Media
|
Transcripts
August 10, 2026
SHARRI MARKSON: And joining me now is the Shadow Defence Minister, James Paterson, live from Canberra. James, great to see you tonight, and a lot of news to get through. I want to start with the breaking news story that Japan did raise this podcast in a diplomatic cable. James, do you think this shows that they were aware and concerned about those sexist comments made by the Prime Minister?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Sharri, from the excerpts that I've read of the diplomatic cable from Japan to Australia, it's very clear that they don't want this to be a public controversy, that they didn't want to talk about it. Frankly, I don't want to talk about it. Every time I see that footage or hear that footage, again, it is one of the most cringe-worthy things I've ever seen an Australian Prime Minister say about any other political figure, let alone the leader of one of our closest and most important allies. But the reality is it is out in the public. It is being talked about. It has become a source of irritation in our relationship, as we've seen from the comments today via the former ambassador of Japan to Australia. And we've also seen comments from a former advisor to Shinzo Abe, the previous Japanese Prime Minister, and commentary in Japanese media. So this is a problem. It's a problem of the Prime Minister's own making. He put himself in that situation. He made those comments. He made that crude gesture. He raised his eyebrows in the most cringe-inducing way. He's the only person who can fix this, and he should fix it by making a clear and contrite apology.
MARKSON: Do you think there's also a level of hypocrisy from Labor figures, including Tanya Plibersek?
PATERSON: Well, just ask yourself Sharri, if a male Liberal leader made any sort of equivalent comments about any other female political leader, let alone one of our closest and most important allies, what do you think Penny Wong would say about it? When do you think the Labor Party would let go of that? When do you think they would let that slide? They would never let that slide, they would rigorously prosecute that until there was a formal and grovelling public apology. Frankly, they prosecuted things far less controversial than this.
MARKSON: I just want to return to the Royal Commission, which has, as you just heard, declined to hear testimony from Josh Frydenberg. Do you think there should be an explanation from the Commissioner about this?
PATERSON: Yeah, so I think the bare minimum is there needs to be an explanation as to why Josh Frydenberg, our most prominent political leader from the Jewish community and someone whom without there would never have been a royal commission, because of his leadership, has not been called. I'm also concerned, Sharri, to learn that you have not been called. Unfortunately, both you and Josh understand the consequences of antisemitism in Australia because you have personally experienced it, and I think that would be powerful testimony. But I also agree with another comment you made in your opening editorial, which is that maybe even more importantly, we need the Prime Minister to appear before the Royal Commission, we need the Home Affairs Minister to appear before the Royal Commission, and we need the Attorney-General, and the Foreign Minister to appear before the Royal Commission. They should be cross-examined about what they did, and what they didn't do to combat antisemitism in the lead up to the horrific terrorist atrocity at Bondi. And if that doesn't happen, well, then I think it'll be very difficult to take this royal commission seriously. And I would urge the commissioner to reflect not just on what the people who appointed her will think of the work that she does, but what history will judge of this royal commission. History will be watching. History will judge. God forbid if there are further atrocities targeting the Jewish community in the future of our country. I wouldn't want to lead a Royal Commission process that wasn't the most thorough, robust, searching examination of that and made the best and strongest recommendations to make sure it never happened again.
MARKSON: Yeah, really strong comments there. And I think you're spot on that these political leaders do need to be called to give evidence. James, this also comes a week after pro-Palestinian activists were able to cross-examine David Ossip, an Australian Jew, over the alleged actions of Israel in Gaza. So taking that into account, are you concerned also about the direction of the commission and some of the decisions it's making?
PATERSON: In my view, it wasn't appropriate for an Australian Jewish community leader to be cross-examined at length about Israel's military actions. David Ossip is an Australian Jew, he's not an Israeli, he is not a spokesman for the Israeli government, he is not a spokesman for the IDF. And I also don't understand how it's consistent with the terms of reference of the Royal Commission, which are not to examine Israel's conduct in Gaza, or decisions of Israeli government or operations of the IDF, they are to examine antisemitism in Australia. And so, I understand the arguments made by some in defence of the Royal Commission that this was a matter of procedural fairness, but procedural fairness should not allow a Royal Commission to be diverted from its core business of combating and investigating antisemitism. And I think that was an error. I hope it doesn't happen again with future witnesses.
MARKSON: Well said. James, I want to move on to reports in The Australian today that the Albanese government collectively paid three media outlets, controversial media outlets, over half a million dollars. And it's reported that they've previously promoted a problematic Islamic teacher. The Sydney preacher Mohammed Hoblos is banned from Germany, also the Netherlands, over concerns about his ideology. Do you think this is a sign there hasn't been proper vetting before handing out taxpayer-funded grants?
PATERSON: It certainly is Sharri, and unfortunately it's not a first offence from the Albanese Government, or I'm sorry to say the Department of Home Affairs, because last term, when I was the Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, we exposed social cohesion grants which went to organisations that were undermining social cohesion by promoting antisemitism and glorifying terrorism on their social media accounts. It's even worse in some ways that they've made this mistake, this error again, clearly failing to do their due diligence. Only the Albanese government would think you promote social cohesion by subsidising antisemitism, and that's exactly what's happened with these media grants. It's appalling, they should be rescinded, and new processes should be put in place before another dollar goes out the door to any further extremists like this.
MARKSON: Before you go, we learned on the weekend employment data showing that the number of public servants, the public sector, has grown under the Albanese government to nearly 200,000 staff. I mean, how is this sustainable? I mean, this is a productivity issue, certainly a budgeting issue as well.
PATERSON: Well, the only kind of employment growth we're really seeing in our economy right now is in the public service or in closely related social care sectors like the NDIS and health and aged care and education. Now that's important and worthy work, but it cannot be the only source of economic growth and jobs growth in our country. That's not sustainable, it's not productive, and it will ultimately lead to a poorer Australia. What we need is a private sector led growth agenda. We need the private sector out there hiring, putting on staff. But they're not, and it's no wonder with the economic policies of this government.
MARKSON: Senator James Paterson, really appreciate your time, live from Canberra on a sitting week. Thank you.
ENDS