Senator the Hon Michaelia Cash
Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs
Leader of the Opposition in the Senate
Senator for Western Australia
TRANSCRIPT
Sky News Sunday Agenda
27 July 2025
Topics: US beef decision; trade tariffs; US alliance; AUKUS; Gaza; welcome to country; net zero
E&OE
Andrew Clennell
I’m joined now by Michaelia Cash the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs. Michaelia Cash, thanks for joining us. Let me start on that interview from the Trade Minister Don Farrell. He told us that the President of the United States raised with the Prime Minister of Australia the fact that he wanted to see a ban on beef imports from the US lifted, and yet, he says it’s an independent scientific decision by departmental officials that led to the decision this week to allow beef imports in. And he said unequivocally, both those events are unrelated. What’s your view?
Senator Cash
That was an extraordinary interview, Andrew, and based on the questions that you asked and the responses that were given by the Trade Minister Don Farrell, there are even more questions now to answer, and we now urgently need an independent review into this decision. I mean, it is very clear now we did not know about this phone call that Minister Farrell has referred to. So in a phone call with the President of the United States, the President of the United States has directly raised the issue of the importation of US beef into Australia as part of a trade deal. You also have the US Trade Representative, Jamieson Greer, who’s basically said a similar thing and linked it to trade. You then have the Trade Minister himself say it’s got nothing to do with trade – it’s all about bio security. So Andrew, I think based on that interview, it is even more imperative now that we need to ensure that the Australian Labor Party under Mr. Albanese have not traded away our strict biosecurity standards, which all Australians understand need to be in place. But the question that I have to say also wasn’t answered by Minister Farrell when he was telling us that everything is okay. Why haven’t the Albanese government released the strict protocols? Because the protocols need to be released so the Australian public can satisfy themselves that yes, in relation to this decision, the strict protocols will ensure that the US beef is safe. It is disease free. It is traceable. That is incredibly important. But more than that, it is produced to high standards, given it is actually grown in Mexico and in Canada. So I have to say, I was honestly astounded by that interview, and congratulations to you, Andrew. I don’t know if you expected that to actually be the outcome of the interview, but it is now more than ever important that we do have an independent review into this decision. What we don’t want to see is that the Albanese government have literally traded away Australia’s strict biosecurity standard to get a meeting with Donald Trump.
Andrew Clennell
Who should conduct that review?
Senator Cash
Well, in the first instance, it could be an independent review. Obviously, I think it’s incredibly important, based on the responses that Minister Farrell has given you, that we get the Department in front of us very, very quickly. It became quite confusing. Who’s made this decision, who was involved in the decision? Was it the Agriculture Minister? Was it the Trade Minister? Was the Prime Minister involved? We now know he was in a phone call with President Trump. And of course, the department itself is involved in it. I’m also now open, though, if we could quickly get up some form of parliamentary inquiry into it, to get the department now in front of the Parliament as quickly as possible. Now, Minister Farrell, in relation to all ofyour questions, his fundamental response is: everything is okay, she’ll be right and just believe me, it’s okay. So I would also then say, well, that if that response is correct, Minister Farrell will agree that there should be an independent review or a parliamentary review. If a parliamentary review is put forward this week, I would then look forward to the Labor Party saying: yes, you are right. We’re confident in our decision, so let’s have it explored as quickly as possible.
Andrew Clennell
You’re talking about now you’re hoping for a Senate inquiry potentially. Is that what you’re saying?
Senator Cash
I think, based on the responses that have just been given to your questions, it is now incredibly urgent that if a Senate inquiry was put forward, Labor should agree to it and we bring the department and the relevant ministers in front of us as quickly as possible.
Andrew Clennell
Now he says, David Littleproud, former agriculture minister, knows full well this is a departmental decision, and it’s him and Barnaby Joyce sort of facing off over the Nationals leadership that’s causing this controversy. What do you say to that?
Senator Cash
No. Well, I completely disagree, and the responses that you just got would indicate that even Minister Farrell doesn’t seem to know exactly what has happened in relation to this announcement? The point in particular that David Littleproud has made is: if the decision has been made and it has, why didn’t the government then, at the same time release the protocols? Because what the protocols are, Andrew, the strict safeguards that must be adhered to. So as I said, in relation to is the beef safe? Is it disease free? Very importantly, the traceability elements of the protocol, and has it been produced to the highest standard? So I think David Littleproud is right to pose the questions: is the decision now, and there was a lot of confusion based on that interview – was it one that was based on a trade relationship with the United States? Or, as Minister Farrell keeps telling people, she’ll be right, it was based in relation to maintaining our highest standards of biosecurity, and that those conditions had been satisfied. SoDavid Littleproud, on behalf of the Coalition, he is raising the correct issues, knowing intimately, as he does, the process that is in place. And that is why, I think, based on that extraordinary interview that Minister Farrell has just done – it raises more questions than answers, and we do need to review this decision, or have an inquiry into this decision, so we can all satisfy ourselves that our strict biosecurity measures, which you and I know – you talk biosecurity with Australians- they’re straight on to it. Andrew, they know what that means. We need to ensure they have not now been compromised by the Albanese government.
Andrew Clennell
Let me ask about this Australian announcement of the Geelong treaty and various other treaties with the UK, a 50 Year AUKUS deal. What do you make of the decision to do this without the US President?
Senator Cash
Well, in the first instance, the Shadow Defence Minister, Angus Taylor, and I, we welcomed this commitment by the United Kingdom and Australia, and in particular the economic and the employment benefits that it will bring. But you are right, AUKUS – and we proudly negotiated AUKUS. I was part of those negotiations in the previous government, with Prime Minister Scott Morrison. It is a tripartite relationship. In other words, there are three parties to the AUKUS deal, the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. And sowhilst, yes, we welcome the bilateral treaty that has been announced. It does now raise serious questions. Was the United States brought in on this? Did they know about it? What was their response to it? But more than that, now, given it is a tripartite treaty – Anthony Albanese needs to urgently get, I would say, on a plane and over to the United States. He urgently needs to get the assurances and the comfort from that third partner in this tripartite deal, the United States, in particular, given the review is now being undertaken that it is fully committed and that they will indeed be taking it forward. So look Andrew, as I said, we welcome the bilateral, but you’re bang on – this is tripartite, and I think there are questions now to be answered by Minister Wong and Prime Minister Albanese in relation to the impact on the United States of America, the third partner in the tripartite treaty.
Andrew Clennell
Just briefly, do you think Kevin Rudd should remain Australia’s ambassador?
Senator Cash
Look, that’s obviously a decision for the Albanese government. What I look for is outcomes and what you saw under the former Coalition government, in relation to both at a governmental level, but also at that ambassadorial level, we got outcomes. We certainly didn’t criticize President Trump, as many in Labor have done, including the Prime Minister, including…
Andrew Clennell
Back to the question, what do you think. Kevin Rudd should stay there at the moment?
Senator Cash
As I said, that is a matter for the Albanese government. What I will hold this government to account on, in particular, as the Minister of the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs – what are the outcomes that you are getting?
Andrew Clennell
Ok. How long’s he got in terms of the outcomes? I mean, we know there might be meetings between the Prime Minister and President in September, if he gets them. Is he okay? If it doesn’t happen? He’s not. What’s your test here?
Senator Cash
The test is, what are the outcomes that you are getting? What is the relationship that you are having with the United States administration that is of the benefit to Australia. Let’s though, let’s put the blame on this, squarely back to Mr. Albanese as the Prime Minister of our country. It has been over 260 days, Andrew, since the election of President Trump, and we still have not had a face to face meeting. The former Coalition government because of the positive relationship that we had at both an ambassadorial and a governmental level with the former Trump administration, we were able to successfully negotiate the exemption from the trade tariffs. So my greatest concern is this: under Mr. Albanese, I don’t think there is any doubt now that the Australia-US alliance has been put on the back burner. In 2025, given the growing global conflict, and Mr. Albanese keeps telling the Australian people we are in incredibly uncertain Global Times, our influence in Washington, it should be greater than ever, not put on the back burner like Mr. Albanese has done. I have reaffirmed the coalition’s fundamental commitment Andrew. But let me tell you, why. Because Australians know the US Australia alliance is the bedrock, the foundation of our security. More than that, Andrew, you as a journalist, know this. We are participants in the free world. You and I get to have this interview because the United States is the leader of the free world – that we hold so dear. So Mr. Albanese needs prioritize that relationship.
Andrew Clennell
Nearly out of time in this interview, though, I wanted to ask about this change of position from the government on the Palestinian question, leaning into the positions of the UK and French governments. You know what Anthony Albanese said,that children are being killed, they’re being starved, and that the Israeli government is responsible. Do you think they are responsible? Are you concerned about what’s going on in Gaza?
Senator Cash
I think the unfortunate reality of Mr. Albanese is he continues to fail to lay the blame for the ongoing war in Gaza directly at the feet of the terrorists who commenced it. It is a fact, and it’s interesting, when you look at the statement, the first thing it says is that these parties asked that the war in Gaza end. But what they failed to do – and quite frankly, shame on Penny Wong. Shame on Penny Wong, who loves her pontification from the left, but not actually, then, on a daily basis, admitting to the Australian people that the war in Gaza could end tomorrow. The terrorist organisation Hamas could release the hostages and lay down their arms.
Andrew Clennell
They mentioned the hostages. They do mention the hostages.
Senator Cash
Oh please Andrew. They now insert that because they have to. What this statement does not do is squarely say to the global community, we would like to see the end of the war in Gaza. And the next sentence should have been, and we call on the terrorists of Hamas – who commenced this war and who are ensuring the suffering of the civilians in Gaza to end this war tomorrow. Does Israel have a moral responsibility? Yes. Should Israel be getting more aid into civilians in Gaza? Absolutely. And I call on the Israeli government to work with the international agencies to get that aid to the civilians. But let us not be blind, Andrew, to the reality. Any moral outrage should be directed at the terrorsts.
Andrew Clennell
I need to ask you about this before you go. Ysupportedstrongly this motion before the WA Liberal Party yesterday to end Welcome to Country ceremonies at official functions.Obviously, I guess this would mean we wouldn’t see it in the parliament again, certainly at Anzac Day Services. Why have you so strongly supported this briefly?
Senator Cash
Because, in particular, the Western Australian Liberal Party, but also it’s been my fundamental belief for a very long time they have now become so overdone, they are tokenistic. But more than this, as a Western Australian, and we live in a big State and there are large indigenous communities, the one thing I want Australians focused on is not tokenistic gestures that make us feel good whilst we turn a blind eye to the realities faced in indigenous communities on the ground. My clear focus, and I will stand with Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Prine any day of the week in relation to this. We want to see all Australians unite and focus on the practical policy outcomes that will make a difference Andrew, in the lives the most disadvantaged in this country. The mere fact that you want to feel good about that by an acknowledgement to country or a welcome to country, quite frankly, is not enough.This country, because of the situation facing the most disadvantaged in this country. The one thing we should unite under is making a practical difference, a positive difference in their lives. That’s my focus. Andrew, I could be judged for that.
Andrew Clennell
There was also a motion for the WA Liberals to abandon net zero that comes on top of the LNP conference and New South Wales nationals doing the same. Briefly do you support that, and is the Coalition on the way, as I’ve reported this morning, to a policy to abandon net zero – in your view?
Senator Cash
I support the views of the Western Australian Liberal Party. And if you read the motion, it is very clear, we’re recommitted to emissions reduction. But we will not do that like Mr. Albanese legislating a net zero target by 2050 when China, 2060 India, 2070. The Americans have gone: we’re putting the American people first. So we have reaffirmed our commitment to reducing emissions. But let’s be honest here, the Western Australian Liberal Party have been very, very clear. We will not crash the economy in doing so. We will squarely put the Australian people at the heart of any energytransition, and we will make sure that we do not impose unreasonable costs on them. Mr. Albanese has done this for ideological purposes. He did not need to legislate net zero by 2050 he chose to, and in choosing to do so, he has now openly said to the Australian people: I don’t care about the higher crippling energy costs that you are paying. What we’re saying in WA is enough is enough, the Australian people need to be put squarely at the center of any debate on energy and lowering their costs.
Andrew Clennell
Okay, Michaelia Cash, thanks so much for your time.
Senator Cash
Great to be with you.
Recent Comments