Memories with Mali: An interview with Peter Malinauskas
Interview by Felix Eldridge
Peter Malinauskas first served in the South Australian Parliament in 2015, filling a casual vacancy in the Legislative Council. He quickly rose up the Ministerial ranks, serving in various portfolios including Police, Health and Emergency Services. At the 2018 South Australian election, he won the lower house seat of Croydon, and after former leader Jay Weatherill’s resignation, he became the South Australian Leader of the Opposition. Peter graduated from Adelaide University with a Bachelor of Commerce and plays for the Adelaide University Football Club. I sat down with Peter to ask him a few questions about his time at university and his career in politics.
What was student politics like when you were at university?
It was a raw representation of politics and democracy where what was happening close to the ground really mattered. The art of campaigning and engaging with people on issues really came to the fore. There was a degree of apathy among a lot of students towards student elections. You have to grab people’s attention and try and seize their vote. You can’t expect people to walk into a ballot box and vote, let alone vote for you. This created a very hotly contested environment, and because turnout was low, every last vote counted.
I didn’t naturally gravitate towards student politics. When I started university I didn’t enter with the mindset that I was going to end up in student politics. For me it didn’t happen until my third or fourth year. That being said, once I got a taste for it, I enjoyed it, I got a bit of a thrill out of it.
What advice would you give yourself if you were a first year university student today?
Well, I breezed through my first semester and thought that it was easy. When second semester came around, I enjoyed myself a bit too much and enjoyed all of the fun that you can have at uni, but my marks weren’t as good in the second semester. So if I went back, I would say to myself that you’ve actually got to put the work in because I learned that quite quickly.
Another bit of advice I’d give would be to join the Adelaide University Football Club (The Blacks). I still play for the Blacks and I just wished I had started in first year of uni.
What was On Dit like when you were at university?
It was edgy and that’s what made it good. I’d flick through it looking for issues or people you knew something about. I used to read it on the bus. It was more so a tabloid style newspaper in my time. I’d say the Vox Pops were always fairly funny. I always would read the political stuff. I remember when Howard was trying to push through higher education reforms I would read about that in On Dit. It definitely had a progressive bent, sometimes more progressive than me, but overall I would say it was a bit of a mix.
Why did you get involved in politics?
I didn’t grow up in a household that was ‘party political’, but was passionate about current affairs and what was going on in the world. Mum and dad were determined to install a sense of social justice in us when my siblings and I were growing up. I think that lent itself to taking an interest in public policy, specifically understanding how does it come about. That curiosity led me to politics. From a young age, I was always interested in politics, but never really in a ‘party political’ way. It wasn’t until I went to university and started to view the world through a political frame that I realised my value system was aligned to Labor values.
When I was at uni, I became politically involved. I joined the ALP and ran in student elections. During this time, I was a retail worker at uni, working at Woollies. I had been a member of the retail worker’s union (the SDA). In the course of working there, I became a union delegate because there were a few night fill issues that I wanted to see addressed. The union then approached me to work part time for 15 hours a week to act as a union rep on behalf of other night fill workers. I started doing that and I fell in love with it. I loved spending time with other working people and I enjoyed representing them, not in a militant way but in a pragmatic way. When I graduated from my commerce degree and the union secretary asked me if I wanted to work for them full time, I took up that job offer. The alternative to this was to work in a bank or an accounting firm but by this time, my heart was with the union movement.
I was very fortunate, I threw everything at the job and after a few years I was in a senior role and after that I became secretary of the union. I did that for seven years and during this time I became increasingly involved in the parliamentary Labor Party. I was offered the opportunity to join the Weatherill Government. I had the opportunity to become a minister and after the election I became leader.
Politics is a funny thing. My advice to anyone seeking to become involved in the political process is to become comfortable with yourself and who you are. I have been fortunate because I’ve had good people around me and have been able to learn a lot from them. I think it’s really important that you take as much information in, that you engage with the political process and learn about Realpolitik, but that you should never do that at the expense of your values and what you care about because if that happens then you just become another political player. I do feel very lucky that I’ve had good people around me that have provided stewardship and advice but you’ve got to have a conviction that you stick to as well.
Given that global markets have been disrupted by Covid and this might challenge countries or regions that had de-facto economic monopolies, what new market niche should SA be aiming to develop?
There is a lot of speculation that we will see a total recalibration of the way that global supply chains work. I think time will only tell if that occurs. What I think will remain true is that for any high value, high wage nation, they still need to be able to compete when it comes to the muscle between our ears and the skills with our hands. If you look at most global indices, SA has been moving in the wrong direction on that score. I think that education is something that we’re going to have to have a thorough look at.
In terms of markets beyond the education sector itself, when it comes to our sovereignty, we have to contemplate what areas might now need to be subjected to greater government intervention to ensure that we have domestic sovereign capacity. For instance, the fact that in the US there has been a massive shortage of face masks and they’ve had to wait for China to export them to the US, that would have been unthinkable thirty years ago. As a country, we’ve got to think about what things are necessary for our security and our sovereignty, whether that be economic sovereignty or for health. We need to consider what things we think we should have the capacity to build here so that if there is a future disruption to the supply chain that we can accommodate that. We need to be thinking about this strategically and states should be working with the Commonwealth closely in this regard.
We can’t just expect that to happen. It will take a degree of government policy to ensure that this happens. Consider a piece of equipment that was uneconomical to manufacture in Australia before the pandemic, it will not automatically become economic to make it here after the pandemic. Production might still be cheaper overseas, the technology might still exist overseas, labour might still be cheaper overseas. All of these dynamics remain true so it will take well thought out government policies to address that if there is appetite to do it.
In your view, despite the ALP’s strong socially progressive focus, why do so many Labor MPs vote alongside conservative MPs on certain social issues e.g. euthanasia and sex work decriminalisation?
When it comes to genuine matters of conscience, these are tough issues and sometimes there are grey areas. A lot of people like to look at matters in a binary way, seeing ‘conservative’ or ‘progressive’. I think that each of these matters should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. I think people should formulate an opinion in conjunction with their own conscience and the views of their community to get that balance right, which is often tricky.
In my time in Parliament I’ve voted in ways that could be characterised as ‘progressive’ on issues such as gay marriage, gay adoption, gender issues such as gender identification etc. But on other issues like sex work, I’ve voted against it. I try and look at it from a humanist view. I try to make the best judgement that I possible can. Personally I found that sex work was a very tricky issue whereas others I’ve found a bit easier to make.
That being said, there are always going to be people who always vote one way or the other. There are hardcore progressives and conservatives who will always vote one way and then there are those in between, who I think represent mainstream Australia, who assess the issue and formulate an opinion based on the merits. I don’t think conscience votes are a bad thing. In the ALP it’s up to the leader to determine whether an issue is a matter of conscience or not. I’m happy taking a liberal view on what a conscience vote is. It gives MPs the ability to express themselves and if you are elected to Parliament it doesn’t hurt to give people the capacity for independent thought outside of straight party lines.
What are your thoughts on a university merger involving the University of Adelaide?
I think South Australia needs a top 100 University to ensure the highest quality research is funded in this state to drive economic growth. This would also lead to SA being attractive to the best and brightest students and staff. Our universities are crucial for our state’s economy: they teach 70,000 South Australians a year and undertake research that leads to new businesses and jobs. We want a sector that is stable and productive. By having a top 100 University it will secure jobs and career pathways for academics, researchers and administrative staff.
The financial stress the three universities in South Australia are facing as a result of the impact of Covid-19 and the lack of support from the Federal Government is costing hundreds of millions of dollars. Labor in government will establish a University Merger Commission including the leadership of the three universities and be headed by an eminent Commissioner with higher education experience. Its task will be to determine how the state can be best served by the university sector. Should the Commission determine that a university merger is in the interest of the South Australian economy and the welfare of the people of SA, then a merger will be a first term priority for a Labor Government.
Premier Marshall chose to show no leadership to drive forward the foundering merger discussions between the University of Adelaide and University of South Australia in 2018. I will take a very different approach. We won’t stand on the sidelines when South Australia’s economic prosperity is at stake.
The state should not start this process with a view about which universities should merge, nor which university should teach what degrees. The role of the State Government is to determine what our collective interests are as South Australians and that is where the process should start.
As leader of the opposition you’ve shown willingness to seek consensus with the Government in several areas, most notably shop trading hours. What’s the reasoning behind this policy and is it working?
I think it’s the right thing to do and that’s just who I am. I remember when we were in government and Steven Marshall opposed absolutely everything for the sake of opposition. The Liberals opposed Adelaide Oval, the footbridge, the Royal Adelaide Hospital, at one point I think they opposed the Torrens to Torrens. They opposed almost everything that Labor did and it irritated me considerably at the time. Even if it was patently in the interests of South Australia Steven Marshall opposed it, similarly to what Tony Abbott did to the Gillard Government. I accept it might be a politically effective way to address things, but when I became leader, I was quite determined not to allow myself to do that. If the Government has some good ideas, I’ll back them. For example, we backed them on developing infrastructure in South Australia, putting together a Productivity Commission, reducing ESL, payroll tax cuts. Where there are changes that make sense on balance, we will support them.
I think that politically that’s a smarter thing to do anyway because when you oppose something then, at least people know that you are doing it because it’s the right thing to do, not just for the sake of it. And there are lots of things that we do oppose. We opposed the privatisation of trains and trams, prisons and on the whole privatisation agenda more broadly. I’ve supported the Government’s health response to Covid, I think that they need to do more on the economic response. I formulate a judgement on the issue, speak candidly about what it is and I think that it’s the right thing to do.
However, there is a catch and the catch is the media aren’t particularly interested when the Opposition agree with the Government. When they approach the Opposition for comment, they don’t run the story when the Opposition agree. I’ve held press conferences where I’ve said that I support the Marshall Liberal Government on this and they then pack up and leave and it won’t be on the TV or in the papers. But if I hold a press conference where I oppose the Government, then it runs on TV. So that’s the frustrating part. People might say that they want politicians to agree with each other more, but they won’t watch it or rather it won’t be on the news.
What would be your top three government priorities if you became Premier tomorrow?
I would end the privatisation madness. I think that privatisation is a failed policy that doesn’t work for the interests of people. If you can improve running the train and tram network, then do it. You don’t have to sell it to achieve that.
Education is of course a key focus. Education is an incredibly powerful lever, not just economically, but socially. Education can greatly empower young people who want to improve the standard of living for themselves and their community. If you look around the world at the moment, the countries with the greatest standards of living and improving standards of living, they tend to be countries that have the best education systems. Nordic countries are excellent examples of that. We operate in an open free market economy that is trading with the rest of the world and need to be able to compete on our skills and our intellect. Education is central to that. I desperately care about income inequality. There are a range of policies that can address that, but education is the great enabler. If you want to maximise someone’s likelihood of earning a higher wage, education is the vehicle for that.
The other issue is jobs. I gave a speech to this effect before the pandemic and it can be broadly summarised as: “Jobs for today, education for tomorrow and environment because it’s forever”. You can’t expect working families to sacrifice themselves in other areas of policy if they can’t provide for their families first, so jobs are critical, not just economically and in terms of families being able to survive, but politically. If you want to be a progressive political party and you want to enact positive social change, you have to do it from a position of community support and that means people have to have a job. If you are a parent, and I certainly feel this more now as a parent than I did as a student, the sense of responsibility to be able to provide for them is overwhelming and having a job is central to that. If you don’t have a job or you think that there’s a prospect of losing your job, or if your work is desperately insecure then you really expect a Government to be focusing on that first and foremost, especially if it’s a Labor Government. This then provides the framework for us to discuss other issues such as education and the environment.
In terms of the environment, it boggles the mind that Australia, which has been a world leader in so many important issues of humanity, now finds itself paralysed when discussing climate change policy. It is a source of shame. If you think about all of the big battles and issues that confronted the world in the 20th century such as the rise of Fascism, Communism and Apartheid, Australia was a leader in taking these challenges on. In other environmental issues such as policy regarding Antarctica, Australia was also a leader. Now it comes to one of the greatest challenges facing humanity in the 21st century in the form of climate change and we have a Federal Government that debates whether it is even real. It is an absurdity and we are compromising our record of being a progressive middle power leading the world on fundamental moral questions, which undermines our standing in the world. But on top of this, we’re also missing out on an economic opportunity in addressing climate change and that disappoints me, so at a state level we need a policy that addresses that.
