Transcript | Sky News First Edition | 24 April 2025

Transcript – Sky News First Edition

24 April 2025

E&OE

PETER STEFANOVIC:

Well, Peter Dutton will target new domestic violence offences today. The use of mobile phones or computers to harm intimate partners would be made illegal. Joining us live is the Shadow Home Affairs and the Cyber Security Minister James Paterson. James, thanks for your time this morning. So, how much would this expand on laws that are already in place?

JAMES PATERSON:

Good morning, Pete. Well, some of this activity is already captured and criminalised, but we want to put that beyond doubt. We want to cover the field. We want to make it very clear that if you're using a carriage service, that means the internet or a mobile phone, to harass your partner, that that's a very serious crime that will attract serious consequences and serious penalties at the federal level. Because unfortunately we know that there is far too much harassment, particularly of women online by their partners and former partners. There's a lot of stalking. There are very sophisticated apps out there that people can download to use to spy on their partners. That's totally and utterly unacceptable, and for Peter Dutton, this is personal. He was a police officer for a decade before entering the federal Parliament. He worked on violent crimes against women and children. He dealt with many instances of domestic violence, and it's core to who he is and what he wants our country to be.

PETER STEFANOVIC:

The Opposition Leader performed his second backflip of the campaign so far, James, by reversing his pledge for tax breaks on new electric vehicles. He supported it just a couple of days ago, now doesn't, what's happened?

JAMES PATERSON:

I think this has just been misunderstood, Pete. From the very beginning, we've been highly critical of this policy because while we strongly support choice - and unlike the Labor party, we're not proposing to put taxes on cars and make them more expensive - we don't think it's a good use of taxpayers' money to subsidise people who can afford to buy a brand new electric vehicle and have everyone else pay for that. And this is a scheme which has massively blown out on Labor's watch. There's actually already very good incentives in place to buy an EV if that's your choice, if that works for you and your family, you're exempt from petrol and diesel tax that everyone else pays, that goes to road maintenance and upgrades. So we don't think this is necessary, and we've never supported it.

PETER STEFANOVIC:

But you did support it just a couple of days ago?

JAMES PATERSON:

I think that was just lost in translation, to be honest, Pete. Peter Dutton was, I think, clearly referring to Labor's plan to tax new vehicles, which we don't support. We've always had this view, and we voted against this in the Parliament. We've always had the view that this EV tax exemption is not justified.

PETER STEFANOVIC:

Okay, just moving on, there was so much build up, James, to your military spend, but it's been widely criticised this morning for just not having enough detail. Was it rushed in the end?

JAMES PATERSON:

No, not at all, Pete, but we're not going to do what the Labor Party did before the last election, which is basically to enter into negotiations and try to negotiate contracts with defence suppliers from opposition. I mean, in his major signature foreign policy and defence speech before the last election at the Lowy Institute, Anthony Albanese said he was going to get Tomahawk missiles on the Collins-class submarines. Now, there are only two problems with that plan. One is, the Tomahawk missiles that can be launched from torpedoes were out of production, and there were no plans to resume production. Secondly, the retrofitting to the Collins-class to have those Tomahawks on was prohibitively complex and expensive, and so they had to embarrassingly abandon that plan in government. That's exactly why you don't try and specify specific platforms or technologies you think the military needs from opposition.

PETER STEFANOVIC:

But how can the figures then be trusted if you're just coming up with a figure and then not having any detail on equipment, or drones, or recruitments as well? I mean, sure, the spending is more than Labor's if you win the election, but it just seems undercooked. So, how can people believe it or trust it if there's no detail underneath it?

JAMES PATERSON:

Because we're following the expert advice of people like Sir Angus Houston, the former Chief of Defence, who conducted the Defence Strategic Review for this government and who says we need to be spending 3% of GDP. And there are many other voices in the public debate who agree with him, including former Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Kim Beazley. We are meeting the challenge of a strategic moment. We are stepping up and providing the ADF with the resources it needs. Everybody knows the ADF is stretched, and very good evidence of that was provided when the People's Liberation Army Navy conducted live firing exercises in the Tasman Sea, and the Albanese government had to rely on a Virgin Australia pilot to know that it was happening. That shows how stretched we are. Nobody contends that we're spending enough on defence right now. And Richard Marles would love to have a number like this. He would love to have a commitment like this. I suspect he went to the Expenditure Review Committee of Cabinet looking for a commitment like this, but he doesn't have the internal authority within the Albanese government to get that across the line. He doesn't have the support of his fellow ministers on the ERC. And that's why only a Coalition government can get our country back on track, and frankly, get the ADF back on track and give it the capability it needs in this dangerous time.

PETER STEFANOVIC:

But you don't get there. A Coalition government doesn't get there according to the first exit polls, which were published today. You do get a 3% swing, but Labor still forms government with preferences. The Greens are also holding the line in Brisbane. What are your thoughts on those early numbers? Doesn't mean it's going to happen, but a first indication, James.

JAMES PATERSON:

Exit polling is notoriously unreliable in Australian elections. It is very difficult to do well. And the best example of that, Pete, is in October last year, the Courier-Mail published an exit poll in Queensland that said that Labor was surging, that the election was going to be incredibly tight. And we all know what went on to happen in that Queensland state election, a very comfortable win for the LNP. So I really don't put any stock in exit polls at all.

PETER STEFANOVIC:

All right, we'll leave it there. James Paterson, thanks as always.

ENDS

‍