Media
|
Transcripts
July 24, 2025
.png)
PETER STEFANOVIC: So that's where we begin in our discussion with the Shadow Finance Minister, James Paterson this morning. He joins us live from Canberra. Good to see you, James. We've got a bit to get to today, so let's just start there. Quick one on that. The government took it to the election. Will you support the government's push to protect penalty rates?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, we'll have a look at the legislation once it's actually been introduced today. I understand that my colleague, Tim Wilson, only had a briefing as recently as yesterday, so we'll consider legislation carefully. Everyone wants higher wages for Australians, but the government itself has previously said that the independence of the Fair Work Commission is important, and it appears that this bill seeks to undermine that, so we will look at it closely.
PETER STEFANOVIC: Okay, let's move on to our top story this morning, James. The government is looking at winding back our tough biosecurity laws for U.S. beef, which had already been relaxed to a point, but it's beef from second parties, second nations, such as Mexico, that's the problem. Do you support this to be used as a bargaining chip, this watering down of our biosecurity laws?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, Pete, the Prime Minister himself has said that we couldn't relax the restrictions on the importation of U.S. beef because of serious biosecurity concerns. So if the government has found some way of dealing with that issue, protecting our domestic agricultural industry from the introduction of foreign diseases and pests, then they should say so. They should stand up and explain that, not anonymously leak it to a newspaper. Full credit to the AFR for getting the story, but a major story like this, affecting a major export industry of about $11 billion a year and about an $82 billion domestic industry when you include red meat more broadly, deserves more answers than this, deserves more details than this and many of them will be alarmed by the news this morning and they deserves some reassurance.
PETER STEFANOVIC: The National Farmers Federation would be filthy about it I'm sure, I've spoken to them a few times in the past over any attempt to water down biosecurity laws but when it comes to US beef apparently that's okay according to the science as I mentioned it's the secondary nation such as Mexico which would be the problem and could possibly be where, you know, Mad cow disease originates. If that's the case, is there any way to stop, you know, second nations from passing their beef on to the Americans and then the Americans passing it on to us?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well it is more easy than it ever has been to track the origin of species and cattle and other produce, because we've got technology that allows us to do that more easily. Australia does that with our production of meat in Australia, and so there's no reason why that couldn't be done by other countries as well. Perhaps the Prime Minister has found a way through this problem. Perhaps he's found a way of ensuring that beef is only imported that is raised and reared in the United States, that it's not introduced from other third countries that are not subject to the US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. But if he has, he should explain how he's done so. He should stand up today and explain to the beef farmers of Australia that there is no risk for their biosecurity, that he hasn't watered it down. But if he has watered down, I think this is going to be a very difficult one for the government to explain.
PETER STEFANOVIC: Okay, I mean, just a final one on this one, though, is it a good opportunity to be used as a bargaining chip in the tariff negotiations that are taking place at the moment? It doesn't look like, we just heard from Donald Trump a moment ago where he's talked about trade deals that will been done with Indonesia, Japan, the latest one, UK as well, he singled out all these countries but we are in the rest of the world group it appears and not getting much more of an extra break at this stage. So, getting back to beef, which is a problem for the Americans, Trump has said so in the past. Is this perhaps a good way to start?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, the best way to start would be with a meeting with President Trump, and now, 261 days since he was elected President of the United States, the Prime Minister has still not achieved a meeting with him. It is inexplicable that Australia, traditionally a Tier 1 U.S. ally, has gone this long without a meeting between our Prime Minister and a new President. It's extraordinary. Frankly, countries that are far less close to the United States have managed to get audiences with the President in the Oval Office far earlier than this government even appears to have attempted to do so. So that is the critical thing that needs to be done if we're to secure a good trade relationship and, frankly, also safeguard AUKUS and our important national security relationship as well.
PETER STEFANOVIC: Well, on AUKUS, we've now paid a second $800 million to the United States. How do you feel about that? It would surely be hard for the Americans to knock the deal back now?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I have absolutely no problem with continuing to make an investment in the U.S. submarine industrial base to increase the production of Virginia-class submarines to meet our shared deterrence goals in the Indo-Pacific, as long as that is not the government's only strategy and only plan to secure AUKUS. And looking from the outside, it appears that that is the only strategy because, as I said before, the Prime Minister made no attempt to go and see the President in Washington, D.C. and meet with him and make that case. It is not good enough to hope that Bridge Colby and the Pentagon will just arrive at the right conclusion. We have to be actively engaged in this process. We have to roll up our sleeves with deft diplomacy and use every advantage we have in this relationship to demonstrate why AUKUS should continue because it's critical to Australia's national security.
PETER STEFANOVIC: All right, just a final one in your house, James. Sussan Ley, she is already under immense pressure over net zero. Is the Coalition making moves now to ditch it entirely?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Pete, I do understand the legitimate interest that the media and others have in the Coalition's position on net zero. But frankly, for the next three years, our position on this issue is academic. We are in opposition. It's the government's position on this issues that is material that actually affects Australians' lives. And on their watch, emissions are up, prices are up, and the system has become less reliable. That is a trifecta of failure on the Albanese government's watch under their policies. And that is what deserves the most scrutiny and attention. We will go through our processes. We'll come to a conclusion. We will share it with the Australian people in due course. But in the meantime, let's interrogate the failures of this government's policies.
PETER STEFANOVIC: Okay, but isn't net zero at the heart of the marriage of the Coalition, so it matters in that sense?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: It's certainly an important public policy issue and we will go through a structured, thoughtful, considered process to land on a policy that balances the important imperatives that we have, which is we do understand we've got obligations for emissions reduction but we also understand that our first and most important obligation is delivering an energy system to the Australian people which is affordable and reliable and doesn't ship jobs overseas. And so we will go through that process, we'll arrive at a conclusion well before the next election and share it with the Australian people and the media.
PETER STEFANOVIC: What's your preference, James?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I'm not going to publicly canvass my view. I've got an opportunity to have my say through internal processes.
PETER STEFANOVIC: Knew you'd say that. Anyway, good to have you with us, James.
ENDS