Media
|
Transcripts
June 18, 2025
Wednesday 18 June 2025
Interview on Sky News First Edition with Kieran Gilbert
TOPICS: High Court ruling on CFMEU intervention, Jim Chalmers national press club address, tax reform, meeting with President Trump
E&OE:………………………………………………………………………………………….
KIERAN GILBERT: Let's bring in the Shadow Finance Minister, James Paterson. Do you welcome the High Court decision on the CFMEU intervention?
SENATOR PATERSON: Yes, we do, Kieran. It is certainly welcome that the intervention is able to continue, that it was legally robust. But I have to say, I personally remain sceptical about whether or not the CFMEU can be reformed simply by appointing an outside administrator. The truth is that corruption and criminality are core to the business model of the CFMEU, it's how they operate, it's how they've always operated. And for Amanda Rishworth to say that the government won't tolerate corruption and violence in the building sector, that's exactly what the government has tolerated for most of its last term. It was only when they were embarrassed by media reports by Nick McKenzie and other journalists that exposed the true rotten heart of the building industry, and particularly the corruption of the Big Build, publicly funded infrastructure projects here in Victoria, that they were forced to act. But up until then they were happy to turn a blind eye. So the test for this government is actually can they follow through, can they deliver, can they clean up the building industry in this country? Because it's not just important from a law and community safety point of view, although that is critical, but it's also important from a productivity point of view. The construction sector is one of the least productive sectors of the economy on this government's watch because they have empowered the CFMEU with extraordinary authority that is incomparable to around the rest of the world. It's no wonder it's so hard to build anything and so expensive to build it in this country
GILBERT: Yep, indeed. It's certainly been a complaint from the construction sector in your hometown, but right across the nation, is that sort of approach from the unions in construction. I want to ask you about productivity though, that's the focus of the Treasurer today. He's talking about 25 people in the Cabinet room, a very targeted discussion. Is this the way to get things done, to get a bit of buy-in from business, unions and analysts on this?
PATERSON: Kieran, at the National Press Club today, Jim Chalmers will be the arsonist playing the role of the firefighter. He's here to put out the fires that he and the Albanese government set in their first term of government. He said he's going to focus on productivity, on enhancing living standards and on making the budget more sustainable. But in their first three years, they did the opposite of those things. Australians became poorer, our economy became less productive, and our budget became weaker as a direct result of the decisions that Jim Chalmers and the Albanese government made in their first term. So I hope that he is able to help clean up the mess that he started, and it is a good thing that he's recognised the harm that has been done to our economy, particularly on productivity which has been wound back almost a decade to 2016 levels on this government's watch and is now in crisis and will further weaken the living standards that have already gone backwards on the government's watch in their first term, if it's not fixed. So we welcome the productivity roundtable, but we want more than just a meeting, we want a process and we want confidence that the government is going to follow through with productivity-enhancing reform that will make Australians wealthier and make our country stronger.
GILBERT: Part of this is the question around tax. Is it time for the Coalition to take a leaf out of John Howard's book and say, okay, if there's a good reform here, we won't fight about it. We'll get on board and make it bipartisan. Get it done.
PATERSON: In short, the answer to your question, Kieran, is yes, and a fortnight ago on Insiders I opened the door on behalf of the Coalition to working constructively with the government on holistic tax reform. It is self-evident that we do not collect tax in this country as efficiently as we could, and it holds back our prosperity and our productivity and our efficiency as an economy, and there are gains that can be made by reforming the tax system. But that is not a blank cheque for this government to increase taxes and I'm worried that Jim Chalmers will be using his speech today to prepare the ground for higher taxes. Because if you agree that the problem in the economy right now is low productivity, low business investment and falling living standards, how would higher taxes improve any of those things? Higher taxes won't make us more productive, it won't make us richer, it won't encourage business investment. What we need are lower and more efficient taxes, and if that's what the Treasurer is talking about, then he'll have a very willing partner in the Coalition.
GILBERT: It's been a long time since Workchoices but the Coalition is always cautious, it seems, these days when it comes to taking a fight on IR. Do you need to also embrace some of that as well, and push back against some of the industrial relations changes Labor's implemented?
PATERSON: Well, there's no question that this government has extensively re-regulated the labour market, made it less productive, less efficient, and they've empowered unions like the CFMEU to play an even bigger role in the economy. They're now even talking about inserting unions between business and technology like artificial intelligence, which is one of the few positive areas for productive growth in our economy going forward. And putting unions in the way of that would guarantee that doesn't happen. So we are very worried about where this government has taken this country on that issue. We'll be consulting carefully on this over the next couple of years and we'll take to the election commitments that are consistent with what the Australian people expect, and that will include very strong and robust protections for workers' rights, because we do want to have a high wage, high productivity economy where people do have secure employment and we think the best way to do that is by delivering a highly productive and efficient economy.
GILBERT: Can I ask you quickly on the Prime Minister, he is departing the G7 as we speak. Talk that he might go to NATO next week to see, for talks, if invited by the Director-General and others. Should he attend NATO given how volatile things are internationally, and if there is the hope of a face-to-face with Donald Trump finally?
PATERSON: I do think it is a good idea for the Prime Minister to attend NATO, particularly if he can get a meeting with President Trump. But I have to say the Prime Minister's strategy up until now of relying on a chance meeting with the President on the sidelines of an international forum like the G7 or NATO has been proven to be a risky and flawed strategy. Because otherwise it will not be until September when he plans to go to the United States, nearly 10 months after the President was elected, for the Prime Minister to have a first sit down face-to-face meeting with President. That is not adequate when we have big issues in our relationship with the United States and in an uncertain world. He needs to have a face-to-face meeting with the President much more quickly, and it was always a risky strategy to wait until hopefully having a meeting on the sidelines. So yes, I'd be supportive of him going to NATO for many reasons, including the important conversations that will happen that week. Hopefully, though, it will also involve a meeting with President Trump. But if not, the Prime Minister should get to Washington D.C. He should frankly camp out at the Hay Adams Hotel, if that's what's required, until he can get face time with the President, because the President will be making big decisions on things like the future of AUKUS and on our trade relationship, and if we haven't had the chance to persuade him directly face-to-face then we risk getting a very poor outcome on those things.
GILBERT: James Paterson, thank you very much, appreciate it. We'll talk to you soon. And incidentally, at the Hay Adams Hotel, just across the park from the White House. So as James Paterson alludes to, not far if he's called upon to visit the Oval Office.
ENDS