Media
|
Transcripts
August 25, 2025
SHARRI MARKSON: Joining me now to discuss this and more is Shadow Finance Minister James Paterson. Senator, thanks for your time again. Now, are you concerned about this government's apparent plans to hit retirees with higher taxes as part of a wealth redistribution that's in the name of intergenerational equity?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: I'm very concerned about it, Sharri, for two reasons. One, the government did not take to the last election higher taxes. In fact, when they were asked if they planned increased taxes after the election, they rubbished the idea and called it a Liberal Party scare campaign. That means they've got no mandate for higher taxes. But secondly, I'm concerned about higher taxes because it won't be good for Australia. We have a productivity crisis in this country. Productivity went back a decade on this government's watch, and business investment in this country, which is one of the things that increases our living standards, is at multi-decade lows. Higher taxes, whether they're on retirees or companies or family trusts or any other vehicle, are not going to solve our productivity crisis or our business investment crisis. It's going to make it even worse. What we need is for this government to stop its spending spree, to bring spending back down to sustainable levels because, on this government's watch, spending as a proportion of the economy will be the highest it has ever been since 1986, outside of the pandemic period. That is utterly reckless and unsustainable, and it needs to be hauled back in.
SHARRI MARKSON: I mean, James, you're a politician, so you can analyse the language of politicians better than any of us. Listening to the Treasurer and the Prime Minister over the past few days, there's no ruling out any taxes. It's you know that's not our current model. We'll take any decisions to cabinet and go through the usual process. So, in your mind, is there any doubt that the signs are that we are heading for more and higher taxes, particularly focused on retirees?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, I think the most interesting thing here, Sharri, is that it's clear that the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are not on the same page. They are at odds. They have differing levels of willingness to break their election commitments to increase taxes. The Prime Minister has been more categorical in his language. He's not completely ruled it out, but he's made it pretty clear that he doesn't want to increase taxes in this term of parliament. He only wants to do what Labor took to the election. But Jim Chalmers is repeatedly leaving the door open, so much so that the Prime Minister often has to go out the next day after Jim Chalmers to clean up his mess and shut down the speculation that Chalmers has allowed to run free, particularly as he did through the productivity roundtable process. And so there's a clash coming between these two. That's got to be resolved in some way. Are they going to keep faith with their commitments and the Australian people, or are they going to break that commitment and increase taxes? I fear Jim Chalmers is going to win this debate, just as he won the debate with the Prime Minister on the stage three tax cuts, which was another broken promise on tax from Labor in their first term.
SHARRI MARKSON: Look, we've heard that Labor's now expediting its five percent home deposit scheme. So this is now going to start from October. But even the Treasury's own modelling and, you know, this story was in the Australian today. It predicts that this scheme will put up house prices by half a percent over the next six years. So this is just Treasury modelling. I mean, it could be higher than that. But the issue is, if house prices actually go up. Well, that's going to make it more difficult for young people to get into the market. I mean it could be going against the original aim of this, of having a five percent deposit.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: So, Sharri, this scheme is actually originally a Morrison government initiative, and it's one of the few housing policies that's actually got young people into housing. But there's a crucial difference in the way in which the Morrison government implemented this and what Labor now proposes to do. And that is that the Morrison government had an income test and a means test. So it was the genuinely needy people who couldn't save a deposit on their own who were able to buy a house with as little as 5% deposit. The Albanese government recklessly plans to get rid of that means testing, get rid of that income test, so that a millionaire could get a loan from the government to buy a house on just 5% equity. Now, that will drive up house prices. There's no question because it will bring even wealthier people into the market earlier to buy homes than they otherwise would have, because they would have normally had to save that deposit for themselves. And these are people who are capable of, in time, saving that deposit for themselves or getting a market solution where they pay insurance to cover the difference between the deposit they have and the deposit they need. So it's particularly reckless both fiscally and in terms of the housing market, and it will drive up costs.
SHARRI MARKSON: And there's going to be a whole suite of unintended consequences as a result of driving up costs. Now, I want to turn to this unbelievable story that you first revealed, James. So journalist Yoni Bashan at The Australian has now been banned from Parliament House for a full week, all because he reported that Albanese had gifted the Greens a brand new party room at a cost of nearly $900,000. Now, Yoni Bashan wrote this story in Margin Call. He ran a photograph of the newly renovated room. And then the Greens lodged a complaint with a Black Rod. Now, James, as I said, you discovered the astounding amount of money that had been spent. Nine hundred thousand dollars, nearly nine hundred thousand dollars, on a new party room for the Greens. I mean, how is this an appropriate expenditure of taxpayer money? And is this the Prime Minister trying to win over the Greens, who now hold the balance of power in the Senate?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, Sharri, if you want an insight into the spiralling, out-of-control construction costs in this country, this is your perfect case study. This is a single room in Parliament House, which has been renovated by the Albanese government for the Greens at the cost of $886,000. As you say, almost $900,000. You can build a luxury home, or you should be able to build a luxurious home for $900,000. In fact, you could build a perfectly nice home for half that kind of money. So questions really need to be asked here. Why did the Albanese government approve this luxurious, lavishly-appointed party room for the Greens, and what did they get in exchange for that? Because the Greens have been casting some curious votes in the Senate in recent times. For example, they voted against a parliamentary inquiry into the Albanese government's staffing cuts, something they would have normally previously always supported. Is there a quid pro quo here? Have they been bought off with their lavishly appointed party room? I don't know, but I think they should fess up and be honest about it.
SHARRI MARKSON: And shocking as well that Yoni has been banned from Parliament for a week just for reporting on this and for taking a photograph of the party room. I mean, this is taxpayer money, taxpayers deserve to see what that party room looks like. That's for sure. Now, just before you go, James, I want to ask you about the Middle East. Israel is at the moment forging ahead with plans to take over Gaza City in order to eliminate Hamas. Troops are now reportedly on the outskirts of the city. Now, I spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu about this on Thursday night, and he rejected calls from the likes of Australia for Israel to immediately withdraw from Gaza. Have a look.
[CLIP START]
PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: It's like leaving the SS in Germany, you know, you clear out most of Germany, but what, you leave out Berlin with the SS and the Nazi Corps there? Of course not.
[CLIP END]
SHARRI MARKSON: James, your reaction to what he had to say?
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Look, I think it's very unfortunate that the government of Israel believes that this is necessary, but I think they believe it is necessary after careful consideration of the choices that they face. It is not a choice to allow the hostages to continue to languish in tunnels under Gaza City. Hamas has taken the choice of negotiating off the table with unreasonable demands that no self-respecting democratic country should ever agree to meet. It's very easy, 14,000 kilometres away, in our comfort and security of Australia, to judge the choices that Israel has to make. But let's remember, if we were in their shoes, if we were in the same circumstances, and our fellow countrymen continued to be held hostage for almost two years, up to 25 of them, we would want our government to do everything it could to recover them.
SHARRI MARKSON: Absolutely, and the conditions that they're being held in, they're emaciated, they're dying, it's absolutely horrific. James, really appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
ENDS