Media
|
Transcripts
September 18, 2025
MARK LEVY: I thought we'd catch up with James Paterson, the Shadow Minister for Finance. He's been good enough to join us on this Thursday morning. Senator, good morning to you.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Good morning, Mark, and to your listeners.
MARK LEVY: Mate, wonderful to catch up as always. I thought we'd start just and get it out of the way. Jim Chalmers, his comments yesterday, which are pretty much unnecessary, that's one way to put it, describing members of the Opposition, a party run by cookers and crackpots. Are you a cooker or a crackpot, James?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, Mark, these are completely unhinged comments from the Treasurer. A Treasurer who felt secure in his position and was performing well would never need to lash out like this. I mean, can you imagine Peter Costello ever using language like that? I think Jim Chalmers must be worried about his internal position in the Labor Party. We know he's locked in a competition with Tony Burke about who can succeed the Prime Minister. And he must feel like he needs to show off to the Labour Party caucus and go hard against us. But actually, he's just undermining his own credibility.
MARK LEVY: A few people have made the point to me this morning, Senator, what happened to that promise and that pledge from the Prime Minister for a more respectful government?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: That's right, a kinder or gentler Parliament and a more respectful government. I mean, the truth is Jim Chalmers has got some pretty big failings which he's just trying to distract from. His own budgets show a decade of deficits and $1.2 trillion of debt because this government has added billions of dollars of recurrent spending, but they have no plan for how to pay for it, and of course, what will ultimately happen is Australians will pay for it in the form of higher taxes.
MARK LEVY: Let's centre in on Sussan Ley's speech yesterday, if we can, Senator. We'll come back to net zero and a few other things that play in a moment. This speech yesterday in Melbourne, the Opposition Leader said that a Coalition government would put a handbrake on new taxes while also calling out the government's desire to spend and spend and spend. What do you make of the government's attack on the idea that we should, heaven forbid, spend less money?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, it's extraordinary, Mark, because every previous Federal government for the last couple of decades, even the Rudd and Gillard governments, imposed on themselves a set of disciplines and rules called fiscal rules about how much money they would spend and how much they would tax. Jim Chalmers is the first Treasurer in a long time to say he doesn't need any constraints, he doesn't need any limits, he can spend whatever he likes, and he can tax whatever he likes. And it's no wonder that spending has got so out of control. In fact, this year it will be the highest as a proportion of our economy in 30 years outside a recession. And so what Sussan is calling for is just a return to normal budget management, normal fiscal management, so that we live within our means, we don't overtax Australians, and we don't leave an unacceptable burden on future generations.
MARK LEVY: Well, that's the thing, you talk about living within our means, is there a push on from your side of politics to means-test more of these programs?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: We think it's a really important principle that government is there to provide a safety net for people who can't provide for themselves. The government shouldn't be giving handouts to people who don't need it. Because if you give handouts to wealthy people who don't need them, that means you have to tax people more than they should be, or run up debts that future generations have to pay back. And that's deeply inequitable. So what we're saying is, don't hand out money to people who don't need it; keep it for those who genuinely need it.
MARK LEVY: Well, one of the big costs on the agenda, and it's a promise of the government, is universal childcare. Where's the Opposition on that?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, our starting point is scepticism. I mean, the Prime Minister has outlined that he wants to get to a place where he can pay for the childcare of all Australians, including those who might be earning a million dollars a year, but he hasn't explained how he'll pay for it, particularly for a budget that's already heading into a deep structural deficit. This will just make that problem even worse. So it might be nice to have free universal childcare, but actually, do people on a million dollars a year need to have their childcare paid for by other taxpayers? We don't think so, and we don't think the Prime Minister has any plan to pay for it.
MARK LEVY: Alright, that'll be an interesting one to watch. Speaking of the Prime Minister, he was up in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea. He's failed to get this deal done with not only Papua New Guinea but Vanuatu as well. I know Greg Sheridan writing today in The Australian, "If the government would spend less time on Palestine and more time on the Pacific, it might avoid the serial humiliations like its failure to land these security agreements with Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea." I would have thought pretty embarrassing for the Prime Minister, Senator?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, it is embarrassing because it's been the Prime Minister and his government which has talked up the prospects of these deals. In fact, we've had two weeks of photo opportunities from the Prime Minister in the Pacific and his government openly briefing about how they have these deals in the bag, and it's blown up in his face because they didn't actually have it in the bag. Now I hope they can pull this one out of the fire. It is in Australia's national interest to secure these agreements with PNG and Vanuatu, but the Prime Minister has stuffed it up, and he needs to urgently get back on the task and fix it.
MARK LEVY: You know, my concern here, Senator, is that, you know, whether listeners like or respect Donald Trump or not, he's a deal-maker, right, and he's a ruthless negotiator. And we keep hearing about this proposed meeting between our Prime Minister and the leader of the free world, the United States President, Donald Trump. What hope does Anthony Albanese have of doing a deal on tariffs, on AUKUS, to ensure that all progresses when he can't get a deal done with a country like Papua New Guinea, which, mind you, is getting a football team through a $600 million investment?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, that's a very fair question. And how on earth are they going to get a deal with the President if he thinks it's fine to wait more than 300 days before even bothering to try to have a meeting with him? You know, this is a President who you need to sit down with, eyeball, shake hands, and do a deal. And the Prime Minister's been afraid or reluctant to do that for almost a year now, and I think that hasn't been in Australia's national interest. I hope that he can pull off a meeting at his upcoming visit to the United States next month. Although I think, frankly, it's quite a strange way to try and pitch yourself to a U.S. administration by going over there and trumpeting your recognition of a Palestinian state, which is completely against their foreign policy of not just a Republican administration, but also Democratic administrations.
MARK LEVY: Yeah. Well, while we're in the United States, I'm sure you'd agree, Senator, some terrible and shocking things have been said in the wake of the political assassination of Charlie Kirk, who was virtually killed for daring to speak his mind and share an opinion. What's your response to these vile comments from Senator Fatima Payman, who's suggesting that Charlie Kirk was an awful person who doesn't deserve the media coverage he's attracted after being shot dead?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, you won't be surprised, Mark, that Senator Payman and I have very different worldviews, but even given those differences, I would have thought Senator Payman could at least not dance on the grave of a person who was murdered in a political assassination, a father of two young children, and someone who actually practised civil discourse on university campuses, who thought that the free exchange of ideas in a democracy was a healthy thing to do, and he's paid the ultimate price with his life. Now, whether you agree with Charlie Kirk or not, we should all be disgusted by the fact that this violence has come to a university campus in the United States, and someone has been killed for their beliefs, and I really think Senator Payman should reconsider her views and apologise.
MARK LEVY: Net zero. I'll come to sort of your position on that in just a moment, and I know there's a review going on, so you'll probably give me that response. But on the government's announcement today, we're hearing that it'll be a target range rather than a single number. What are you expecting to hear this afternoon from the government?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, I think they will set quite an ambitious target, and I think Australians are entitled to ask how they're going to achieve it, given that in the last three years they haven't reduced emissions at all. The Abbott government, the Turnbull government, and the Morrison government all reduced emissions more than Anthony Albanese has in his first term, and they've already got an ambitious 2030 target. Doubling down on that to 2035 without a plan to achieve it, I think, is reckless and will harm our economy and hurt households.
MARK LEVY: How far are we away from hearing what the Opposition's position on net zero is?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I think not too far away, we're going through our internal party processes, we are having a healthy debate as we must do after a big election defeat and colleagues are motivated by putting Australia's national interest first. Of course we understand we've got environmental obligations and that's important, but not at the cost of trashing our economy and not at the costs of driving jobs overseas.
MARK LEVY: Is it difficult to argue against what the government's doing when you haven't got a position yourself?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I think, I understand why people want us to come to a position soon, and I want that too, but we do have time to get it right, and we must get it right. I don't want to rush into a position that's wrong. I'd rather take the time to get it right, give colleagues the opportunity to have a say and listen to the Australian people about what they want.
MARK LEVY: Alright, one last one, Senator, and you're always so giving of your time, and I really appreciate that, and I know the listeners do as well. You've been promoted into the senior leadership team in the wake of Jacinta Nampajimpa Price being dumped from the shadow frontbench. Unless things turn around quickly, Labor could be in power for another two terms. Do you concede that to be the case, or can the Coalition make some sort of miraculous comeback?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I'm very determined to help make sure that's not the case because I think that will be a disaster for our country. I don't think this government is going to get better by getting more terms in power. I think the economic situation they've placed us in, with productivity going backwards, cost of living going upwards, is not going to get any better. And we're not going to get any safer. This is a government that fails to invest the necessary funds in our defence and national security in the most uncertain time we've faced since the end of World War II. So I'm working very hard to make sure this is a government that is out of office very quickly.
MARK LEVY: All right. Well, James Paterson, you're a straight shooter. That's what I respect about you. And we'll wait and see what the government's got to say for itself this afternoon after its cabinet meeting in Sydney. Appreciate your time, as always.
ENDS