Simon Birmingham, welcome to the program.
Good morning, David. Great to be with you.
So the two leaders signed this new climate compact
and elevated the issue to what they're calling a central pill after are of the
alliance. Do you agree climate change is an essential element of the US alliance?
It's essential to work cooperatively with our partner nations and this compact, this agreement,
is welcome and complementary with agreements Australia previously signed under the Coalition
government and with Germany, with Japan, Singapore or the United Kingdom, where we established green
economy agreements and cooperative arrangements to be able to ensure that the $22 billion we
had put in place for clean energy investment and transition of Australia's economy to net was done
in concert with the types of country who were going to be essential to help us get low-cost
technological transformation. That is what the United States under President Biden and through
his inflation reduction act is, in particular, doing - investing significantly in lower-cost
technologies to help enable the transition to net zero and it's critical for Australia to be part of
that journey as we are already with a number of other nations through other arrangements.
It makes it harder for you to consider watering down Australia's climate targets?
I wouldn't want to see Australia water down our climate targets.
So you support the climate targets?
The challenge of getting to net zero is going to be a difficult one for all
the cups of the world. It will take maximum cooperation between us and it does entail all
of us making sure that we work through the different means of technological
investment to get the types of outcomes that can ensure change, not just in our
energy markets but critically in terms of industrial emissions, transport emissions,
agricultural emissions. There are a range of different sectors of all of our economies that
need that type of investment and technological change to make net zero actual reality.
We have a target legislated. The Libs didn't vote for it. I haven't heard this before,
but you've said you don't want that watered down. You support Australia's climate targets now?
I don't want to see Australia take backwards steps in terms of our emissions targets. Under the Paris
agreement, there are five-yearly steps for us to take in terms of updating the targets, whoever
is in government at each point of time will have to assess what will be feasible in terms of those
five-yearly updates and do so in consideration of how that technology is evolving, what the impacts
on Australian jobs and industry will be and what progress is being made around the world. But
partnerships like this one will be important in helping to ensure we make that type of progress.
That's interesting. The Quad meeting went ahead last night. How important
is this grouping? What do you envisage for its future?
The Quad is important. It brings together four Indo-Pacific, democratic, maritime powers and in
doing so, four countries who can speak with common values to our region about the type of region we
wish to see, as you were highlighting before, a region that is, indeed, open and secure, peaceful
and prosperous, one in which countries are not forced to make a choice, but feel empowered
in their own sovereignty. It's an ability to cooperate across a range of different spheres
in relation to supporting a rules-based order that has enabled prosperity and lifting people out of
poverty across our region over a number of decades now, right across South-East Asia and across the
sub-continent into India and elsewhere, we have seen a massive change in terms of lifestyle and
living standards, underpinned largely by open trade, growing exchange of goods, growing exchange
of technology and commerce around the region and a rules-based order that has helped to transform the
lives of hundreds of millions and that is why it is so important we work together to preserve that.
On China, the Prime Minister has now been invited to visit Beijing. Do
you think he should go before all of the trade actions are lifted?
I think Australia does deserve to have absolute clarity that these trade sanctions are going
to be lifted and that clarity should be there before the Prime Minister entertains a formal
state visit to Beijing. And why? Because China is acting very clearly in breach of its commitments
to Australia. China is acting in breach of its commitments under the China-Australia Free Trade
Agreement. It's acting in breach of commitments it's given in a number of regional trade compacts
with Australia. And it's acting in breach of its commitment to the World Trade Organisation. Now,
it's clear China did not want that independent global umpire, the World Trade Organisation,
to hand down findings against it, which is why it negotiated the process in relation to
the barley dispute that was -- barley dispute that was initiated by China.
They have still not lifted those.
They have not and we should expect them to be lifted completely,
as we should the tariffs on our wine industry. And we should expect nothing
less than China to adhere to the terms it into under the Australia free trade agreement.
Just to be clear, you're saying the PM shouldn't go until all that has happened?
We've had lots of good steps in terms of dialogue. It was counterproductive
of China to refuse to have ministerial-level dialogue with Australia and as an opposition,
we have given absolute bipartisan support to the Albanese Government to re-enter into dialogue with
China and it's good that the Prime Minister's had that dialogue, as has the deputy Prince Minister,
the Foreign Minister, and the Trade Minister, and we welcomed each of those,
but there is a point where we should expect clear outcomes and that China should adhere to
the terms of the China-Australia FTA and without seeking concession or conditions from Australia,
other than that we equally adhere to those terms, as we have been a good partner in doing so.
What about the detention of Cheng Lei and Yang Hengjun the two Australian citizens…
should that be cleared up before he goes or is that a separate matter in your mind?
It's obviously a different matter but still a very, very important and significant matter. It
is a matter that I know the Prime Minister and every official, as in the previous government,
raises at every opportunity, as they should and we should be expecting to progress in
relation to that. There are obviously China's own legal processes but the unfair detention,
the lack of transparency in relation to those detained Australians, is completely
unacceptable and we should continue to seize every opportunity to prosecute that case.
OK. Let's turn to a couple of domestic matters. It's nearly two weeks now since the Budget,
two weeks since the increase in JobSeeker was proposed by the Government. Have you
worked out whether you support an increase in JobSeeker yet?
We'll go through our normal processes once we see the legislation for this but Peter Dutton
has proposed an important alternative that would help Australians who are willing to
and looking to engage in the workforce. The reality is across the Australian economy we
face workforce shortages at present. Many employers are still looking for
people to do extra hours and take on different shifts. The proposal to help
jobseekers keep more of what they earn is a valuable one that economists said
would put downward pressure on inflation and increase capacity across the economy.
Have you worked out the cost of that proposal yet?
As has been indicated, that's being worked through
with the Parliamentary Budget Office in terms of final costings arrangements.
So did you sign off on a policy that you don't know the cost of?
We've outlined an alternative at this stage,
David. We are not at an election and not about to form government in the next two
years. We'll take fully costed policies to the election but in terms of in the couple of days…
So Oppositions don't need to cost policies? Is that what you're saying?
No. I just said we will take fully costed policies to the next election. That's exactly
what I said and what we will do. But in terms of the two days after the Budget was handed down,
we put forward an alternative, an alternative that it's clear under
anybody else analysis will cost less than the government's proposal is but
one that will help Australians to get into the workforce, making things better for employers,
making things better for Australians who take the extra hours when they're on JobSeeker and putting
a bit downward pressure on inflation, which is so critical at this time to help all Australians.
It's two weeks since the Government announced plans to change the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax.
The gas industry is broadly OK with it. Are you?
Our concerns are primarily the fact that the Government seems to have waged a continuous
war on the gas sector, an important export earner for Australia and an
important revenue source for Australia, and critical for our domestic industry. Now,
the PRRT has been subject, as you know, of a number of reviews and analysis and in some ways,
these changes may be the least of the industry's concerns relative to the
other things the government has done that creates investment risk around the PRRT, and so, again,
when we see the detail of the legislation from the government, we will go through our proper
processes, and engage with industry and come to a conclusion about our position in the Parliament.
Surely if the industry is OK with it, you're not going to say no, are you?
That's why we'll sit down with industry and do our own analysis when we see the detail
of the legislation. The Government has made an announcement but we need to see that to come to
a final position. But elsewhere, we have grave concerns that the Government's interventions in
the gas market have hurt Australia's standing in terms of international investors and in doing so,
jeopardised the affordability of energy in Australia and through that,
the job generation and elsewhere that comes from that very strong export industry.
It's 12 months today since the Coalition's election defeat.
You appeared on this program. The morning after the election, as I'm sure you recall.
I do.
You said the Liberal Party had lost professionals and women in particular.
You said the party had to regroup to win them back. What has the party done since
then to win back the professionals and the women you were talking about?
Well, the test for us will be at the next election in terms of taking forward a set of policies,
a set of candidates and a campaign approach that does win back those cohort of voters we
lost. The work is under way in terms of policy development. We need to see outcomes in terms
of candidate selection as well. And these are very important tasks for the party. It's an
ongoing task and one that needs to reach a crescendo at that point at the next election
to give voters the confidence that we heard messages from the last election. There will
be different issues at play at the next election in terms of, of course, the pressures Australians
are feeling in their household budgets, the areas of broken promises from the Albanese
government in terms of where they promised lower electricity prices, real wage increases...
But can I take you back to - I appreciate your lines of attack there, but can I take you back
to the question? What have you done in the first 12 months of this term to win back those groups?
Importantly, policy work is taking place within the Coalition to make sure that we
can present I trust compelling messages at the election and they need to be compelling
around how it is, they need to demonstrate continued economics economically but also,
as we started this interview, commitment on matters such as climate change and how we do
that in a way that demonstrates to people we are sincere about achieving net zero...
Well, you voted against the climate targets.
You voted against the safeguards mechanism. Do you think that helped?
That is where our alternative policies have to be convincing and compelling for Australians,
David and that is the test we'll face at the next election.
What does that mean? We haven't seen anything in the first 12 months. Are
you saying behind the scenes you have a secret plan that will wow us on the climate front?
We will be outlining clear policies in the lead-up to the next election. You wouldn't
expect oppositions to do that two years out from a scheduled election. You know full well that's done
when they are fully developed and fully costed and can be released cognisant of the circumstances we
will all face at that time of the next election. The circumstances now are different to what they
were 12 months ago. We've seen Australia going from some of the lowest inflation rates among
developed economies to having amongst the highest inflation rates of developed economies. We have a
government forecasting lower growth and higher unemployment than previously forecast so we'll
face different circumstances and they're the challenges to confront in our policies.
On the Indigenous Voice, you previously said you wanted to wait for the parliamentary
committee to do its work on this before deciding which way you'll go. They've
now wrapped up their work. What will you do? Support or oppose The Voice?
I won't be acting contrary to the party position on this but I do urge the Government to look,
listen and think about the types of comments we've seen from Mick Gooda and others in recent days. We
see very clearly a view that is emerging that the approach the Government is taking is increasing
the risk in relation to this referendum. I don't think it is a good thing for Australia where we
end up with a referendum likely to fail. It's far better if the Government goes back to the drawing
board and if the members of the working group and other Indigenous leaders think hard about the
type of advice here hearing from the likes of Mick Gooda and give the Government license and room to
move such that the people could take a fresh look at this again and consider the way it's handled.
There's no sign they're going to do that. If it goes forward as were posed,
will you vote for it or against it?
As I said, I won't act contrary to the party position on
What will you do...
The party position is out there...
I know what that position is I'm asking your position. What's your position?
I said. I'm not going to act contrary to the party position.
You'll vote no?
That's the party position.
So you'll vote no?
And I'm not going to act contrary to it.
That means you'll vote no?
That is the party position, David and I'm not going to act contrary to it.
In terms of your own vote?
David, look, there are many issues Australia faces at present. This will be an important debate.
I think it is unfortunate this debate has been mishandled by the Government in terms of getting
to the position it is. There's an opportunity for them to reconsider the way in which they put this
to the people. If that means it takes a little bit longer, that won't be necessarily a bad thing in
terms of trying to get this to a position where we could actually have a unifying moment as a nation.
Final one. 12 months with Peter Dutton as Opposition Leader we've
seen one by-election defeat in Aston. You've got another coming up in Fadden.
Can the leader afford to lose two by-elections?
Well, we'll put a strong campaign forward in Fadden and I am confident
that Peter and the whole team will be working hard in that by-election...
He's got to win too right?
Off the back of the most recent Budget, we have a different set of circumstances
in terms of clearly being able to point to a Government now that is projecting lower growth,
higher unemployment, that real wages are going backwards...
So he's going to win this by-election?
Well, we always want to win a by-election. We want to win this one for sure and the
issues we campaign on, clearly the track record of the Government,
the broken promises of the Government. One year on from the election of the Albanese Government,
most Australians are feeling worse off, not better off, and that is a key factor in terms
of how we will campaign and the approach we will take to hold them to account.
Simon Birmingham, appreciate your time this morning, thanks for joining us.
Thanks David, My pleasure.