THE HON ANDREW HASTIE MP
SHADOW MINISTER FOR INDUSTRY AND SOVEREIGN CAPABILITY
FEDERAL MEMBER FOR CANNING

TRANSCRIPT
INTERVIEW WITH MARK LEVY, 2GB

Thursday 22 October 2026

Topics: Ben Roberts-Smith; Helen Haines; One Nation cartoons. 

E&OE……………………………………

MARK LEVY: Andrew, good morning to you.

ANDREW HASTIE: Good morning, Mark. Good to be with you and your listeners.

MARK LEVY: You too, mate. Look, I'll come to what's been a difficult week in federal politics with what's happened to Helen Haines and get your thoughts on that in just a moment. But as you can appreciate, Andrew, one of the big talking points for our listeners this morning in Sydney is what they've heard in this exclusive interview with Ben Roberts-Smith that was played this morning on the breakfast program. I know there's a time difference between Sydney and Perth. Did you get a chance to listen to the interview, and what did you think of it?

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, it's just past seven here, so I haven't had a chance to hear the interview but I've seen the headlines across the different mastheads, so I'll catch up with it later on today.

MARK LEVY: What are your thoughts, given what you've read in the headlines, Andrew?

ANDREW HASTIE: I think Ben Roberts-Smith is entitled to the presumption of innocence, and he's putting his case to the Australian people. That's a decision for him and his legal team.

MARK LEVY: And the other thing that I've certainly stressed this morning, Andrew, and I think we all have a responsibility to stress is that these allegations need to be tested in court rather than the court of public opinion. People will form their own opinion, but until we see the evidence that will eventually come out in trial, I think it's important to allow the process to run its course. Do you agree?

ANDREW HASTIE: I agree. The process must have integrity, and that's why you'll find I'm very circumspect about commenting on these matters, particularly if we want to uphold Ben Roberts-Smith's presumption of innocence.

MARK LEVY: I do want to play one part of the interview to you, Andrew, and it's something that a few of the listeners and me have certainly seized on. And that is back in 2024, the Albanese government changed a law which essentially lowers the threshold to prove an unlawful killing or a war crime. Essentially, it means fewer criteria need to be met to determine whether a prisoner is hors de combat = French for out of combat. It's something Ben Roberts-Smith was not happy about during the interview. This is what he had to say about it this morning.

ROBERTS-SMITH: This legislative change that has now been made retrospective does not, in my opinion, pass the pub test.

FORDHAM: Why did the Coalition allow that to go through?

ROBERTS-SMITH: Well see, that's the interesting part. So, when it was explained to everyone in the Parliament, it was just an administrative change to keep it in line with international law. So, it was a drafting. I think the exact words were it was a drafting error, right? Because they changed a word. But the word was you had to prove A, B and C. Now it just says, you can prove A or B or C, right? So, they don't have to prove all of it, if they can just prove one thing then it counts. So, hang on. And I don't have an issue if that is in line with law. That's not my concern. My concern is that the same person that consented to the charges wants to make it retrospective and didn't fully explain the material change to the Parliament.

MARK LEVY: So, it's retrospective, Andrew, and the Coalition let it through. I'd love your response to that and what your recollection is to the changes to those laws back in 2024. 

ANDREW HASTIE: Sure, the legislation was passed in 2024. It passed on the voices, which means that no one opposed it, including Pauline Hanson and One Nation. I think the general principle here is that Australian soldiers don't execute prisoners, and we wanted to reflect that in law. So, under the Geneva Code, if you have an enemy combatant who's in your control and they've surrendered, they're incapacitated, or they're wounded – they're out of the fight. Any one of those things – surrendered, incapacitated, wounded – any one of those criteria met, then they obviously can't be executed. So, this was bringing Australian law in line with a tactical battlefield application of the Geneva Code or Convention, and the Shadow Attorney General at the time, Michaelia Cash, she gave us an in-depth brief. There were no issues identified then, which is why Pauline Hanson and One Nation didn't oppose it either. 

MARK LEVY: So, you're comfortable yourself, Andrew, with the definition of that law? 

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, if we're not executing prisoners, then I don't see any issue with the law as it stands. That's right.

MARK LEVY: Alright. One last one on this before we move on to other things. Both Ben Roberts-Smith and yourself have spoken about the enormous pride you feel having fought for this country. Do you think this criminal trial, Andrew Hastie, will deter people from signing up to join the ADF?

ANDREW HASTIE: There's certainly that narrative out there. But yesterday, I got a text from a young bloke who's decided to enlist in the Australian Army and who's very proud of it, and I was proud of him because I advised him to. I've got another young bloke who I've counselled to join the ADF, and he's in the middle of the recruitment process now. Back in winter, I think it was June, July, I was at the SAS. I caught up with all their junior leaders, and I was happily surprised at how high morale was, how high the numbers were, and there's a lot of people still very keen to get into the SAS, which is great news. Because we need patriots who are willing to stand up to our country and take on the toughest missions that we can possibly ever do.

MARK LEVY: Well said, and they play a very important role, as you did, in defending our democracy. That takes me to this awful, and I need to say, alleged attack on Helen Haines, one of your parliamentary colleagues, the independent MP for Indi. She has been the victim of awful circumstances. This alleged attack from a bloke who's now in custody and is facing serious charges. But Andrew, firstly, your reaction to this, and also to political violence, which is now in the spotlight, and it should never happen in this country.

ANDREW HASTIE: It shouldn't. I was very saddened to see Helen attacked. She's one of the kindest, gentlest people you'll meet in the halls of Parliament, and it was hard to process. But I'm not surprised, though. Over the last decade – I've been in the Parliament now for 11 years – we've seen the political climate get hotter and hotter, and it's been fuelled by a lot of grievance and anger online through social media, particularly. The algorithm is designed to you into a lather and get you more and more down the rabbit hole and frustrated. I've seen that on both sides of politics - on the right and the left. And so, for me, it was just a matter of time before someone who is mentally unstable or troubled felt justified in attacking a member of parliament or a senator. Sadly, that's what happened to Helen Haines, and she's lost both her legs. I think this has massive consequences for the way we do business. One of the reasons why we've been a successful parliamentary democracy for 125 years is because we debate, we negotiate, and we compromise on the big public policy questions. And the more we become polarised, and the more the heat rises, it just destroys trust, and then that means we don't have a closer connection with our elected representatives, as we should.

 MARK LEVY: Yeah, and I think Andrew, it's important to say – and I'm starting to get a bit sick of hearing the term, "turn the temperature down" – I just think we need the adults back in the room here. Because you and I have had some spirited conversations and some spirited debates in our fortnightly catchups. There's been things I've challenged you on and we're both big enough and respectful enough to speak passionately about our views. We can't lose that spirited debate in all of this, but we just need those fringe elements, and those people that think that they can do and say whatever they like – they're the ones that need to heed these warnings, yeah?

ANDREW HASTIE: That's right. I like a bit of contact, mate, and we've had that on this radio station, and I respect you for that because it's your job to ask hard questions of elected officials. But in the end, we don't demonise each other, we don't attack each other's character or standing and incite hatred towards one another. We focus on the issue, and that's what it should be about. Westminster democracy works well because it is adversarial. We have question time. We don't pull our punches. But online, when it gets really hateful, you can't account for those people on the margins who might weaponise a car at short notice and try and run over an MP or pick up a kitchen knife and try and stab someone, as someone did in the UK and murdered an MP a couple of years ago, or even pick up a cricket bat. Whatever it might be, we just can't account for those people, and the AFP and the security measures can't account for those people. So, modelling good behaviour and civil engagement as an MP is really important. 

MARK LEVY: Do you fear for your safety, Andrew? And have you been the victim of threats in years gone by? 

ANDREW HASTIE: Look, I remember back in I think it was 2019, I had death threats directed at my children, and they had to be investigated seriously. I've had a rough year – there's no question about that – which is why I've been identified for increased security. I didn't ask for it; I just got told that it needed to happen. But I love my country and I'll keep serving. I'm not deterred by that – it's just part of the job. But my point over the last few days is that we have to lead. We have to show a good example to the Australian people and say, "this is how you do good debate, and this is how you be a good steward of Australian democracy".

MARK LEVY: What did you make of the One Nation cartoon depicting Jacqui Lambie? I called it out earlier this week, and I'm glad the One Nation leader, Pauline Hanson, has apologised for it. I thought that stooped to a new low. Now I understand satire, but I thought that cartoon was just cruel. What did you make of it, Andrew?

ANDREW HASTIE: I thought it was offensive. It was nasty. It was cheap. Mocking Jacqui Lambie's vaginal prolapse, for your listeners if they haven't heard, that's what it did. I wanted every woman in the country to see that because my personal view is they need to get a sense of the character behind One Nation. And when you're mocking sitting senators and their health problems, and thereby mocking other women across the country, I think that's in the public interest that people ought to know.

MARK LEVY: I tend to agree with you. I've said this week that Anthony Albanese needs to lead from the front in terms of decency and the like. Were you aware of this dirt file that was circulated on Helen Haines when she dared to question the grant that was given to one of his local golf clubs?

ANDREW HASTIE: I wasn't aware of it. I've become aware of it, and I think it's pretty disgusting if that is the case. This is the point about Westminster democracy – we do exercise accountability, we ask the hard questions, including questions about grants that don't pass the pub test.

MARK LEVY: It's a bit hypocritical though for the Prime Minister of this country to talk and say lovely things about Helen Haines when, at the same time, a month earlier he's trying to discredit her with this dirt file – or his office anyway. Isn't that where our political leaders need to be better, Andrew?

ANDREW HASTIE: Absolutely. People hate hypocrisy. The Australian public have a very low view of politicians at the moment, particularly after the pandemic – trust was broken, I think – and hypocrisy is the first thing that people raise. So, I think in this case, if that is the case, that's pretty shameful from the Prime Minister and his office. Before he lectures other people, he should reflect on that.

MARK LEVY: Alright, Andrew, let's finish on a lighter note. I like to finish on a bit of a lighter note with our chats. One of your dear friends, Senator Jonno Duniam, he's a great mate of yours and your housemate in Canberra. He's received a glowing farewell from all sides of the political spectrum – Katy Gallagher, Nick McKim. The overwhelming sentiment is that he's a brilliant man to work with, and as dapper as they come. In fact, Matt Canavan, he said, "I heard Senator Ruston say earlier that everyone loves Jonno. I hate Jonno. I hate him because he makes every other bloke look like they've got the fashion sense of Steve Urkel. They've never used a blow dryer in their life, and they can barely use a comb. You show us all up, mate!" Now, Andrew Hastie, with Jonno leaving, what are your parting words for your great mate? And how keen are you on having full access to the blow dryer?

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, he does wake me up. He gets up at 5 a.m. I'm on Perth time, so it's around 2 a.m. in summer, and I can hear the blow dryer going. So, he does look after himself. Look, Jonno is a great guy – lovely wife and three boys – and he wants to spend more time with his family. I don't think he'll leave politics altogether. I think he'll stay very involved, and I think it's a real testament to his character that he had such praise across the Senate when he gave his valedictory speech. My wife and kids came over for that as well. Politics is about, in the end, working with all Australians, not just your own tribe, and I think Jonno demonstrated that in the Senate.

MARK LEVY: Alright, Andrew, nice to catch up, mate. We'll see you in a couple of weeks.

ANDREW HASTIE: Thanks, Mark. Appreciate it.

[ENDS]