Media
|
Transcripts
July 28, 2026
SHARRI MARKSON: All right, and joining me to discuss this, and of course, the Victorian politics today, is Shadow Defence Minister James Paterson. James, great to see you. Look, the Governor was very clear there in warning that there could be a fourth interest rate rise at the board meeting on August 11. And that is a prospect that will alarm every family, given the cost of living, high petrol prices, high power bills, high grocery items.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: That's right, Sharri, it's very bleak news for households today in hearing that warning from the RBA Governor. I think most Australians had thought that the recent round of rate rises under Labor had come to a conclusion and that it was going to stay at this level, at least, for some time, if not be reduced in the future. I think it would be a massive psychological blow for a lot of Australian families and for our economy if there is another rate rise, and it will be directly linked to Labor's inability to control spending. They are spending record highs as a proportion of our economy, and that is driving up inflation, and driving up interest rates, and Jim Chalmers and Anthony Albanese are directly responsible for this if it happens.
MARKSON: I mean, I just played that comment, but she was very pointed when she said that inflation was a problem before the recent oil prices. So she's really pretty clever in not letting the government off the hook there.
PATERSON: And earlier this year the RBA Governor made very clear that fiscal policy, that is the tax and spend settings of the Albanese government, is putting upward pressure on inflation and that if the Federal government did not do more to rein in spending then the RBA would have no choice but to increase interest rates. So make no mistake, they will own any interest rate rise from here.
MARKSON: I'm going to return to your state of Victoria. Of course, Ben Carroll sought to address voter concerns today by calling that royal commission and signaling action in other areas. Do you think voters will buy this message that it's a new era?
PATERSON: Well, today, Ben Carroll said that he's not Daniel Andrews and he's just not Jacinta Allan. That's true, but he was an accomplice of Daniel Andrews and an accomplice of Jacinta Allan. He was Jacinta's deputy premier. He sat around the cabinet table with both of them for almost a decade. And every decision this government has made, which has put Victoria in the parlous state that it is, including refusing to call a royal commission until today, he owns, he took part in, he stood shoulder to shoulder with Jacinta Allan and Daniel Andrews on those decisions. And the only reason that he has backflipped today and the government has allowed him to backflip is not because they've had a sincere change of heart, not because there's suddenly become concerned about corruption two years after these revelations started by Nick McKenzie in The Age. It's because they realise it's become a political problem for them and in an ultimate act of cynicism they're hoping to manage that political problem by calling a royal commission which they hope will report long, long, into future when they're gone from public office.
MARKSON: I mean, they couldn't be having the daily hearings during an election campaign. There's no way they'd do that. Look, I'm interested, James, and you're obviously very close to Jess Wilson's campaign because your lovely wife works for her. Do you think this change in leader today makes it tougher or easier for Jess Wilson to win the election in November?
PATERSON: Jacinta Allan had 71% of Victorians who disapproved of the way she was doing her job. So anybody who replaces her would, presumably, help lift the Labor Party vote by a little bit at least, and it might narrow the contest a bit more. But fundamentally, I think Victorians will look at this government that's had 12 years in office as a tired, old, corrupt government that has allowed our state to fall into complete disrepair, the potholes that litter the roads, the community safety and crime crisis, the investment that's fleeing Victoria, the highest unemployment rate in the nation, the $200 billion of debt that we're hurtling towards. They'll look at that, and they'll think, Ben Carroll helped make that mess. He can't clean up this mess. Only a fresh start with Jess Wilson and her Liberal and National team and their plan will turn this state around.
MARKSON: But even with that shocking record, I mean, the polls are very tight. So if Ben Carroll does lift them slightly, I mean it could be the case, couldn't it, that they win in November.
PATERSON: Well, depending on the polls, Labor is polling in the low 20s to mid 20s, he would have to lift their primary vote by a lot to put Labor in a competitive position, certainly before they could even dream of returning to majority government. But we take nothing for granted. We understand that there is a contest to be had here, there is case to be made, and that's why Jess travelled around the whole state. She visited every single one of the 88 lower house seats across the state, whether they were safe Labor seats or not, to listen to people, to get feedback into her plan to turn this state around.
MARKSON: I just want to turn to the important speech that you gave a few days ago where you warned against voters supporting populist parties, including One Nation. You said, 'the danger is these anti-establishment parties don't just mine grievance about poor economic performance. Whether on the populist left or right, they bring with them a much broader wagon of grudges and resentments. And they are most often defined by a total lack of regard for our institutions more broadly.' Now, clearly you made these remarks because conservative voters are turning to Pauline Hanson, who's, of course, appearing on Paul Murray right after my show tonight. So what's your message to voters about One Nation?
PATERSON: There are three quick points to make here, Sharri. First is, our primary political opponents are and always have been the Labor Party, but One Nation is a political competitor, and they deserve reasonable scrutiny when they make mistakes, and I want to see that happen. The second thing is, I understand why voters are angry, why they're angry with the political system, why they are angry with us, why they want change. But the third and most important point is that while you might want change and you might want to break the system, you've got to be careful about how you vote for change because you might end up breaking more than you want to, including the precious inheritance of Western civilisation, those British institutions. And you'll be voting for, as I said, a grab bag of grievances. Just look at the comments of Malcolm Roberts that have been exposed over the last few weeks. This is a person who said that the Bondi terror attack was possibly an inside job. He shared an antisemitic cartoon on his social media. He's described the United States as the world's greatest terrorist organisation. He's even endorsed someone who is a 9/11 truther and a school-shooting denier. These are really extreme, out there, views, and Malcolm Roberts is not some random candidate. He's been serving in the Senate as Pauline Hanson's right-hand man for a decade. And she has not repudiated him for this. There have been no consequences for this.
MARKSON: Do you think she's had enough scrutiny about these views of Malcolm Roberts?
PATERSON: No, Pauline Hanson is very rarely asked questions about this at all because she very rarely fronts up for tough media interviews and scrutiny. And when she is asked about them, she just fobs them off and tries to move on. She needs to be held account as someone who says she wants to be Prime Minister of this country after the next election, who wants to have a One Nation government. A One Nation government with Malcolm Roberts in and around the cabinet table would jeopardise our US alliance, would put our national security at risk. What portfolio would Malcolm Roberts serve in?
MARKSON: Should she dump him?
PATERSON: Would he be the Foreign Minister? Would he be the Defence Minister? Would he be the Home Affairs Minister? There should be consequences for the things he has said if Pauline Hanson disagrees with them. This is someone who has also attacked AUKUS. This is also someone who's said that the US Air Force is putting chemicals on the US people with some sort of experiment.
MARKSON: So should she dump him?
PATERSON: This is wild and wacky stuff. I think there should be consequences. It's up to Pauline to decide what those consequences are. It is up to her to decide what she will tolerate.
MARKSON: What consequences, what do you think?
PATERSON: Well, I'm not here to run One Nation for One Nation. That's a decision...well, I wouldn't want to have a colleague with views like that, I would not want to share a party room with a colleague who had extreme views like that. If Pauline chooses to share the company of Malcolm Roberts, to value him on an ongoing basis as a colleague, then that reflects on her and the kind of government that she would lead if she were to form a government after the next election.
MARKSON: All right, and of course we'll hear what she has to say on Paul Murray's show after this. James Paterson, thank you very much for joining us as always.
ENDS