March 4, 2025
.png)
PETER STEFANOVIC: James Paterson, who I've spoken to a number of times about the port of Darwin, joins us now. 1.3 billion as Matt just mentioned? James, is that a good deal? Should we be paying that?
JAMES PATERSON: Peter, I really hope these media reports are right that the Albanese government is about to do a massive backflip on the eve of an election and finally accept that it is not in our national interest for the Port of Darwin to be controlled by a company linked to a foreign authoritarian government, because, as you would remember, it was not that long ago that the government was putting out reports saying that there was no need to cancel this lease, that there was no security issues that couldn't be mitigated. Very clearly, that's not the case. And I assume from Luke Gosling's messaging yesterday that they've had a change of heart on the eve of an election. They are finally going to do something about it.
STEFANOVIC: Could you have moved on it, though? This chat's been going for so long now. I mean, could this have been done in the previous government?
PATERSON: Well, what's changed, Pete, as I understand it, is a change at Landbridge Group. They're having some very serious financial difficulties. Certainly, their parent company listed in Hong Kong is having some very serious financial difficulties, and it's possible that they either need to sell for commercial reasons or they may breach the terms of their lease by not fulfilling their undertakings. So this window of opportunity hasn't existed before, but it's been very clear since late last year that this window is now open. Then the only question is will the government actually do something about it? Because they've been very set on downplaying the need to do so for all their time in government.
STEFANOVIC: Okay. So would we be foolish then to pay a maximum price if that company's under financial strain?
PATERSON: Well, it sounds like an ambit claim to me. This is a company that's in distress; this is a company that needs to sell. And we've got the whip hand here as the Australian government. So the Albanese government should seize that opportunity and secure the port of Darwin back on very good commercial terms.
STEFANOVIC: Just elsewhere this morning, James, I don't know if you caught it, but there was a fascinating exchange of questions and answers to the U.S. President. It was at the top of this hour. But amongst all things, he was asked about these claims from the Kremlin, which has basically praised Donald Trump's foreign policy as largely aligning with Moscow. And Trump didn't deny it. I mean, I think it's pretty clear at the moment when it comes to what's going on with Ukraine anyway. But how would you feel about that?
PATERSON: Well, I think Vladimir Putin is manifesting here. He's projecting what he wants to be the case and hoping that people agree. But if you just look objectively at the United States foreign policy, it couldn't be more removed from Moscow's interests. I don't think there's any argument to be made that they are acting in Moscow's interests here. We want peace in Ukraine. We support President Zelensky, and we will continue to support the Ukrainian people for as long as they want to resist Russia's invasion and attempted occupation because it's not in Australia's national interest for that to happen. And we encourage our American friends to stand with us and with Europe in doing so. And the United States has provided extraordinary military assistance, including under this President, both the first time he was in office, and this time, to the Ukrainian people to assist them in that task. And what we have right now is a complex negotiation. It's playing out in public in a way that might be, you know, a little bit untidy. But I hope that the substance that we land at is a secure and safe for Ukraine.
STEFANOVIC: If we don't get a carve-out when it comes to aluminium and steel, it looks like these tariffs are going into effect tomorrow when it comes to Mexico and Canada. That's a side note. But it seems unlikely that we're going to get a pass to. Do you think the U.S. is a reliable partner in our region as it once was?
PATERSON: Well Pete, we should get an exemption because we got an exemption last time. Unlike many other trading partners of the United States, the United States has a significant trade surplus with Australia and has had it for some time. And we are absolutely critical and indispensable security and a strategic partner of the United States. So we've got really deep equities in this relationship. And if we fail to get an exemption, the responsibility will lie at Anthony Albanese's door because, unlike almost every other world leader, he hasn't bothered to get on a plane to fly to Washington, D.C.. And I now have to wonder, is this politics? Is he afraid of what would happen in a Greens seat if he's pictured with Donald Trump? Or is he still scared of Donald Trump, using language I can't repeat on your program, as he's previously said. It is bizarre.
STEFANOVIC: Are we forgetting that it's Donald Trump who's making the decision here? It's not Anthony Albanese's decision.
PATERSON: That's, of course, true, Pete. But we have to put our best foot forward and our best foot forward is not keeping the PM at home and failing to form that relationship with Donald Trump, failing to see him eye-to-eye in the White House office and make that pitch. This is an administration unlike any other. It is uniquely important to have a personal relationship with the President, and Anthony Albanese's failure to get on a plane and go and see the President does put us back of the pack and makes it a harder task for us to secure an exemption. And that's why I find it very difficult to understand why he hasn't done so.
STEFANOVIC: Just one more question. You want the government to share with MPs the contact details of new Australians sworn in by Tony Burke following a rush of quite well-timed citizenship ceremonies right before the election. Why do you want these details shared?
PATERSON: Well, this has been a politicised process from start to finish. 21 of the 25 citizenship ceremonies are held in Labor seats. Only Labor MPs have been invited to attend. Tony Burke has totally misused this for his partisan political advantage. But the absolute bare minimum after a citizenship ceremony is that new citizens who have become new constituents of their local MPs have their contact details shared with their MPs on a strictly non-partisan basis, on an equal basis, so that MPs have an opportunity to contact them and welcome them to the electorate. Now that's what local councils do when they officiate, when they run citizenship ceremonies. But I don't have any confidence that the Department of Home Affairs, while it's being directed by Tony Burke as Minister, will do what it's supposed to do under the citizenship code.
STEFANOVIC: James, we will have to leave it there. Appreciate it though. We'll chat again soon.
ENDS
