|
April 28, 2025
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
James. Good morning.
JAMES PATERSON:
Great to be with you, Stephen.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
Last week to go, the latest Newspoll suggests that most voters want to get rid of the Albanese government, but don't think that the Coalition have done enough to prove that they're ready to govern yet. I guess the difference here is that this is going to be a particularly hyper-local election. That poll says you've lost the presidential campaign, as people like to call it. How are things going on the ground in those seats that you need to win?
JAMES PATERSON:
We've been getting very positive feedback from our candidates in the field, particularly in those target seats that will decide the election outcome. They've been on pre-poll for four days now and have been incredibly warmly received. So we're very encouraged by that. And the truth is, we don't have a Presidential system of politics in this country. We have a Westminster system where there are 150 local elections, and whichever party wins the most of those local elections is the party that will form government, not a popularity contest at the national level.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
Yes. That's right. But in recent years, we've seen people make their decisions based on the respective leaders more than on those at the local level. This one seems to have gone back to the way the system is supposed to work. Are there any seats that have surprised you out there?
JAMES PATERSON:
I think you'll see enormous regional variation in the results on election night. I think you'll see some traditional safe Labor seats with massive swings against the government, and you might see some smaller swings in other seats that have been hotly contested and where both parties have put in a lot of money because they are the traditional marginal contests. So it's going to be hugely varied. And the truth is, the result probably won't be evident early on election night. We may not even have a result at all on election night, or it might be very late in the night before it becomes clear. Because those on the day booths, as it was in the Queensland state election, might be initially encouraging for Labor. But when the pre-polls and postals come in, I think they'll be much stronger for the Coalition, and it could be a very late night of counting.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
This should have been a cost of living election. Cost of living being the first, fourth, fifth and probably through to the top six topics that are front of mind for Australians and then national security probably comes in somewhere after that. Although the government has tried to fight this as a health election. Why has the Coalition been reluctant to, I guess, engage them on that? Because the Mediscare campaign, which has been resurrected for probably the fifth time now, is based on falsehoods, but it's taken a long time for the opposition leader to actually fight back against that.
JAMES PATERSON:
I don't think we've been reluctant. Peter Dutton talks about this in press conferences and speeches almost every day of the campaign so far, and Anne Ruston debated the Health Minister at the National Press Club just last week. And I think we've got a very good story to tell here. On our watch, when we were last in government, the bulk billing rate was 88% at the height of the pandemic. But going all the way back to when Peter Dutton was health minister, it was 84%. On Anthony Albanese's watch it's dropped to 77%, and on average, people are paying $43 out-of-pocket costs just to see the GP. So it's become much harder and much more expensive to see a GP on Anthony Albanese's watch, and we will spend more than Labor on health if we win the next election.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
I want to talk about that for a moment. Because the Prime Minister said it again in the debate last night, that by wanting to bring in an $8 co-payment, Peter Dutton wanted to abolish bulk billing altogether. That clearly indicates that the Prime Minister doesn't understand what bulk billing is. But aside from myself and Terry Barnes, nobody has actually explicitly said we have a Prime Minister that doesn't understand what bulk billing is.
JAMES PATERSON:
Yes. Well, I think that's a very good way to put it. And he's been telling this lie throughout the campaign that if you need to see a GP, all you need is your Medicare card. Well, that was blown up in the first Sky News debate, where he presumptuously told a member of the audience that all she needed was her Medicare card. And she responded, in fact, she also needed her credit card. And in her case, I think she was paying about $60 to $80 of out-of-pocket costs. So, I mean, the Prime minister is gaslighting the Australian people on this. But they know in their own experience, when they go to see a GP that there's either an extraordinarily long wait time for a bulk billed place, or they have to pay if they need to get seen in a more timely way. And for a lot of Australians, that's more expensive than it ever has been. And we know many are putting off going to get medical care because of this Prime Minister's failure to deliver an affordable health system.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
Well, I made that comment last week that I, you know, during the Howard years, I could go to a clinic and get completely bulk billed. There was no co-payment. I go to probably the most affordable GP here in Canberra, and I pay $47 out of pocket. And we know that bulk billing rates are lower here in Canberra than anywhere else. And as I say, they probably should be if we've given that we've got some of the higher incomes in the country. But it really does tell a different story to what is being portrayed out there.
JAMES PATERSON:
That's right. And one of the problems is there's a shortage of doctors around the country. And that's particularly evident in regional areas. And this government has done nothing to address that crisis. We've got a very positive plan to address that, and we are promising to help train more doctors and help make sure that doctors are paid well for what they do, so they can see people in the community when they need to, but this government's only answer to that is spin and lies. And Australians shouldn't expect that these things are going to magically improve if this government gets another three years in office. Just look at what happened in their first three years in office to judge what will happen in the second term.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
I want to talk defence for a moment, because the Coalition has announced $21 billion in additional defence spending, but it's fair to say that over the last two decades, governments of all stripes have neglected our defence spending for far too long. But isn't it incumbent on you to tell us how you're going to spend that money?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, I've seen some commentators make this point that the opposition should be announcing all of the specific platforms and munitions and technologies that we'd purchase with this money, but you don't have to cast your mind back very far to understand why that would be a mistake if we did that. Because in his major defence and national security address prior to the last election, Anthony Albanese promised to put Tomahawk missiles on the Collins-class submarines. Now, there are only two problems with that plan, which he discovered when he got to government. The first is that the type of Tomahawk missiles that could go on a submarine were no longer in production, and the United States had no plan to resume production of those missiles. And number two, the modifications required to the submarine to allow them to be fitted was so extensive that it would be prohibitively costly and complex to do so. So we're not going to follow Anthony Albanese's failed example on defence and national security. We're not going to make commitments that we can't enter into in government. We're going to follow the advice of defence officials to make sure we get it right.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
But isn't that part of the problem? That defence officials have been giving the government bad advice for too long now?
JAMES PATERSON:
Look, no department is perfect, and defence acquisitions certainly have had a history of cost overruns and delays. But politicians randomly engaging in negotiations with weapons manufacturers without the benefit of advice and briefings from the military is a reckless thing to do. And that's what the Prime Minister did before the last election. We're not going to repeat his mistakes.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
But surely you can give us broad strokes of where the money will be spent. So, you know, I'm not saying specifically what type of missiles, but you might say, you know, some of this is going to go towards missile technology. Some of it will go towards hardware. You know, some of it will go towards submarines or airplanes or whatever they might be.
JAMES PATERSON:
You're right. And we can and we have. And one specific commitment we've made is that we are going to restore the fourth squadron of Joint Strike Fighters, the F-35s, that this government has cancelled. That's a straightforward commitment to make in opposition, because it was one the government previously committed to. And we're just reversing that. But we've also given some detail about the general areas where this will be spent. Guided weapons are absolutely a critical part of that. But so is sustainment. So is recruitment and retention. So is investment in our bases. I'm deeply worried that this government is going to fail to meet the deadline of 2027 for HMAS Stirling, our base in Western Australia, which is supposed to host a rotational force of US Virginia-class submarines. That is the first deadline we face in AUKUS. And if we fail at that first hurdle, everything else is jeopardised. But this government is ripping money out of investing in facilities like that at a time when we need to be investing more.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
Now, last time you and I spoke, we were talking about an announcement in Janes magazine, a very highly respected defence magazine that Russia had approached Indonesia to basically store long range military aircraft on Indonesian airfields. The government came out and said nothing to see here. The Russians, haven't asked the Indonesians to build a base on their land, which was never the right question anyway. We now find out that the government actually knew about this before the election campaign started.
JAMES PATERSON:
The Prime Minister has told a lot of lies in this campaign, but this is one of the most reckless and irresponsible. You cannot lie to the Australian people about national security matters that affect them. But that's what this Prime Minister has done, and so have many of his senior ministers. In fact, the Prime Minister compared this report to a fake moon landing. And Murray Watt, one of his senior frontbenchers, compared it to the Loch Ness Monster. It now turns out, in fact, it does appear that there was a proposal from Russia to Indonesia. And the government has denied a briefing to the opposition under the bipartisan conventions that we normally follow in this country. I think this is reckless and irresponsible in the extreme. And the Prime Minister really needs to explain now, today, when he does his press conference; what did he know? When did he know it? And what did he do about it? And why did he think it was okay to mislead the Australian people about it?
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
Because, I mean, this was blatant and I put it down to, and I'm sure he'll come up with some tricky response, you know, well, we asked the Indonesians and they said, no, but as I say, they asked the wrong question, which it would now appear was deliberate.
JAMES PATERSON:
This is a guy who's really loose when it comes to the details of national security. He claimed that the Chinese research vessel was being monitored by the Australian Defence Force, when in fact it was being monitored by the Australian Border Force. He claimed that we learned about the live firing exercises in the Tasman Sea from the Chinese Navy at the same time, from defence channels than we did from a Virgin Australia pilot. In fact, we found out first from the Virgin Australia pilot. He claimed the Chinese government gave us adequate notice of those live firing exercises, when in fact they gave us none at all. Yet when he can't get the details right, or he is in fact willing to lie about such grave matters of national security, what does that say about his integrity? And what does that say about what else he's lying to the Australian people about in this election?
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
What do you make of last night's debate? I think the debates are a great idea, and the fact that there were four different formats is good, but I don't know that the opinion of the people in the room actually matters that much from the perspective of other voters. I mean, just because 60 people in a room say they're going to vote one way doesn't mean that I'm going to think the same way. What do you take away from the fact that the Prime Minister, as far as those 60 voters were concerned, won that debate fairly comprehensively?
JAMES PATERSON:
Look, I wouldn't read too much into that supposed room of undecided voters. I'm sure that the companies involved did a very diligent effort to select them. But I think history shows that it's very rare for Liberal leaders to win those rooms in debates like this, even when we win the election. I think what matters is the audience at home and Australians at home, and I think they do know that cost of living has got completely out of control on Anthony Albanese's watch, that he has no plan to get it back under control and that if he is re-elected, particularly in a minority government with the Greens and the Teals, things are only going to get worse in his second term. And there is a better way with a Dutton Coalition government.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
So, what do you need to do differently in this last week to win the only poll that really matters?
JAMES PATERSON:
We need to make sure that those voters who are undecided, and that is a very significant proportion of the electorate, hear our message about the immediate relief we will give them to the cost of living, including our petrol and diesel tax cut of $14 a tank, including our tax rebate of up to $1,200 for up to 85% of taxpayers, including our plan to drive more gas into the system to drive energy prices down, particularly on the east coast, including a plan to make our country and our community safe again.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
Next question, when are you planning to make a jump to the lower house?
JAMES PATERSON:
I'm one of those people who is very happy in the Senate. I didn't run for the Senate by accident, or because I couldn't get a lower house seat; the Senate is the right place for me.
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
James, good to talk. You will catch up again soon.
JAMES PATERSON:
Thank you, mate.
ENDS