|
April 16, 2025
JAMES PATERSON:
Good evening, everyone. Well, the Prime Minister has told a lot of lies in this campaign. He's lied about the Coalition's record on health. He's lied about the Coalition's record on education. He has even lied about falling off the stage. But the lie he told tonight about negative gearing is the most bald-faced lie he's told in this campaign so far. He said flat out, when asked by David Speers, that the government did not commission or initiate any advice from Treasury about negative gearing. But we know that's not true. And if you're in any doubt, and since we're here at the ABC, here's the headline. 'Treasurer Jim Chalmers concedes he asked Treasury for negative gearing modelling.' Now I understand the Treasurer might be standing up after me, I hope you ask him whether it is true that he commissioned this modelling and whether the Prime Minister attempted to mislead Australians about this issue, and whether indeed he in fact has a secret plan on negative gearing, given he lied so plainly about it tonight. Happy to take questions.
JOURNALIST:
Senator Paterson, does Peter Dutton accept the climate change science or not?
JAMES PATERSON:
Yes, of course he does. We're committed to the Paris Agreement. We're committed to net zero by 2050. It's one of the reasons why we're spending $331 billion to transition Australia to emissions-free nuclear technology, which is 44% of Labor's renewable only program.
JOURNALIST:
So why did Peter question the science in that debate?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, he, as the Prime Minister has done, when he was asked, was talking specifically about Thargomindah and wasn't commenting about whether climate change caused that specific incident. But of course, Peter accepts the science of climate change, as he said tonight, and as he said on many other occasions.
JOURNALIST:
Senator, do you think you have to be a scientist to see the impacts of climate change?
JAMES PATERSON: Well, Peter does accept the science of climate change. He said that repeatedly. He said that tonight. And I think it's very clear.
JOURNALIST:
You've been talking about the truthfulness of the Prime Minister. Was it a mistake for Peter Dutton not to apologise earlier for verballing the Indonesian President? Took more than 24 hours, and he's apologised now after 6 p.m. news packages, after print deadlines. Was that a mistake to leave it so long?
JAMES PATERSON:
He apologised in a live televised debate watched by probably hundreds of thousands of people, maybe more. Someone from the ABC will correct me. I don't think that suggestion is correct. He was commenting on a breaking news story. He was relying on media reports. It was a reasonable thing for an opposition leader to do in the campaign, and he's made it clear tonight that he was relying on those media reports.
JOURNALIST:
But it was brought to his attention yesterday afternoon and again this morning that what he said was incorrect. And he didn't concede a mistake or an error then?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, what Peter has said all the way through has been consistent. He relied on those media reports, which did suggest that the Russian government approached the Indonesian government about basing Air Force assets in Indonesia. Now, what the Prime Minister has not yet answered about this is what the government knew, and when they knew it. The Prime Minister appeared to imply tonight that this request was never even made by the Russian government. But we've now got comments on the record from the Russian Ambassador, which don't explicitly, but certainly very strongly suggest that that request was made.
JOURNALIST:
Senator Paterson, on Donald Trump. He was asked whether he trusted Donald Trump. It took less than a sentence before he was using the word disgrace, and he couldn't bring himself to say that he did trust Donald Trump. Does that mean that the relationship would be off to a rocky start?
JAMES PATERSON:
We trust Donald Trump to act in the United States' interest. We trust Xi Jinping to act in China's interest. And I trust Peter Dutton to act in Australia's interest. I trust him to be a strong leader who will stand up for our national interest on the international stage and never take a backward step with any country, friend or foe in any circumstance, and always defend the Australian people.
JOURNALIST:
So, do you trust Donald Trump?
JAMES PATERSON:
I haven't met Donald Trump either.
JOURNALIST:
So you won't say whether you trust him?
JAMES PATERSON:
We trust the relationship that we have with the United States, which is bigger than any one leader. It's been built over generations of service and sacrifice by Australians and Americans in many battles and many conflicts all around the world. It's built on many important agreements like ANZUS and AUKUS, and of course, the free trade agreement negotiated by the Howard government. It is a strong relationship. It is our most important relationship. It is our closest relationship.
JOURNALIST:
Senator Paterson, you keep calling Anthony Albanese a liar. But isn't the truth that the public just thinks you're all liars? Why would you use that attack?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, because it's true. I mean, the Prime Minister lies, and he's particularly lied frequently in this campaign. In fact, the Coalition has established an Albanese Live Lie Tracker, which we will be updating tomorrow morning because there were more lies in the debate tonight on negative gearing and many other things.
JOURNALIST:
And what, you think that will win you the election?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well regardless, Latika, of whether it wins the election or not. I think it's important to point out when the Prime Minister lies, because he's done it so often, so many times in this campaign. And I think the Australian people deserve the truth. I think they deserve to understand what the Prime Minister's record has been over the last 3 years, and what his plans are for the future. And if he could focus on that instead of telling lies about us, I think Australians will be better served by that in the campaign.
JOURNALIST:
Senator, who do you think won the debate?
JAMES PATERSON:
I think very clearly, Peter won the debate as he did win in the first debate. It was a particularly strong exchange on questions of cost of living, housing, and energy. And I think Peter very clearly won the debate.
JOURNALIST:
Peter Dutton made the point twice that Kevin Rudd can't get into the West Wing. Will he remain Ambassador if the Coalition wins?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, we've been saying for all the time that Kevin has been in Washington, D.C., that we want him to succeed in Australia's national interest. But if he's not able to get the access that we need, then that's a problem for Australia and it's a problem for the Prime Minister because he was the Prime Minister's captain's pick. In fact, Penny Wong initially opposed the suggestion of sending Kevin Rudd to Washington, D.C., and that's why the appointment of the Ambassador, a critical role, took so long for the Albanese government to make. If Kevin Rudd can succeed as our Ambassador in Washington, D.C., that's a good thing. If he can't, well, then we will have to deal with that. Thank you everyone.
ENDS