Media
|
Transcripts
July 25, 2026
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, as expected, of course, at a national conference of the Labor Party, the Prime Minister and the government have prevailed on the floor of the conference on issues of foreign policy, defence and national security. That was always going to be the case because these are tightly managed affairs. The Prime Minister was never going to be rolled at the conference.
But the real question is what concessions were made to Labor factions and grassroots members behind the scenes in order to get their acquiescence at the conference today? Ed Husic has been whipping these branch members, unions and others into a frenzy on Israel-Palestine, the US alliance, and many other issues. And in order to get compliance from those Labor Party members and conference delegates today, the Prime Minister made concessions.
We know at least one of those concessions. The Australian Labor Party now no longer believes it's necessary for Hamas to disarm. That's an extraordinary proposition for a party of government to adopt. They have omitted their previous demand that the terrorist organisation responsible for the atrocities on the 7th of October and many other crimes against innocent civilians now no long needs to disarm according to the ALP National Conference. But what other concessions were made behind the scenes to make sure that the Maritime Union, for example, refused to second Ed Husic's motion on genocide and other issues?
These are questions that the Prime Minister must answer. These are the questions the Prime Minister must be upfront about. Australia's foreign policy, our defence and national security settings, must be determined by the national interest, not by the most left-wing branch member of the Labor Party or faceless men and women behind the scenes at Labor's national conference.
Secondly, I just want to briefly comment on the controversy surrounding the Prime Minister's attendance at a fundraising dinner at a Sydney home recently that was previously of interest to the Australian Taxation Office. The Prime Minister is hiding behind the Labor Party here, saying that donations are a matter for them. Well, that might be true, but the Prime Minister is not just a random political candidate, he's the Prime Minister of our country. And how he spends his time, who he spends time with, the homes that he dines in is a matter of legitimate public interest, and his refusal to answer any questions about this dinner or the source of these funds raises very serious questions about him and his judgement, and it's time that he fronts up.
I understand the Prime Minister will be on Insiders tomorrow with David Speers. I hope he has good answers as to the due diligence he did before he agreed to attend this dinner, towards the source the funds that ultimately will be donated to the Labor Party. How did he satisfy himself? Was he familiar with the ATO's interest in this home or the family associated with it? These are the bare minimum questions we should expect the Prime Minister to be upfront about. Happy to take some questions.
JOURNALIST: Do you believe that it is likely that the Labor Party will settle its position today on the foreign policy issues, given that we have seen, you know, backbench and branch revolts from within the party on other issues like AUKUS?
PATERSON: I think it's very clear that the Labor grassroots is out of step with the Labor government when it comes to key foreign policy and national security issues, whether that's Israel-Palestine, the US alliance or AUKUS. And the government has had to go to extraordinary lengths to twist arms to make sure that the Foreign Minister Penny Wong, the Defence Minister Richard Marles and ultimately the Prime Minister were not embarrassed on the floor of the conference today. But those issues have not gone away. We've got multiple prominent former Labor ministers like Peter Garrett, Gareth Evans, running around the country with an inquiry into AUKUS trying to whip up further discontent on that issue and undermine the bipartisan support for what is Australia's most important signature national security policy. The truth is the government needs to do much more to make the case for AUKUS, the US alliance and other core national security issues in Australia's national interest, not allow them to be undermined by Ed Husic or anyone else.
JOURNALIST: Would you have liked to have seen this debate actually play out to get a better idea where the rank and file in the party stands, noting that this is a kind of debate that's unique to the Labor Party itself, the Liberal Party I don't believe goes through a similar process?
PATERSON: I think it is very telling that rather than have the debate and win the debate, the Prime Minister and his government would prefer to shut down the debate. I think that shows what he knows. He knows that deep down there is deep divisions within the Labor Party on core national security interest issues, on core foreign policy issues, and on core defence policy issues. The Prime Minister is worried that he would be embarrassed on the floor of the conference if AUKUS was allowed to be debated, or if Israel-Palestine was allowed to be debated, or indeed the US alliance was allowed to be debated. I think he shut that down because he was afraid about where it would go.
JOURNALIST: And it seems out of this conference that a lot of concessions made for unions, the establishment of a Fair Work Court. What is your reaction to sort of the industrial relations direction that the government is taking off the back of this conference?
PATERSON: Well, I'm a Victorian, and we can all see, and we live every day with the consequences of handing over industrial relations policy to the union movement. It's led to unprecedented allegations of corruption in this state, with $15 billion of taxpayers' money going to organised crime, bikies and the CFMEU because the CFMEU has essentially been in charge of the Big Build projects under the Andrews and Allan governments here in Victoria. Now, whether the Victorian government changes premiers this week to Ben Carroll, the truth will be the same. Labor, at the state and federal level, is run by unions for unions, not for the members, not for workers, but for the union officials and, it is taxpayers who are ultimately worse off. So I'm very concerned that Federal Labor is following in the footsteps of Victorian Labor and allowing unions to dictate public policy.
JOURNALIST: [unintelligible] See if the Labor Party in Victoria does decide to roll Jacinta Allan this week?
PATERSON: Yeah, look, I fully expect that Jacinta Allan is in her final days as Premier of Victoria. The Victorian Labor Party is in sheer panic about the polls and about her personal standing with the public. But the truth is, Ben Carroll has sat around the cabinet table in Victoria for a decade. He sat around that cabinet table with Daniel Andrews as Premier, he sat around that table with Jacinta Allan as her Deputy Premier, and he's participated in every single decision that the Labor Party has made in Victoria. He wears the consequences for where Victoria finds itself now. He stood shoulder to shoulder with Jacinta Allan in refusing to call a royal commission into the Big Build, in refusing to give our anti-corruption commission here in Victoria the powers it needs to go after the money that was stolen from Victorians and federal taxpayers. And he might have a shift of policy in the next few days, he might do a backflip, he might call the Royal Commission, but I think we all know why he and his colleagues resisted it for so long and that is because they have too much to hide.
JOURNALIST: Both you and the Prime Minister this week have pointed to the risks and the concerns around the rise of One Nation, and Labor put forward how it will respond by saying they will look to practical responses. What do you make of that, given that you made that speech a few days ago where you talked about this issue?
PATERSON: Well, I think that overwhelmingly the Liberal Party's primary political opponent is the Labor Party. They are a party of government, we are a party of government. We're in competition with them over who can govern this country. But that doesn't mean we don't have other political rivals who are trying to steal votes and seats from us. And those political rivals should have legitimate scrutiny as well, particularly if they're polling well, particularly if they promise and aspire to forming government as One Nation and Pauline Hanson does. And the truth is Pauline Hanson has been in hiding for several weeks on a European holiday. Rather than fronting up and answering questions about the extreme and unhinged views of her long-time Senate colleague Malcolm Roberts, who has espoused some of the most ridiculous and absurd conspiracy theories, including about the US alliance, including about AUKUS, including pharmaceutical companies, including about chemtrails, even endorsing people who have raised questions about 9-11 and school shootings. I mean, this is really extreme stuff. Pauline Hanson should come out of hiding, should front up and should answer basic questions about her close colleague and his views and whether or not they represent One Nation's views.
JOURNALIST: That's everything I had on my list, Senator.
PATERSON: Thank you very much.
ENDS