Media
|
Transcripts
June 15, 2026
MICHAEL MCLAREN: Senator James Paterson, the Shadow Defence Minister, he's with me. Senator, always good to talk.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Good to be with you.
MCLAREN: Extraordinary development. I mean, it's very, very rare that a minister from any portfolio quits, let alone one that is close to the Prime Minister, as was the case with Healey and Keir Starmer. It's a very rare event indeed.
PATERSON: You're absolutely right, and obviously it's not my role to comment on the domestic politics of a friendly democracy. But just speaking generally about the conventions in the Westminster system of government that we have, it is right if you feel so conflicted that your principles can't be upheld in the ministry to resign from the ministry, and I think it shows great integrity on the part of John Healey that he's decided to do this. As you say, though, Australia faces very similar challenges. We're not spending enough on defence either, and I doubt it's crossed Richard Marles' mind that perhaps he should resign if he feels he can't secure adequate investment as recommended by our own defence strategic review of about 3% of GDP.
MCLAREN: What are we spending at the moment just to tick over two, is it?
PATERSON: That's right. It's about 2.1% this year. It's actually going to drop back down to about 2% next year. And Sir Angus Houston, who completed the DSR and Professor Peter Dean, who helped author the DSR, have both since publicly said after they completed that review that it needs to be at least 3% of GDP. Now, the government is trying to confuse the public by muddying the waters and counting lots of things like pensions and superannuation, which we never used to count and they claim to be spending more. But the true number is what it has been on an average basis for about the last 25 years, which is 2% of GDP, and that's just not enough in this strategic environment.
MCLAREN: The government will say, look, we have all of this money coming down the pipeline, trust us, in you know, eight years' time or something, we'll be spending X, it's all factored in. And to be honest, both sides have done it over the years, as you know. But more often than not, in the intervening years, we've had an election and side A is voted out, side B comes in, and they don't meet those commitments, and so we're in the position we're in.
PATERSON: Well, and from the actual appropriation of the government annually over the next four years, there's only $6.8 billion dollars of new ongoing funding for defence. A whole lot of it is contingent on alternative financing, which the government has admitted themselves is not very well advanced and really in its early stages. And in these defence asset sales that you and I have been talking about, which I am really sceptical will ever truly be realised. I don't think they'll get the sale price that they were counting on, given the collapse of the Australian property market in the last few weeks after the budget. And I think they'll find the remediation costs are going to be higher and more complex than they initially assumed they would be. And I'm not sure politically, they'll actually be able to proceed with all of these sales. There is very serious opposition building around the country, including in Sydney, to the sale of Victoria Barracks Sydney or HMAS Penguin or the Lancers in Parramatta, that I think means that it's not sustainable for the government to proceed with all these sales.
MCLAREN: No, and they're the best pieces of real estate in the portfolio, so you know the money that would come in from the rest is markedly lower. Just on that, you have been running your own petition, of course, you joined me on the day that you launched it. You wanted to get to 50,000. I think you're just a few hundred short.
PATERSON: We are knocking on the door, and if any of your listeners want to help, I'm right now at 49,090 signatures, so only 910 to go to get to 50,000. If they head to senatorpaterson.com.au, they can sign that petition and add their voice because we really need the government to rethink this. We are giving away precious heritage that we can never get back, and we're sacrificing current military capability. I was just in Perth the other day. I visited Leeuwin Barracks in Fremantle. There are hundreds of reservists who train there, and when that base is closed, they're going to be required to drive 40 minutes in good traffic to the next closest base to train in future. And I fear a lot of those reservists will just leave the ADF altogether rather than have to go through that kind of commute. And how does that make our country any safer or stronger?
MCLAREN: Well, it doesn't. Very serious issues. I mean, as you know, we've been trying to organise an interview with Richard Marles since we launched our petition months ago, and we're 18,500 signatures, and that's only about Victoria Barracks in Sydney, only one. No luck, they don't even reply to us anymore. We've been trying to get onto Peter Khalil, it looked like they were pretty keen for a chat now, radio silence, I'm told. Does it surprise you they don't want to come on and speak to, you know just a middle of the road radio announcer in Sydney about this?
PATERSON: On one level, it doesn't surprise me. This is a government that is not transparent, it is not accountable, particularly when it comes to defence. When I challenged them the other week in Senate estimates about where they were making cuts over the next few years, they couldn't tell me, they said they didn't know, that they would have to take it on notice. But frankly, it's not good enough. If you want to do something pretty radical, pretty extreme, sell off our defence heritage, then the least you can do, the bare minimum, is you should front up to the public, including through the media, and answer questions about it. Your listeners obviously have a very strong interest in it. They deserve answers from a minister, and Richard Marles should front up, and if he doesn't have the strength of character to do so, he should at least send Peter Khalil in to do so.
MCLAREN: So there's no mandate for it. That's the problem, right? This is a bit like the tax change. It's just we win and whoop, here it is.
PATERSON: Exactly. No Australian who went into the voting booth at the last election realised, if they voted for Labor that our defence estate heritage would be on the chopping block. And I think many of them would have voted differently, judging by your petition and mine, if they'd known that before the last elections. So the very least that Australians are entitled to is reasonable answers to their reasonable questions.
MCLAREN: Well, we speak of politicians being the honourable, that's sort of the prefix that comes from the convention of Westminster, but in the case of Mr Healy in the UK, he's lived up to that title. I wish we had more. You're one of them at least. Always good to speak, James. Thank you for your time.
PATERSON: Thank you, Michael.
MCLAREN: Senator James Paterson, sign his petition, get it over the 50,000, senatorpaterson.com.au, and sign his petition there to save our military heritage.
ENDS