - - - great many of them moved in to politics, I think. It was a great training ground – student politics has always been a great training ground - - -
MARTIN: M’mm, m’mm.
DOUG: - - - for politics, later in life. Were you much involved in politics at uni?
MARTIN: I was. I was elected chairperson of the Monash Association of Students, which was the pinnacle of my student politics career. There was this woman called: Julia Gillard – who was president of the Australian Union of Students at the time so – m’mm, it was a bit of a batch of us. Some went significantly further than others - - -
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: - - - yes, a strong involvement in campus politics.
DOUG: You made a lot of friends within the Labor movement that you still have, then?
MARTIN: Yes, yeah – quite a deal. Yeah, sometimes you have significant differences but – m’mm, you’ve got to stay civil in these things.
DOUG: Of course. Now, you’ve said you joined forces at one stage – later on – with younger, progressives in the party and you mention Lindsay Tanner in particular - - -
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: - - - who’s also done this hour with me, on a previous occasion. He’s just left politics.
MARTIN: Yes. Well, Lindsay was a little bit older than me and he was just leaving Melbourne Uni student politics when I was just starting in Monash student politics. A couple of years later when I’m still trying to finish my degree amongst all the other things my student life brings I was working at the TAB, telephone betting. Which was a very big place at the time and ran into Lindsay there and we decided that we’d support his little campaign to try to democratise and bring what was then, the Federated Clerks Union into the 20th century and remarkably we were successful.
DOUG: Now, Lindsay and Julia of course had a bit of a stoush over the seat of Melbourne didn’t they?
MARTIN: Ah, they did. Yes. You’ve got a good memory, Doug - - -
[laughs]
DOUG: I’ve done the research.
MARTIN: - - - I was always a Julia Gillard supporter although on that occasion I may have voted the other way - - -
[laughs]
DOUG: Well, these things run deep in the Labor Party. People don’t - - -
MARTIN: They do.
DOUG: - - - forget these things, do they?
MARTIN: No, they don’t. But hey, it all worked out in the end.
DOUG: Well, it did – you mentioned, what did you call it: the Federated Clerks Union?
MARTIN: Yes, yes.
DOUG: That sounds awfully Dickensian.
MARTIN: Ah, yes.
DOUG: It conjures up visions of you sitting on a stool with a quill pen.
MARTIN: [laughs] Yes and in many ways it was – it was – m’mm, if you’re into your Labor history, it was one of the DLP Catholic-group controlled unions. It was a former Communist-run union in the ‘50s and the group has knocked it over, in the ‘50s and it was highly conservative, highly un-representative of its predominantly women members and highly ineffective. So it failed on a lot of grounds - - -
DOUG: Why would anybody be a member?
MARTIN: - - - that’s a very good question ‘cause this was another era when you were signed-up by the boss - - -
DOUG: Right.
MARTIN: (and)It was a tool of control in the workforce - - -
DOUG: Who were the members, who were the clerks?
MARTIN: The - - -
DOUG: I mean, what kinds of jobs would they be doing?
MARTIN: - - - well this was then, the biggest workplace the Union had in Victoria; these were telephone betting operators - - -
DOUG: Right.
MARTIN: - - - you’d take a bet. There were over 1100 of us down there in Queens Road. But it was also airline check-in, indoor staff. Call centres, all sorts of people in basically, female-dominated low paid, vulnerable positions.
DOUG: So, very basic office work?
MARTIN: It could well be - - -
DOUG: M’mm.
MARTIN: - - - yes. Overwhelmingly, that sort of work.
DOUG: Right and as you say, not very well paid so how did you set about modernising an organisation like that?
MARTIN: Through – essentially, just trying to apply some principles of participation that – we got elected, we ran on a platform of making sure that we didn’t do what the boss said. We did what the members said; we built up the whole notion that they had power in their workplace, the notion that we would represent them as themselves. We made sure that initially we had 50 per cent women in all positions and by the time of two or three elections later, there were 75 per cent and now although it’s amalgamated into other organisations over time (it) continues to be run by women, led by women representing women and that’s a very important lesson. If you want people to take power you’ve got to be representative of that group that you’re asking them to exercise power on behalf of.
DOUG: You said previously it was effectively, a management tool – you know, it belonged to the bosses rather than to the membership?
MARTIN: Absolutely and under a centralised, wage-fixing system where everything was resolved in the then Industrial Arbitration Court. There was very little opportunity for members to have a go.
DOUG: So, it was like a cosy deal between the union leadership and the management?
MARTIN: It was.
DOUG: (and)They sat down in a smoke-filled room somewhere - - -
MARTIN: [laughs]
DOUG: - - - and decided what everybody would do?
MARTIN: Yes and you would be told if it was deemed appropriate, later.
DOUG: Yeah. Opportunities for corruption in that sort of set-up, in a small way at least I would have thought?
MARTIN: I would have thought so. I never – I wouldn’t want to suggest that there was any and I never saw any opportunity for it. But what I did see as a rank and file member was a hopeless organisation and that was the motivation to - - -
DOUG: Yeah, it wasn’t doing anything for the membership.
MARTIN: - - - no.
DOUG: So, you rolled your sleeves up and you got stuck in?
MARTIN: Yes. We got stuck in.
DOUG: [laughs] Not everybody does that, though – I mean, most people sit back and do nothing. Why do you think you decided to put your hand up and you know, actually do the work?
MARTIN: There’s a good question.
DOUG: Was that more of the Catholic background kicking in?
MARTIN: Possibly. I didn’t think of that – yeah, it might well be. There’s no point whinging unless you’re prepared to have a crack at something. It was one of those lessons – and looking back at my Nan’s trade union background and her family’s background, that’s what you did.
DOUG: M’mm. Because that’s not the response that occurs to everybody, is it – most people shrug their shoulders and go: that’s the way it is. ‘Don’t rock the boat’, all that sort of stuff - - -
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: - - - don’t make waves, that’s what my family were always tell me.
MARTIN: M’mm. You’re a long time dead is what my Nan always used to tell me - - -
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: - - - so you might as well - - -
DOUG: Try and make some sort of difference - - -
MARTIN: - - - while you’re here.
DOUG: Yes, I would go along with that; now, we were talking about your time at the clerks’ union and then you went on to the ASU.
MARTIN: The clerks then amalgamated in a three-way amalgamation into the ASU as part of the union amalgamation process in the early ‘90s and that time, Lindsay then moved on to federal parliament - - -
DOUG: (and)You were climbing the ladder inside the ASU?
MARTIN: - - - yeah. I did, indeed.
DOUG: You eventually got to be president?
MARTIN: I did. Yes. Assistant Secretary and Secretary and then, President. They were good times.
DOUG: It’s 15-years in all?
MARTIN: Yeah. It was, yes.
DOUG: Now – why then, the shift into politics because it must be really different in politics to what it is being – m’mm, a union official?
MARTIN: Ah – well, it was an accident – really, it was the Ansett collapse and seeing 16,000 people lose their jobs and the sheer, terrible cynicism that the federal government held that company in and more importantly, its workers – out, on a limb. Deliberately. That was enough for me and the trauma that was associated – after having bedded that down I thought well, time to go. I’m too bitter and twisted in this job, now – and resigned and unexpectedly got the call from some people asking me do I want to go and work in government which I had no intention of doing but – m’mm, that’s where I ended up.
DOUG: So, what was your first job in government?
MARTIN: I was Chief of Staff to the Minister for Primary Industries as he then was and I was there for three years. After which time he was the Minister for Police at the last part of it so, that was Bob Cameron and they were instructive times for me.
DOUG: Somebody, somewhere must’ve been doing a bit of talent spotting here. They must’ve thought you’d be good in politics?
MARTIN: Well, I don’t know if it exactly works that way – I’d always been active, I’d always been trying to push a ‘barrow of reform whether it was of the Party itself. Or whether it was of policy – and remarkably, John Thwaites and Steve Bracks tapped [indistinct] at the same time and an opportunity fell on my head.
DOUG: That was quite a remarkable thing when they suddenly up and left - - -
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: - - - took everyone by surprise I think.
MARTIN: Sure did.
DOUG: Were you expecting that?
MARTIN: No, not at all. M’mm, knock me over with a feather when it happened. That’s for sure.
DOUG: Particularly when John Thwaites went, I think ‘cause - - -
MARTIN: Yes.
DOUG: - - - there went Steve Bracks and there was kind of logic to that - - -
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: But then John Thwaites almost immediately, followed him out the door.
MARTIN: Yes, he did. It was – m’mm, an amazing day. That’s for sure. But then when you look back at it with hindsight now, they were such a team and John had been there 15-years so – you know, done some hard times in opposition as well as - - -
DOUG: M’mm.
MARTIN: - - - a time as deputy premier and was still young enough to have another go at things and I think, from his own point of view it’s been quite a successful decision.
DOUG: Yeah – what’s he doing now?
MARTIN: All sorts of things. He heads-up the Monash Sustainability centre or institute, I forget its name. Climate Works which is kind of a cross-departmental and faculty organisation looking at issues around climate change and sustainability. He’s on the Board of the Brotherhood of St. Laurence in an honorary capacity. He chairs the Centre for the Moving Image and does – you know, bits and pieces - - -
DOUG: He’s certainly not having a quiet life, anyway?
MARTIN: - - - no. He’s very busy.
DOUG: Well of course, John Thwaites was very popular with our community. Mainly because he’d drop into his Speedos - - -
MARTIN: Yes. That’s right.
DOUG: - - - every time you turned around, basically – either him or Steve Bracks were climbing out of the briny in their Speedos; doesn’t seem to have worked for Ted Baillieu - - -
MARTIN: I can assure you it wouldn’t work for me, Doug.
DOUG: - - - I was going to say - - -
MARTIN: I want people to vote for me not against me [laughs]
DOUG: You went a slightly different route.
[laughs]
DOUG: Let’s put it that way - - -
MARTIN: Genetics pre-determines some things, I’m afraid.
DOUG: Big shoes to fill?
MARTIN: Absolutely and I couldn’t pretend to replicate the efforts that John did in how he essentially, helped run the State and turn around the legacy of the Kennett years. Let alone, his leadership in lots of different areas of good, public policy. But what I’ve tried to do is essentially build on those where I can particularly in the local community and make sure that that progressive – m’mm, mantel that he did so much to build up is extended.
DOUG: What’s the constituency work like – I mean, do you see a lot of your constituents?
MARTIN: Yes, I see quite a lot of my constituents. Bless all 47,000 of them – ah, it’s a very demanding position and hey, how you could do that and be deputy premier just staggered me but – m’mm, it’s fantastic. This is a community that is dynamic, its diverse. It prides itself on tolerance and it is just such a joy to be part of its leadership and representing its interests.
DOUG: ‘Cause one thinks of it as being a fairly wealthy constituency but you’ve actually got quite a broad range?
MARTIN: It is – you know, you’ve got to be an AFL footballer to buy in Albert Park but having said that, we have huge pockets of disadvantaged. We have two-and-a-half thousand public housing units. We have social infrastructure that attracts people when they’re down on their luck – whether it’s Father Bob or Hanover or the Sacred Heart Mission or any number of other agencies, we are truly a diverse community and making sure it stays that way. Which is a bit hard, sometimes. Is a key part of what I do.
DOUG: That’s one of the problems of the more – inner-city suburbs, isn’t it – as property prices have gone up, as land prices have gone up. A lot of people have been squeezed out and the diversity tends to disappear. It becomes just another middle-class enclave.
MARTIN: Yes. That’s why active interventions such as those organisations I spoke about, the social and community housing investment that we’re putting in needs an active, strong role for government. To make sure that what makes the place interesting in the first place is not destroyed and that we’re not all just vanilla versions of something else, that we have genuine diversity. That we are rich and poor, side-by-side.
DOUG: How can you help achieve that – I mean, can you insist for example, on developers providing a certain percentage of social housing - - -
MARTIN: I would love that power, Doug - - -
DOUG: - - - [laughs] - - -
MARTIN: It’s infinitely more a negotiating process and taking your opportunities where they arise – m’mm, for instance – Father Bob, who we all love. We saw an opportunity with him when he ran into hid difficulties with his Arch Bishop and essentially put together a package which is going to see an old, disused building that he’s had turned into social housing units; 41-people who would be at-risk of homelessness, otherwise. Secure them in their own community that otherwise they’d be turfed-out of – together with securing the future of Father Bob’s parish and underwriting all the work that he does and we’ve done that in partnership with South Port Community Housing who are a terrific group and we are social infrastructure rich in our community. Using the opportunities that are there. Building the networks to make sure that you can lock people in secure, affordable homes – not just boxes – but homes and that support is fundamental to trying to maintain that. ‘Cause we have lots of people say this is a great place to live but then suddenly find reasons why the very things that made it a great place to live – m’mm, are suddenly not so welcome.
DOUG: [laughs] Well, we’ve seen that in some of the inner-city areas where people object to nightclubs - - -
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: - - - and object to noise and all those sorts of things. Which were there, long before they were.
MARTIN: Yeah.
DOUG: Do you have any famous pubs and things that cause - - -
MARTIN: Oh, yes. Yes - - -
DOUG: - - - the odd problem?
MARTIN: We do and these things need management; without doubt, some of the club cultures particularly through alcohol abuse, got out of hand – but having said that with appropriate regulation and with appropriate education, appropriate policing you can and we’ve actually seen in (the) Fitzroy Street block in St. Kilda, we’ve seen after it peaked about 18-months ago, a reduction in the violence. A reduction in the alcohol abuse. It’s always an issue but we’ve got to make sure we work through it in a way that maintains the dynamic, interesting nature of the place but also makes it a good and safe place to live.
DOUG: Yeah – but not too safe, we’re almost at the end of our hour together – been quite fascinating, all this Labor history we’ve been getting today. A good, old solid dose of real Socialism. We don’t see much of that in the Labor Party - - -
MARTIN: No.
DOUG: - - - these days? It’s – m’mm, it’s a different beast - - -
MARTIN: It is – ah, but it’s always changed. When you look at the history of the Party it’s always looking to how to re-engage. It goes through cycles, it goes through its ups and its downs; clearly, federally at the moment it’s in a bit of a funny spot. But I’d like to think its enduring qualities are its ability to re-new and to stay on the progressive side of democratic politics.
DOUG: Because there’s been a lot of criticism particularly during this election and after this election, that somehow Labor’s lost its way. It’s lost its soul, that it’s only interested in winning votes - - -
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: - - - it’s not really interested in putting up policies on a basis of any kind of belief.
MARTIN: (and)Clearly, the federal election just gone would do nothing but confirm that view, Doug - - -
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: - - - but that does not reflect the Party’s culture. It does not reflect the Party’s membership and when Labor is successful it is not that, when Labor is successful it is the Party of ideas. It is the Party of vision and the Party of engagement with both its traditional, working families or blue-collar organisations and more broadly, those who look to Labor and government to make your life less miserable. Together with those who look to Labor as the vehicle to tackle the big, social issues of the day – the big issues of ‘what kind of society are we’. You meld those two and that’s a pre-condition for success. It’s not a guarantee of success but it’s a pre-condition for success and somehow or other, the geniuses who ran the last federal election campaign lost sight of that fundamental truth.
DOUG: Because a lot of the criticism of that campaign was basically saying those two things were not in fact, compatible – that the, to borrow the pejorative term that The Australian might use for example – the latte-sipping set in the inner-cities are pulling in one direction and the working-class base as it were, is pulling in another completely different direction. (and)That Labor can no longer straddle that divide.
MARTIN: People who say that generally have a philosophy that they wish to push you – the Party, in the direction of being a conservative – m’mm, kowtower to their interests. The Labor strategy of success is building a national narrative that properly binds those two constituencies – and the other constituencies, together. You don’t have to go back too far to see how successful that can and has been. Rudd did it in 2007, the taking action on climate change. The Kyoto – at the same time, as building together the anti-Work Choices campaign. Keating, in the un-winnable ’93 election – the broad vision of our place as an independent nation in Asia, cutting its own way whilst looking after those who needed an active government – Gough did it, he was the first to really do it after so long in the wilderness. Yes. It has to change, yes, it has to be modernised in the current context. But people who take the view that the Labor Party should somehow, just be better managers than the other mob miss the fundamental question that Labor is about building a better, fairer and more sustainable society. You can’t do that just through managerialism(sic).
DOUG: Victoria did better than anywhere else, for the Labor Party. In this election. Victoria’s still I think, the most successful state is it not?
MARTIN: Yes, in terms of its primary vote I think Tasmania may have got a higher primary vote - - -
DOUG: I’m thinking in more general terms than just the vote – I mean, as a functioning entity - - -
MARTIN: - - - yeah.
DOUG: - - - within WA, obviously, you’ve got boom-or-bust because of the mining - - -
MARTIN: Yeah.
DOUG: But on a steady, state basis Victoria seems to run pretty well, with Labor.
MARTIN: Look, we’ve got a lot of challenges without doubt and no-one would under-estimate the challenges of either winning the up-coming state election or the policy challenges of whoever’s in government afterwards. But what this state Labor government has done is just hasn’t looked at managerialism – a sensible, prudent running of the economy which it’s done as an end in itself. It’s looked at that as that creates the opportunities and the fruits that you can then distribute. You can then invest, you can then pursue a better and fairer Victoria. One of the things that certainly, John Thwaites my predecessor in the seat of Albert Park was fundamental in putting together, was the whole fairer Victoria strategy which was a first for Australia. Which makes every department, every decision of cabinet – every programme of government – linked-into how it can go about building, contributing, to a better and fairer Victoria and – m’mm, that strategy – it’s gone through several iterations, has been I think, one of the defining features of this government. Together with its commitment to wanting to make sure it continues to be in a position to do so by running an effective, economic ship.
DOUG: One of the things it hasn’t run terribly effectively and I have to bring it up, is public transport - - -
MARTIN: Ah, yes. Yes.
DOUG: - - - now I know that you were left with a bit of a dog’s breakfast-situation after the privatisation and so on and so forth – m’mm, my personal thought was I don’t know why you didn’t take it back into public ownership?
MARTIN: M’mm - - -
DOUG: Especially when - - -
MARTIN: - - - some of the cost - - -
DOUG: Some of the contractors were quite willing to walk away [laughs]
MARTIN: Indeed, National Trains threw the keys back ‘cause the contract was so difficult for them in terms of trying to meet its obligations of the then, Kennett contracts. But they were re-negotiated and a new operator came in, that new operator then fell over and we’ve got another new operator – m’mm, simply the enormous cost in buying back those privatised arrangements is enormous and would hinder us from doing much else. The real challenge - - -
DOUG: But aren’t you spending an awful lot of money to keep them going?
MARTIN: Absolutely – and even more importantly, with spending now – in the last two budgets, the majority of transport and infrastructure spending has been on public transport infrastructure. The truth of the matter is that there is substantial ground to be made up but what we’re looking at is a generational shift in how that infrastructure is going to be applied; whether it’s the country rail link, whether it’s the new train rolling stock or the 50-new trams – all of these arrangements are firstly, incredibly expensive. But secondly, time consuming in terms of [indistinct] public transport down so – and whether it’s the South Morang Rail Link – all these kinds of things that are now happening, clearly there are issues around timing and how after a generation of totally focussing on ever-expanding, urban boundaries and roads we are now seeing that consolidation - - -
DOUG: Yeah.
MARTIN: - - - perhaps we can do a bit more? But I’d like to think that the budgets are following the commitment, where the dollars are going reflects that generational change in public transport infrastructure.
DOUG: Yeah – because you can’t keep building roads and you can’t keep pumping more cars into what is a finite space - - -
MARTIN: That’s exactly right and that needs us all, as a community – to look at what increased, medium-density living and society means and – m’mm - - -
DOUG: That one must be a hard one to juggle in a constituency like yours - - -
MARTIN: - - - it is.
DOUG: Where you’ve got all these wealthy people with their houses they paid a small fortune for and they do not wish to be overlooked by a tower block - - -
MARTIN: Yes, that’s a very good way of putting it but at the same time – m’mm, St. Kilda is one of the most densely populated parts of Victoria and Port Melbourne is rapidly following. There’s a general willingness that says ‘this is the kind of place I want to be’ – this is the kind of infrastructure that we live in – and that means certain compromises and – m’mm, you’re seeing that happens – and actually, it means better services, better delivery. Because you’re in a better position to be able to pay for it.
DOUG: You wrote at the end of the notes you gave me, that you’re a true believer.
MARTIN: Yes.
DOUG: Not in the Catholic Church - - -
MARTIN: [laughs]
DOUG: - - - but in the Labor Party.
MARTIN: M’mm.
DOUG: Have you just swapped the one for the other?
MARTIN: Yes, I’ve had several people suggest that to me over the years - - -
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: - - - m’mm - - -
DOUG: Well they say there’s no-one more enthusiastic than a convert?
MARTIN: - - - yes. I don’t want to wait around ‘til the next life to see a better life - - -
[laughs]
MARTIN: I want to make sure that the fruits of justice and the ability to make life better – is not, sitting up on a harp - - -
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: - - - it’s sitting around in this community. Making this community a better one and – m’mm - - -
DOUG: Do you see yourself staying in politics for the foreseeable?
MARTIN: - - - well I’m standing again at this election. These are uncertain times, Doug so I wouldn’t like to make a prediction.
DOUG: Well – if the voters will have you.
MARTIN: If the voters will have me I will certainly be in parliamentary politics. But I think I will always be in some form of politics.
DOUG: Yeah? No particular hankering like Lindsay, to go off and live on a farm and put it all behind you – yet.
MARTIN: No.
DOUG: [laughs]
MARTIN: Too many challenges. Too many challenges.
DOUG: Well, Martin. Thank you very much for joining us today, we’ve got one more piece of music to go out on. The Chieftains, “The Wind From The South” – it’s also something unpronounceable in Gaelic but we won’t try that - - -
[laughs]
DOUG: - - - it’s very different to your other music choices. This harks back to Irish roots?
MARTIN: Yes, yes – ah, the Foleys come from County Cork a town called: Glandore – and I did see the Chieftains, many, many years ago over in Ireland and my dad was a great fan of the Chieftains – and this is a song we played at his funeral so it’s always been important to me.
DOUG: Okay – well, Martin – thanks very much for your time today.
MARTIN: Thanks, Doug. I’ve very much enjoyed it.
DOUG: (and)This is the Chieftains, “The Wind From The South”.
[music]
Current Affairs
Rainbow Reporter
OK, it was only 3 people who complained, but I don't remember anyone doing that before.
We've had people choose every kind of music you could think of previously, from heavy metal to classical, pop, rock, Buddhist chants, church choirs . . . you name it. But no complaints. Odd.