Media
|
Transcripts
August 13, 2026
.png)
PETER STEFANOVIC: Shadow Defence Minister, James Paterson, hello to you. What's your initial response to this deal?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, good morning, Pete. I mean, it's certainly a good thing that Tomago is not going to close. But let's be real here, this bailout is only necessary because electricity prices have become completely unaffordable under Labor, not just for households and small businesses, but for large industrial users like Tomago. And that's because they've put ideology ahead of the interests of workers or taxpayers and have been pursuing net zero with this fervor against all the costs for our economy and our society. And I think it's, you know, I'm glad it's not closing, but it's sad that we now need to be running around bailing out every industrial facility in this country apparently.
STEFANOVIC: Will I mean is this is this just a sign of how things are? I mean, this is a 10 year deal. But what happens then?
PATERSON: Well, it shouldn't be a sign of how things are. We should want to have a country where energy is affordable, where businesses can get what they need to make the great things that Australians are capable of making for our own country and for export without having to be bailed out by the government. And the government obviously has no interest in that. They've given up on that. And instead, they're just going to take from taxpayers, ultimately taxes that you and I and everyone else pays, to bail out these facilities. Otherwise, we'll lose them. And I think that's just a recipe for an inefficient, a sclerotic economy that can't compete on the international stage and Australians will be poorer as a result.
STEFANOVIC: Okay, let's go to these student protests that will emerge a little later on in the day. It's against One Nation. Have you got any thoughts ahead of that, James?
PATERSON: Well, primary and secondary school students should be in school and they should be learning. University students can knock themselves out if that's what they really want to do, but frankly, I think there are better things for young people to be learning than going to protests.
STEFANOVIC: Yeah, I mean does this kind of thing just help One Nation in the end?
PATERSON: Probably. I think One Nation will probably weaponise this quite successfully. They like to claim victimhood status whenever they're criticised. So, as we've seen in other instances where there's been some really inept campaigning against them by Get Up, for example, with that ridiculous stunt at the National Press Club, all they're doing is feeding One Nation and their grievances. And people should reflect on that. If they're really genuinely opposed to One Nation's political success, they should reflect how they've contributed to it.
STEFANOVIC: Elsewhere this morning, and somewhat related to One Nation, it's migration. Is Andrew Bragg freelancing on migration policy?
PATERSON: Well, Andrew was sharing his personal views in his speech at the National Press Club. We are going through our policy development process. We're doing it carefully. We're going it deliberately because we want to have an answer to this problem, unlike the government, who can't actually achieve any of the cuts that they've promised. They've failed to consistently. And unlike parties like One Nation, who can’t give you a clear answer about what it is they want to achieve, who've confused the NOM and the permanent migration intake multiple times. We're going to go through a deliberate, careful process that balances the needs of the economy and society. It's going to take the pressure off housing by bringing migration down, and we're doing that in a careful, deliberate, proper way.
STEFANOVIC: So is he out of his lane here?
PATERSON: Well, my approach to my portfolio is that I don't comment speculatively on other colleagues' portfolio areas. I'm responsible for defence, and if I want to get defence proposals up, I've got to do the work. I've got to demonstrate to my colleagues the value of the proposals I'm going bring forward. I've got to take it through our processes and I get their support to do that.
STEFANOVIC: So if it's not official, I mean, are you surprised? Are you disappointed by what he's had to say? Because some of the Nationals are, Matt Canavan speaking overnight saying, well, this is news to me, because targets are going to be migrants who pick fruit in regional communities, and we need them.
PATERSON: Well, I wouldn't say that I'd be surprised. I would just say that it's a personal view that Andrew has expressed and that the Coalition's policy will be made clear after we've gone through a deliberate, proper process.
STEFANOVIC: What about that 180,000 figure? Is that about the mark for a NOM?
PATERSON: No, we've got more to say about that. We're going to go through, as I said, a deliberative, proper process that actually does the heavy lifting and the hard work on the costings and the implications of all of this, the consultation that's required with colleagues and stakeholders to produce an answer that is going to be right for our economy.
STEFANOVIC: Okay. Well, racing through different topics today, James, is a deal on gambling imminent?
PATERSON: Look, there have been productive negotiations with the government but, as I understand it, no agreement has been reached yet since the last update I had. It's very clear that the Prime Minister's initial proposal has not met the mark of community expectations. It is very clear it can be improved. But it is also important that we get the balance right, that we don't overreach, that we do not inadvertently drive people towards the black market of online gambling, which would not be a good outcome.
STEFANOVIC: Seems like you are in the box seat though for a deal?
PATERSON: Well, I think it's very clear that the Greens are not interested in negotiating with the government in a meaningful way, and it's very clearly the government doesn't have any other pathway to legislate this, and so we're being responsible, we're acting in the national interest, we're going to improve these laws, and if we're satisfied that we've improved them sufficiently, then we'll be able to support them. But we're not there yet.
STEFANOVIC: Ok. In your space, James, there's this story in the Daily Tele today about 147 drone incursions that have been detected in defence airspace at various facilities around the country. We're not sure who's responsible for it. Perhaps it's sinister, but it could just be punters flying up drones. I mean, they do that everywhere. But nevertheless, how alarmed you by that?
PATERSON: I'm very concerned about this reporting in the Daily Telegraph for a couple of reasons. One, it appears to have affected a very significant number of our RAAF bases and some of our most important and sensitive ones, not just Williamtown, but Edinburgh and Amberley and Townsville and others, and that is a very dangerous thing. Obviously, planes fly from these bases. A drone in the sky can be a very dangerous thing for a plane taking off or landing. Secondly, I'm concerned because of the potential to have intelligence captured by drones. And thirdly, I am concerned because the only reason we know about this is because of a whistleblower who came forward to Phil Thompson to draw his attention to this, and it's now been reported. The government hasn't voluntarily disclosed any of this. And I'm not filled with any confidence at all to hear the usual talking points rolled out about how we've got “layered defence” for this. It doesn't appear we have any defence at all, and to the extent there are any layers, the final layer is closing the blinds to make sure sensitive material is not seen through the windows by a drone. It also appears by some of these reports that it's not just a solitary drone, which might be a hobbyist or a kid doing something silly. But there are reports of swarms of drones. Now, teenagers with a $500 DJI are not capable of organising a swarm of drones on a base. That is something that should be really seriously investigated, and we must get to the bottom of it.
STEFANOVIC: That's a good point. James Paterson, we covered a range of issues there, but thanks for your time, as always.
ENDS