Senator Lundy is interviewed about her background, interest in ICT, Government 2.0, Canberra and a few personal topics such as her passion for sport.
http://www.vimeo.com/7195064Transcript:
Laurie Wilson: Hello and welcome to another edition of viewpoint. Kate Lundy has represented the people of the ACT in the senate for well over a decade. Like many Labor party politicians Senator Lundy made her way up through the union ranks, working as a young woman in the building industry. Along the way she developed a fascination for computing and a passion for the power of the internet. While not widely known outside of Canberra Senator Lundy was recently named among the top twenty-five people around the world who are influencing the role of the internet in politics.
Opening Sequence
LW: Kate Lundy thank you very much for joining us on viewpoint. You’ve been a Senator now for what, thirteen years, when you look back over that time what have been the highlights?
Kate Lundy: Well Laurie it won’t surprise you to know that winning the federal election was a highlight. I think being in opposition for so many of those thirteen years was extremely tough. Election after election Labor were out manoeuvred and defeated at the election so come 2007 it was a very exciting time.
LW: Yes, unlike most other Senator’s who represent the states you actually a territory, the ACT and your terms of office are actually different to those of the states. In fact you’ve actually been a Senator from day one of when Labor went into opposition way back in 1996.
KL: Look you’re absolutely right. A lot of people don’t realise that our term is exactly the same as the house of reps. The four territory Senators, two from the Northern Territory, two from the ACT have essentially a three year term or thereabouts aligned with the house of reps, so we go to election every time and we also start our term the day after the poll in the same way the house of reps members do.
LW: Does that make it harder for you? I mean it’s almost like in a sense you’re a member of the lower house except that you’re not in the lower house.
KL: Look, to be honest it feels like that because I often say we are the most accountable Senators because we are elected every three years but sort of all jokes aside my electorate is the ACT. It’s two very large lower house seats, the seat of Canberra and the seat of Fraser combined, but the way I do my work, I think is very much like a house of reps member. We do a lot of constituent work, we make sure our office is very accessible and that constituents are welcome to come in and discuss whatever it is they’d like to discuss with me. So it feels a bit like that.
LW: Indeed, unlike most other members of parliament, upper house and lower house you actually live where you work.
KL: Well in this regard I think I’m one of the lucky ones. I do get to go home every night and that can’t be said for the vast majority of sitting members when they’re here in Canberra. That’s quite a tough life when you think of the separation from family, so in that sense I do think I’m lucky. I live in north Canberra so it’s about ten minutes from parliament house and I think that’s been essential to have a family and to do my work.
LW: Looking back, you actually left school at quite a young age and you took an unusual career path for a young woman. You went into the building industry.
KL: Yeah, Look I’m very proud of how I got to parliament, it is a bit different. I did leave school as you say when I was sixteen and started work as a labourer. That was pretty unusual at the time and my job was removing asbestos from public buildings, so it was quite tough, we would wear a lot of protective clothing and in fact Laurie, it was that experience that raised my political consciousness. My focus was on occupational health and safety and arguing to make sure that we did abide by the safety standards associated with removing asbestos and it really underpins how I became a political person.
LW: You obviously did end up in politics but the path to that, like many other Labor members was through the union movement, and leadership in the union movement, what motivated you to take that path?
KL: Look I think it was ultimately about necessity, my parent weren’t particularly political so my eye opening if you like, or my awareness about the relationship between your experience in the workplace and politics came about on the job and it didn’t take very long to work out that someone made the safety standards, someone made the laws that governed who we worked and how we were able to work and so the connection happened pretty early on. We worked to a code of practice, that code of practice was developed by the government, the government made the policy that set the code of practice. So if you wanted to influence the government policy you needed to be engaged and involved in the first instance through my union, which was part of the negotiating parties determining those standards and ultimately the Labor party who were in government federally at the time and this was pre self-government in the ACT, so if you wanted to influence the government of the day that was the Labor party and I joined the Labor Party when I was eighteen.
LW: In your early to mid twenties you had become president of your union, what’s now the CFMEU, the old Building Workers Industrial Union. Was it tough having to deal with a bunch of hard nosed blokes as a young woman on a building site?
KL: Well, it was a fascinating time and I think that the key to what I was doing was that I knew what I was talking about. I’d worked in the Industry, particularly in the asbestos removal field as I mentioned but with occupational health and safety as a focus. I set about making sure I knew what the laws were, what the rules were and what the safe practices were. And I think I earned the respect of the members I was representing and my colleagues in the union over the time and I don’t really know how to say this other than I was probably surprised that I survived, It is a tough environment . Not, It was always inspiring and for me, I think I’ll always feel comfortable on a building site because that’s were I started, that’s were I grew up in many respects. And I did know my job, I think I was very lucky to be active at a time when women were being very strongly promoted both within my union and within the Labor party and I benefited in that sense from generations of work of women and men before me making sure that when people like me came along they had those opportunities. So I feel like I’m very much a product of generational battles for equal opportunity and the fact that I, I think that I even got my original chance to be a labourer was because in 1984 which is when I started that was the year that Susan Ryan carried through the Parliament the equal opportunity and anti-discrimination laws. And unbeknownst to me as a young person at the time that was instrumental in me having an opportunity to be employed as a labourer from the very get go.
LW: From labourer to union president to federal politics, what did it take to make that final step into the Senate?
KL: Look, It was probably the hardest, working in the union movement was incredibly satisfying, it was tough, challenging and all the rest of it but every day you felt like you were making a genuine difference. To make the transition into politics was honestly something that I found incredibly daunting, my immediate reaction was oh no I haven’t got a degree I better go and get one, because my lack of education was something that concerned me but I had a lot of encouragement and I had a lot of I suppose, my nature is to give things a go in the first instance and I didn’t know wether I would succeed in the long term in that role, I’m still here so I think that’s been fine but I really did have to make a tough decision, it was the right decision, it’s an extraordinary privilege to be offered an opportunity to represent Australian’s in the federal parliament and one that I would never have thought as a young person I’d ever have.
LW: Now politics is tough, does it make people tough? Has it changed you?
KL: I think I was tough before I got here. I think my work in the building union, you’re dealing with very pragmatic honest people all of the time, there’s no room for mucking around or any garbage, it’s very strait forwed and I think that was a really great training ground in a very genuine sense for the tougher aspects of the role in politics. So in that regard I think I came to this job well prepared and obviously not so much now days but working in male dominated environments is something that I’m completely comfortable with.
LW: I raise that question because when we look back over your career you’ve served in quite a number of roles in the opposition, in the shadow ministry, but when Labor was re-elected it must have been tough on you that there wasn’t a place in the Rudd ministry for you.
KL: Yeah, I was surprised at how hard I took it. You learn something about yourself all of the time, but you come to terms with it. I think it doesn’t take you too long to figure out a constructive role in government, I’ve been working towards government for twelve years and it was an amazing thing to be a part of a government that has so many visionary policies and just to name one that’s particularly close to my heart, the national broadband network was immensely gratifying so as a back bencher there is a really important role that you play in progressing the agenda of the government and the relationship of the governments policies with your own constituency. So yes I was disappointed, I certainly said I was disappointed at the time but you get on with it. And I’m still here and ready willing and able if I’m to be considered in the future.
LW: Now I’m sure many people in Canberra, and perhaps some outside Canberra may remember as a shadow minister you were among other things a spokesman for sport and recreation but the area that many people might not realise that you take a particular interest in, that’s become your passion is IT, information technology, the internet, how did that come about?
KL: Oh IT is, it’s something that’s an intuitive thing for me, when I worked at the union, because I didn’t go to university by the time I found out about the internet was when it was breaking out of academia and breaking out into the public domain and applications like mosaic and some of the early browsers. The world wide web was to me a revelation, because my work had been in I suppose a social entity, a trade union, what inspired me most was the opportunity the internet had to empower people with information, and inform them, and allow a level of engagement in their communities, in society, with government that was unprecedented and even though it was early days I found that incredibly inspiring and I made a very strategic decision early on after I was preselected that this was an area that I really wanted to engage in the public policy debate about. So it was, you know I’m self taught on computers and I’ve done a lot of work with computers at the union and with desktop publishing, so it was really a gut feeling that this was going to be important to us as a society in the future and I needed to be there and be part of the conversation.
LW: Now I look back at your maiden speech in parliament, and I want to quote from that, you said ‘information and how it’s communicated are major determinates of power within our society’ and you went on to say ‘the importance of public policy relating to the use of credible information sources and its increasingly complex delivery technologies can not be underestimated.’ Thirteen years ago, that was pretty prescient; you were certainly looking down the track and seeing where things were going.
KL: I was already thinking about these issues back then. I felt very strongly that it was going to change our lives the way that communication technologies where developing, and I still think, and I mentioned the national broadband network earlier that is a sort of perfect example of the sort of massive investment through a public policy initiative that needs to be made if we as a society are going to share in the benefits of technological development it doesn’t happen by itself, we know that it tends to consolidate around the few who control it and I think that it’s really about applying democratic principles and social access principles to technology.
LW: Now I only became aware quite recently that you’ve just been announced as one of the twenty five most influential people in the world in terms of the world of the internet and politics, let me quote from the announcement, politics online and the world e-democracy forum every year announce twenty five finalists in a competition in terms of the most influential people in that area, and you’ve been ranked thirteenth, how did that come about?
KL: Well this was a terrific surprise and I think a real credit not just to me, but to my team in my office, I have a wonderful team including my IT advisor Pia Waugh who has joined me over the last five months. But what we did Laurie was really put some of these new social networking tools to work for a policy discussion. So the concept is actually a really simple one, it’s quite common for politicians and ministers and I suppose backbenchers to decide to have a conversation with a group of people about where policy ought to go. We did that but we deployed a whole raft of new social networking facilities and the tools of the internet to that conversation, and we created an event called a public sphere. And it was essentially this, we decided on an issue and I suppose the one most relevant is a Gov 2.0, so the new social networking platforms of the internet being applied to how governments do their job and we opened up our website for blogging comments and submissions for presentations to have a single day event and in doing so post that event we had a collaborative document built on a wiki were everyone can come in and edit. But the concept was on the actual day to have a series of presentations where people used the live stream of the presentations to blog and use twitter, tweet, their comments about that and I guess provide a continual feedback loop about the issues that they were hearing and discussing. That provides, at the end of that day you have a wonderful data set that contains everyone’s thoughts and ideas including the transcripts from the presentations and so forth. You’ve had an audience that was both in the room and online via the live feed. And then we work up a document that becomes the outcome of what s occurred via social networking sites and tools as well in the room on the actual public sphere event. And there were two outcomes, one outcome was the policy submission if you like to government which traversed the issue of the day, the other outcome was writing up the event itself, how we did it, what technology was used, how many participants we had in the room, online, how many tweets, what sort of response occurred on the blogging sites and compiled all of that as well, and what we think we’ve done is created just one model of how a government or a politician could possible engage using these fantastic new tools in a way that invites a contribution from someone who wouldn’t otherwise have been able to participate in such a conversation with government. So it’s enhancing their participation in policy development as well as enhancing the governments to tap into what we call the wisdom of the crowd, people out there who have great ideas, who have a great deal of expertise, but would otherwise be excluded from that kind of conversation.
LW: Well in terms of these public sphere forums that you’ve been holding, have you learnt something in terms of how you should go about this? How you might refine the process?
KL: We’ve had three of these public spheres so far, the one I was describing was actually held here in parliament house, in the main committee room and we learnt an awful lot about how we can refine particularly the technological requirements, things like getting enough bandwidth to get the live feed out, making sure you make that as quality a feed as possible so that people can participate online. We also innovated with a thing called a live wall which had consecutive twitter feed and live blogging comments on it at the same time so people could track that as well as the video feed. The lessons that we learnt along the way where always tweaks that we could refine it, make it better, and our subsequent one we introduced a new tool called zing which allows consecutive conversations to occur and people to actually type in issues and comments in a small roundtable discussion as part of the day. So every time we’ve done one we’ve changed it, innovated a little more, experimented a little more and then sought feedback from the participants about how they thought it went. So it’s a very iterative process it’s a genuine experiment and when we, because we are doing everything completely openly, anyone can look at this online, anyone can participate in the wiki, we think and we hope that other people will modify and emulate the process and by the nature of it we’ll get more people engaged in public policy conversations right around the country. And in fact Penny Sharpe, a member of the legislative council in NSW decided to have a NSW sphere that was just last week and that was an incredible success and I congratulate her for that and we love to see this idea emulated and proliferated.
LW: Indeed looking at the selection as one of the finalists in this, the organisation that runs it makes the point that these events are opening the door for Australian politicians to more interactively engage online and generating interest at all levels of Australian politics and the public sector.
KL: And there’s an important distinction that I’m sure Laurie if you don’t mind I just want to touch on, part of our public sphere is about my conversation, as a representative, with my constituents, but there’s a fantastic role for government, the public sector to have conversations with citizens in a similar way about how they provide services and providing a platform for innovation within the public, within communities that the government could actually provide, so there is a distinction I think, and I actually get the feeling at the moment that the public sector, the public service is a little bit worried about where that fine line might be, but I think that the public sector per se has got a wonderful opportunity to converse with citizens about the way they provide services and the way those services can be developed to support communities too.
LW: Are you satisfied at the pace that the public sector is moving towards embracing these new technologies? There is certainly a significant move towards centralising access for the average citizen, not just you and me, but also for business, for instance the creation of a standard business register is something which is now on the way, but are you satisfied that we are moving to it quickly enough?
KL: Look, I think we’ve actually got a bit of a back log. I was critical of the former government, the Howard government in their handling of public policy and how that guided the use of ICT within the federal government. You mentioned my first speech, it’s this very point, if you haven’t got informed public policy guiding some of these major developments it doesn’t happen by itself unless it’s pockets of innovation, and can I say that we’ve got some of the best innovators in ICT in the public sector here in Canberra, but its never had under the former government the political leadership, we’ve now got the political leadership that’s encouraging this, we’ve got several reform programs including the outcomes of the department of finances Gershorn review on ICT reform, we’ve got Lindsay Tanner’s Gov 2.0 taskforce trying to extract innovative ideas about the new platform that government can provide using the web and also I think a genuine will across a whole raft of portfolio’s not least being education and health, talking about what the internet means to the delivery of education and health services, fantastic initiatives, the digital economy in the department of, portfolio of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy and even Kim Carr with industry and innovation has got a whole new direction focused on promoting ICT. So there’s a huge amount happening, but finally we have the political leadership. Where I think there is a bit of a blockage at the moment is between the fantastic work that’s happening on the ground and the political leadership. There’s the confidence in the senior ranks of the public service to take the big step, to guess to resolve any concerns they have about the internet as a useful and appropriate and meaningful platform between them as public service providers and the citizens of this country. That step is still yet to be taken on a grand scale.
LW: You mentioned the level of confidence within the public sector, and I probably should mentioned that you were actually pipped for a place in the top ten for this particular award for online and politics by a public servant, Craig Thomler, many people might not have heard about Craig Thomler outside of the public service but congratulations to him, …. (Inaudible)
KL: Well I do know Craig and he is a fantastic example of an innovator within our public sector, that deserves much greater recognition so I’m really glad you mentioned his name, There is amazing work going on within the public sector here and It’s because of this wonderful blend of great ideas in the public sector and a capacity to work with wonderfully innovative, usually smaller companies in the ICT sector as well, so it’s the blend of public and private innovation that gives us that great strength.
LW: There’s a parliamentary enquiry underway at the moment into cyber crime, now how concerned are you about cyber crime? A rapidly growing area of concern because here we are encouraging Australians to use the internet more to deal with the government online, but at the same time they’re increasingly at risk, potentially, in doing so.
KL: It’s incredibly important with anything new and particularly because the internet is becoming so widespread now and we have a national broadband network coming which I hope and I believe will close the digital divide. So we’re heading into an era were everyone will be able to get online and use those services, we need to keep pace therefore with our authorities to tackle the new sorts of criminal activity that can take place in that sort of environment. And I not so long ago went down to the AFP here in Canberra and got a briefing on the AFP’s commitment to combating cyber crime, and I have to say was incredibly impressed with their unit and confident that they’ve got the funding they need to, to tackle crime on the internet. I think successive governments have made that commitment which I think is very good to see. But it requires constant vigilance, wether it something, I suppose as malicious but as real as phishing, what’s called phishing, that’s with a ‘ph’, phishing, spy ware that can raid your bank accounts right through to the viral and denial of service attacks that you read about quite regularly. This is criminal activity, it needs to be dealt with under the law, and we do have an obligation as a government to make sure that the law keeps pace with this kind of criminal activity.
LW: Now we’ve talked about Kate Lundy the politician but tell me about Kate Lundy the person, the private citizen, which is probably something you can be as a politician….
KL: What would you like to know?
LW: Well, what are the things that interest you; I know that you’re a very keen sports woman, that you’ve become very interested and active in sport as a young person and quiet an enthusiastic rower.
KL: Well can I say again, that this is a wonderful reflection on the city in which I Live, Canberra. If you are going to be a sportsperson this is the place to be, you mentioned rowing, there is nothing more beautiful than knowing a spring or autumn morning on Lake Burley Griffin when the sky is clear and the moons still up, the mist is rising of the water, it’s just exquisite so I think I’m again very fortunate to have that experience. We’ve got a great rowing club life here in Canberra, several public clubs that anyone can participate in, not surprisingly the masters ranks are very strong which is where I belong and where I even get a chance to compete just from time to time as the masters’ crew is a wonderful group of women.
LW: Well that’s my point you still do compete… I mean obviously…
KL: Well I try.
LW: Well my point I guess is that you’ve got a competitive nature I assume.
KL: Well sports just fun, I mean I like a lot of people struggle with maintaining a level of fitness, particularly with a busy job, I’m not Robinson Crusoe there, sport to me is one of the most efficient and fun ways to do it and I’ve even started playing hockey and soccer and all sorts of things since I’ve turned forty and loved it, its been an important part of what constitutes a work life balance for me and with my kids who play, participate in sport of some nature it’s a great way to bring parents and kids together too.
LW: Finally you’ve taken a considerable interest in the legacy of Walter Burley Griffin, and as a Canberra politician especially, you are particularly interested in it, in fact you have a role at the national archives as well, how important is it though do you think that people not just in Canberra but with an interest in the Griffin Legacy and do you think that they really care?
KL: Oh I think that once people come to Canberra it ignites something inside them, I look at some of the testimonies from some of the sixth graders that come here as part of their school program, they never forget it and I’ve met adults who’ve come back to Canberra to work who say that they’ve never got Canberra out of their mind because of that experience. So it’s this dilemma of Canberra being created for the purposes of being the national capital has an image out there as being all about the politicians and I’m not even worried about that, I think that’s good, that’s exactly what the capital is, it’s the heart of the Australian democracy. It’s an incredibly important city in that regard and one which every Australian has a share in. What I love about the Griffin Legacy is the unique status that it affords, you know, the physical presence of Canberra and you don’t, you only need to come here and stand at that point were the land axis touches the water axis and get a sense of the extraordinary geometry that the Griffin’s created the city on, it’s a planned city built on a vision that was created at the turn of the last century and survived by virtue of the fact that the commonwealth has maintained a commitment to that vision through the National Capital Plan, so come the twenty first century, it won’t surprise you to know that I was on the committee that conducted a review on the role of the National Capital Planning Authority, it’s as strong as ever and the fact that the plan has survived in such a wonderfully pure form, its geometry places this city in a unique arena around the world and people come here and they can’t quite pin it down why it’s so special. I think partly it’s because of the institution of the federal parliament and the heart of our democracy, partly because we hold in our national institutions here collections on behalf of the citizens of Australia, wether it’s the Art gallery, the National Museum of Australia, the National Library, The National Archive which you mentioned, that’s all held in trust on behalf of the people and then they look around and realise how special the place is, you wont, I don’t think you’ll find much stronger advocates of this city than I and I do live here, I love it and I think if more Australian’s had the chance to immerse themselves in their national capital they’d capture the magic too.
LW: Senator Kate Lundy lets conclude on that note, Thank you very much for your time, thank you very much for talking to us on Viewpoint.
KL: Thanks very much Laurie.
Closing sequence.
