June 14, 2024
.png)
ERIN MOLAN: I'm joined now by shadow home affairs minister James Paterson. James, great to chat with you. Thank you so much for coming on. How crucial is a meeting like this for Australia? I mean, you can be as critical as you like about the CCP, but that does not mean that we don't need dialogue and this is not good for Australia.
SENATOR PATERSON: You're right, Erin. We welcome Premier Li. He's a welcome visitor in Australia and this is an important bilateral relationship and I don't want to shock you, but the issues go a little bit deeper than panda diplomacy as well. And dialogue is important not just when we agree but actually particularly when we disagree. In fact, there's a very long list of issues that we hope that Prime Minister Albanese is able to raise on Australia's behalf when he meets the Premier, including the detained Australian, Yang Hengjun; including the unsafe activities of the People's Liberation Army in our region towards the Australian Defence Force personnel; including the record levels of foreign interference and espionage in Australia's democracy, the cyber attacks; very serious human rights issues domestically in China, and a whole range of other things. This is an opportunity for us to stand up for ourselves, to articulate our national interest and to have that heard at the highest levels of the Chinese government.
MOLAN: How would you approach it, James, if you guys were in power? What would you do to ensure that we continued to try and rebuild trade, and none of which was our fault, by the way, any of the issues with that. But how would you tackle it in a way that would still be tough and uncompromising in laying down the law of the land, but without compromising things that we need, because we're so dependent on China.
PATERSON: We would do it robustly, respectfully, and directly, as well as publicly because critical to who we are as a liberal democracy is a country that stands up for ourselves and our values and is not shy in speaking out and will not be coerced into silence. And the truth is that the Chinese government is unwinding its campaign of economic coercion against Australia, not because they've been charmed by the Prime Minister or charmed by Penny Wong, much less Don Farrell. It's because they've made an assessment that it did not achieve their objectives. They hoped it would damage the Australian economy, and they hoped it would change our public policy settings. And they also hoped that other countries would watch it and decide not to stand up to China. But none of those things happened. Our economy proved resilient. We stood behind that policy settings and other countries watched what happened to Australia and said we're going to reduce our dependence on China so they don't have that leverage over us. So that's the reason why they're unwinding it. And we should take great confidence from that and be able to stand up for ourselves in knowing that they will continue to unwind it because it's in their national interest to do so.
MOLAN: Yeah, I don't understand the fear factor in speaking publicly or standing up for our nation publicly. I mean, we do anything, the US does anything, the UK does anything, and China, either directly or through their newspaper, come out so strongly about everything, they come out. It doesn't matter what it is, they have no qualms coming out publicly and smashing anything they don't like. So, you'd think that they would potentially respect that in another country?
PATERSON: Well, I think the principle of reciprocity is a really important one international relations. And if the Chinese government can freely criticise the Australian government, both through its own spokespeople but also through their organs, as you mentioned, Chinese language media and elsewhere, then we should also feel free to do the same, particularly as a liberal democracy that supports and protects and promotes freedom of speech. And it would be not be being true to ourselves if we silenced ourselves. And unfortunately, I do think the Albanese government has deliberately dialled back any public criticism of the Chinese government, whether it's on domestic issues, including human rights in China, whether it's on the South China Sea or whether it's on foreign interference in our own democracy, because they are obsessed with the bilateral relationship, as if the bilateral relationship is an end in itself rather than a means to an end. And the end is securing Australia's national interest.
MOLAN: Yeah, brilliantly said. Hey, before I let you go, I had Michaelia Cash on here a few weeks ago and she made mention of the fact that this is the most united Coalition party she's ever been a part of, and she's obviously been in politics for a fair while. But this week we've had a couple of bits of internal rumblings and external, to be honest, quite public. Hollie Hughes and Angus Taylor, a little bit of argy bargy there. Also, some talk amongst some backbenchers about Peter Dutton's call on 2030 emissions reduction targets and the ditching of that, and some people saying, did we miss a meeting? Are there little bits of something starting to happen behind the scenes in the Coalition that we should be aware of?
PATERSON: My view Erin is that Angus Taylor is doing an outstanding job as our shadow treasurer. He's one of the most deeply substantive policy thinkers in the federal parliament and the shadow cabinet, he's doing a great job. Hollie Hughes is also a very valued colleague and a friend, and I do understand why she's been very distressed by her preselection result. She worked very hard to get where she is, she was making a really good contribution and to have that taken away as a result of a democratic preselection in the New South Wales Division is a very tough thing. When it comes to climate targets Peter Dutton said something that's very consistent with our approach to this issue since we were in opposition. We voted against Labor's 43% emissions target by 2030 because we believe it is unachievable and inappropriate, and it will do real harm to the Australian economy because it relies on getting to 82% renewables by 2030 and no one believes that that's possible. We support emissions reductions, we support net zero by 2050, but we're going to do it in a sustainable way that doesn't cost Australian jobs or competitiveness. And we're going to do it by relying on proven technologies like emissions for nuclear technology, which is used widely around the world in advanced economies. And actually, we think we're the only ones who can sustainably reduce emissions while maintaining a strong and productive economy.
MOLAN: Okay, one word answer because I don't have any time left. Does Angus Taylor want Peter Dutton's job, Senator?
PATERSON: No, I don't think so.
MOLAN: Well said. Thank you so much, really appreciate your time.
PATERSON: Thanks, Erin.
ENDS
