Journalist: It’s the last sitting week before the winter break, talking about federal politics and our parliament; Federal Member for McPherson Karen Andrews is joining me for the first time; we hope this is going to become a regular chat. Karen Andrews, welcome

Karen Andrews: Thank you very much for having me, it’s a pleasure, and I hope it is going to become regular.

Journalist: Well I hope so too; you might be pretty busy though, some talk of an early election; we’ll get to that a little later on, scuttlebutt or otherwise. But first thing’s first, may we clear the elephant in the room. A lot of talk about the ABC and the role it plays in the last 24 hours or so; the issue that developed from Q&A on Monday night started here; former terrorism suspect Zaky Mallah speaking to the Federal Member for Moncrieff, your colleague, Steve Ciobo.

(Excerpt from Q&A plays)

And on and on it went. We’ve heard a lot about this in recent times, Karen Andrews. The decision to allow Zaky Mallah to have this exchange with Parliamentary Secretary Ciobo, indeed for him to appear on that TV programme Q&A at all, prompted PM to say this:

(Excerpt of the Prime Minister talking plays)

There you go. The PM speaking, a little earlier on, on whose side are you on. The ABC suggested that it wasn’t the best judgement having Zaky Mallah on Q&A, but this idea of taking sides, what’s your take on this Karen Andrews?

Karen Andrews: Well, look, I’ve got a couple of comments that I’d like to make, and I think that it has been broadly acknowledgement that it was a poor judgement call to have Zaky Mallah on the show, for a whole range of reasons, one because he was clearly a known threat, as well, so there were risks to the audience, potentially, and there were also some risks to the ABC, because, it was, I guess, easy to assume which line he might take, that it was a live show, so you didn’t have the opportunity to edit out anything he might say.

So there were inherent risks, and I think it’s been rightly recognised as a bad judgement call.

Overall with the ABC, look, a lot of people do contact me, and they talk about concerns about the direction the ABC has taken.

In the past, my view was that I grew up with the ABC, Aunty, being the trusted advisor; that’s where you turned to get information, that’s where you turn to get facts, and I think that’s where it’s best placed.

It has a reputation, a long standing reputation for that, and I hope that the ABC maintains that reputation into the future.

In terms of taking sides, I would hope that everyone in Australia is on Team Australia, and that we’re all there supporting this wonderful country that we live in.

Journalist: What if Team Australia gets it wrong?

Karen Andrews: Team Australia will, from time to time get it wrong; that’s just a reality.

Journalist: And doesn’t that deserve to be scrutinised? You’ve got to have an element of independent inquiry; life is not rosy.

Karen Andrews: Look, I understand that as well too, and I should clarify that, I’m talking Team Australia as the broader sense, I’m not politicising any of that as well.

We, by our very nature are Team Australia, because we live here, this is our country, and sometimes, we as individuals, organisations within that will get it wrong. Should it be scrutinised? Absolutely. What’s the role of the ABC in the future?

I go back to saying that the ABC’s reputation has been that it’s a trusted advisor; it’s where we go to for facts and information, and that’s where it should be in the future.

Journalist: Should it be objective though? Are you suggesting otherwise?

Karen Andrews: Well you’re then getting into a debate about whether or not the role of the ABC is to provide facts and information or whether its role is to provide a commentary.

My personal view and the view of many others that I speak to is that there should be a clear delineation. So there should be a very clear separation of when the ABC is providing information and facts, and when it is providing commentary.

And that may well be the way that Q&A, for example, is to find into the future, that it is providing commentary on topics of the day.

Journalist: Are you suggesting, like honestly suggesting, that the ABC’s function is as some kind of notice board?

Karen Andrews: No, I’m saying that there is probably a role for both.

That it is the trusted advisor, that’s what people have tuned in direct to the ABC for in the past, and I think it has a role for that; but what I’m saying is that it should be then clear what the delineation is, so when it is providing the facts, and when it is providing commentary, and as I said, that is, for example, perhaps, the role of Q&A.

Journalist: Our guest this afternoon, Minister Karen Andrews, Federal Member for McPherson here on the Gold Coast, on the line from Canberra.

I want to move on in a moment – it would be very easy to get bogged down on this particular issue, but I just wanted to get your thoughts more broadly on the media landscape that we exist in at the moment, if you don’t mind.

Allegations of bias, or not, are flung around fairly freely in relation to various publications – the Fairfax media has a certain slant to how it reports things, The Australian, the other providers of media services in this country provide another slant; one need only look at the Courier Mail, the front page of the Courier Mail, to appreciate where it sits on certain things.

How do you, as a Minister, day to day operate within the parameters of what is effectively a range of barracking broadsheets and the like. How does it work?

Karen Andrews: Well, that’s actually a very, very good question. Managing the media and then part of the media cycle has enormous complexity.

We do live in an age where there is a 24 hour news cycle. Reporters, journalists have to actually fill the pages; they have to fill the airwaves with information as well. It’s unrelenting, it’s unrelenting for politicians and for everyone else who is part of it, and it is clearly unrelenting for the journalists as well.

So it’s not easy for people to manage, irrespective of what position they actually hold. In terms of media bias, I think that it is very easy to listen to something or to read something that you don’t agree with and say it’s biased.

It’s certainly from a different perspective. Is it biased? In my view, I think most of the time the media is not biased in its views, but there the editorial rights which newspapers and organisations in particular hold very near and dear to them as well, and the editors of your newspapers would say that they had very strong rights to print the stories that they thought were appropriate.

Journalist: What do you think when you see the front of the Courier Mail today?

Karen Andrews: I think that it was very confronting.

Journalist: Confronting?

Karen Andrews: Yes, I think it was very confronting. If it actually achieved the objective of getting people to think and talk about the issues, then I think that’s a good thing, but I don’t think that there should ever be portrayals of anything just to make a strong statement on the front page of a newspaper.

Journalist: Okay, we could talk about this for another half an hour. We should move on, time is short, I know. The Instrument Landing System here on the GC has stirred up a lot of debate. Your colleague, the Member for Moncrieff, has been pretty outspoken on this. Where do you sit on this?

Karen Andrews: Well, I think it was probably back in 2012, possibly 2011, that I gave my first speech in Parliament supporting an Instrument Landing System on the Gold Coast, and I did that in response to residents and businesses contacting me, complaining bitterly about flights that they were on, or their colleagues, or their business partners were on, that could not land at the airport because we did not have an appropriate navigational aid at the airport. I came out very strongly saying that we needed to look at putting an Instrument Landing System in at the Gold Coast Airport.

Now, since then I’ve worked very hard to make sure that the Gold Coast got the RNP system, which happened in December last year, and I’m delighted about that, and that has certainly improved the situation.

We now have the consultation period open on the major development plan, and I think that this is the time where people who are going to be affected by this one way or another should really apprise themselves properly of all the facts, and put in a submission either in support of it or opposing it.

Now I have just written to Air Services Australia, I meet with them all the time, but I met with them again at the beginning of this week, and I put to them a series of 10 questions that have been put to me by residents as well, and they have undertaken to get back to me by close of business on Friday. I have said that I will be making public my letter, and their responses.

Journalist: We’ll wait and see what those responses, what the outcomes are then. Just finally before I let you go, Minister, some rumblings of an early election; are we going to get one?

Karen Andrews: Personally I’m always on an election footing, but I don’t expect there’s going to be an election in the near future. I expect that will be towards the end of next year.

Journalist: Towards the end of next year. You heard it here first, on 91.7 ABC Gold Coast. Karen Andrews, there was a lot we tried to cover this afternoon; I hope we did some of it justice. I look forward to speaking to you more regularly in the weeks and months to come.

Karen Andrews: Terrific, and great to speak to you too Matt.

Journalist: Thanks, Minister. Karen Andrews, Federal Member for McPherson, Karen Andrews there, joining us.

[ENDS]