|
April 21, 2025
.png)
SARAH FERGUSON:
Victorian Senator James Paterson is the Shadow Minister for Home Affairs and the Coalition's Campaign Spokesperson. James Paterson welcome back to 7.30.
JAMES PATERSON:
Good to be with you, Sarah.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Now, we saw, there you, with the leader, Peter Dutton, in Victoria, again today, talking about crime in a state where offending has increased in many categories, also where the state government is extremely unpopular. How do you explain that support for the Coalition in Victoria is going backwards?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, Sarah, the Prime Minister might not think that crime is his job, but Peter Dutton and the Coalition believe it is our responsibility, and we will take very strong action on it, and we were there in Victoria today for the reasons that you say. Victorians are suffering under a bad State Labor government and a bad Federal government that is soft on crime, and it's led to predictable consequences. And everyone is paying the price, not just the victims of crime who are up, but also every Australian who is paying 35% more for their insurance in part because of increased crime in our community. So we'll continue to argue that message between now and election day, and I think it's resonating with Victorians and Australians.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Isn't part of the problem members of the Coalition struggling to get your stories straight? We saw at the weekend the spectre of your dumped working from home policy revived again by Jane Hume, who said that that policy just hadn't found its appropriate time, that it was good policy. Why can't you get your story straight?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, we've been very clear about this. We heard the feedback from the community. They do not want this policy to be introduced. It was never going to be introduced in the private sector, but we've also said we won't introduce it in the public sector either in Canberra.
SARAH FERGUSON:
So what does Jane Hume mean when she says it's a good policy, it just hasn't found its appropriate time?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, look, I think we've been crystal clear about this from Peter Dutton down, that we are not introducing this policy, that we do not believe in this policy. We understand the importance of flexible working arrangements for Australians including in the public service and frankly there's some very good people who can be very productive from home or in a hybrid arrangement where they come to the office partly, so we very sincerely are not pursuing this policy. We've heard the feedback loud and clear.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Yeah, but Jane Hume clearly thinks it's a good policy. She's a senior member of the front bench. She said it hasn't found its appropriate time, which is true. Her version or your version?
JAMES PATERSON:
The policy of the Coalition is clear. We are not taking this policy to the election. We will not implement this policy if we are successful. We've heard the community. Working from home is here to stay. Flexible work is here to stay.
SARAH FERGUSON:
So there's no answer to the question about why you disagree. But I'm going to move on. So the polls are telling us, it looks like they're telling us that you are struggling to get your messages across. The last big piece of your policy puzzle is defence. How quickly are we going to get the details this week of your plans for defence?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well very soon, Sarah, but we have already said that we'll increase defence spending, we'll spend more and we'll spent it faster than what Labor is and we've outlined some of the things we'll spending on, including restoring the fourth squadron of Joint Strike Fighters which Labor Party cancelled. We think Australia, in a dangerous world, needs that capability, that regionally superior air capability. And so we'll be outlining more about our policies on defence in the coming days.
SARAH FERGUSON:
But aren't voters running out of time to digest complex policies like this?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, I assure you they won't have long to wait at all, Sarah, for that and other important policy issues from the Coalition. We're nearly done.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Well, it's been reported today in the Financial Review that you'll be announcing increases in the defence budget. But the bigger growth to reach 2.5% of GDP, which has been spoken of for a long time now, that won't happen until the 2030s. Is that reporting correct?
JAMES PATERSON:
I'd love to be able to share that detail with you, Sarah, but as you know, it's not my role as Campaign Spokesman to get ahead of my colleagues and their formal announcements, but I assure you, it's not long to wait now at all.
SARAH FERGUSON:
I mean, the reason why this is important is that your Defence Spokesman, Andrew Hastie, has said previously, and I'm quoting him here, that the money that really counts is what's in the forward estimates, that longer-term promises are essentially meaningless. So in terms of the next four years, what kind of increase, lift in defence spending are we going to see in the four years that he says are the ones that matter?
JAMES PATERSON:
I assure you there will be an increase in defence spending in the next four years, unlike the Labor party, who has kicked the can down the road and initially proposed reaching 2.4% by the end of the decade. They've already revised that down to 2.3% by the end of the decade and a very little increase in the forward estimates. We will have an increase in defence spending in the forward estimates, and the exact amount will be specified very soon.
SARAH FERGUSON:
All right, well, putting aside the exact details of the release, is this an opportunity for Peter Dutton to claw back ground on Defence on one of his key subjects under normal circumstances for him? But he lost ground after verbally the Indonesian president. Does this give him the opportunity to claw some of that back?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, we don't view this through a political lens, Sarah. When the Prime Minister and others say this is the most dangerous time for our country since the end of World War II, we actually believe it, and we'll have a policy that meets that standard. This is a government that has cut and delayed defence capability, including infantry fighting vehicles, howitzers and other capabilities. And what they're doing is they're buying future AUKUS capability, which is very important, but they're cannibalising current defence capability to pay for it, rather than increasing defence capability now, so we get the capability we need in the next few years and AUKUS in the future. I think that's a gravely irresponsible thing to do, particularly when you have foreign powers apparently looking to establish military facilities in our region.
SARAH FERGUSON:
But where in the budget, then, is this coming from? If you're talking about increases of that quantity, we'll wait and see exactly when that money is going to arrive. But are these going to be actual figures, or are these going to be aspirational targets for defence, like we saw in the announcement on indexing tax brackets?
JAMES PATERSON:
No, there'll be actual figures in the forward estimates, which we'll set out in a normal way, in the normal time that will demonstrate our commitment to national security and defence. Unlike the Prime Minister, who is not across the details and often late and weak on issues like this, I mean the confusion between his senior ministers this week about whether or not, in fact, Russia did make this request to Indonesia, speaks to that lack of clarity from this government on national security.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Who's going to make this announcement? Will we see Defence spokesman Andrew Hastie, or will he just be standing behind Peter Dutton when Peter Dutton makes the announcement?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, it will be a joint announcement between Andrew Hastie and Peter Dutton, as is usual, as was the case when Peter and Andrew travelled to Darwin together to announce our plan to take back control of the Port of Darwin, a commitment that the Prime Minister said he was going to make but still hasn't followed through with any of the details at all, in fact seems very confused about.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Now, you understand why I'm asking that question, because we haven't seen Andrew Hastie in a frontline role since he was reported to have said that women shouldn't serve in close combat roles because they, quote, disturb the fighting DNA of combat groups. Have you been keeping him away from tricky questions?
JAMES PATERSON:
Not at all. He stood with the entire press pack beside Peter Dutton in a conference in Darwin to announce our policy on that, and we will see more from Andrew throughout the campaign.
SARAH FERGUSON:
And since then?
JAMES PATERSON:
And you will see more of him. Yep, I hear you, and you will see more of him in the coming days as well about this and other issues. Andrew Hastie is an outstanding colleague whom I have immense respect and admiration for, for his service to our country in uniform and his parliamentary service. Let's remember he was Assistant Defence Minister to Peter Dutton under us in government and did an outstanding job there.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Do you think that women in combat roles disturb the fighting DNA of combat groups?
JAMES PATERSON:
I believe that any Australian who wants to pull on the uniform, who can meet the physical standards required of that task, should be allowed to fulfil any single role in the Defence Force, including combat roles, and that's our policy.
SARAH FERGUSON:
Have you discussed it with Andrew Hastie?
JAMES PATERSON:
Yes, we have, and look, unlike Andrew Hastie, I haven't served in a frontline combat role, and I'm humble enough to acknowledge that, unlike the Deputy Prime Minister, I respect the expertise he has. But as Assistant Defence Minister in the last government he sought to make no changes to this policy, and as Defence Minister in a Peter Dutton government he will not seek to make changes to his policy because our policy is anyone who has the ability to serve in those roles, who meets the requirements for those roles, can serve in those role irrespective of their gender or any other irrelevant characteristic.
SARAH FERGUSON:
James Paterson, thank you very much indeed for joining us.
JAMES PATERSON:
Thanks, Sarah.
ENDS