Interview with Laura Jayes on Sky News

Subjects: Defence land review, Interest rate increases, Future of the Coalition

E&OE.........

Laura Jayes

I want to get some instant reaction now. Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness, and Shadow Minister for Productivity and Deregulation, Senator Bragg. Senator, what do you think about this move today? Is it a good one?

Senator Bragg

Well, good morning, Laura. We will look at the detail of the announcement, but certainly I would say that the government needs to do this because they have a massive hole in their Budget. They are spending like drunken sailors, there are deficits as far as the eye can see, and so selling off government assets, I guess, is one of the only things that they can do.

Laura Jayes

On its merit, though, is it a good idea? Victoria Barracks, prime real estate in Sydney, for example, that could solve a lot of the housing crisis, could it not?

Senator Bragg

Look, I am open-minded about the idea of more housing everywhere, and I think we have got to be committed to seeing more housing supply. Certainly, those areas in inner-city Melbourne, Sydney, or Brisbane could be of assistance. But I think the reason that they are selling these things is because they have got a massive black hole.

Laura Jayes

Okay, but can't they do both? Isn't this $1.8 billion—I mean, we need it right now.

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, we will have a look at the announcement. I am very open and very aggressively keen to see more houses built everywhere. So if there are opportunities for more housing, even in contentious areas, I think we have to do it because we have got to find a way to change the housing system in Australia that works for younger people. But I make the point that I do not think the government would be doing this if they had not created a huge black hole for themselves.

Laura Jayes

Okay, but do you think Victoria Barracks is in a contentious area? When you talk about young people, isn't that a perfect example about where young people want to live—close to the city, close to their jobs?

Senator Bragg

Yeah, but it is contentious—everything is contentious. The NIMBYs have been running the planning systems in the eastern states for far too long. And what you see in places like that and others in Melbourne, Sydney, and Brisbane is depopulation. You see depopulation across established suburbs where there are existing transport links, and that is very bad for young people. And I think that people under the age of 40 understand that every time an apartment block is vetoed, it is very bad for them. So we want to be supporting more development wherever it can be supported.

Laura Jayes

So, you are not a NIMBY on this one then, on Victoria Barracks?

Senator Bragg

No, I am not. But I make the point that the government's created a huge black hole for itself.

Laura Jayes

That's right. Okay, so let's talk about this—the spending side of things—because we see a few things being thrown around today. We have got this big announcement here from Richard Marles, we see capital gains tax discounts potentially in the frame, and not a lot on the spending side. It is difficult for any government of any flavour. What would be the first couple of things you would cut?

Senator Bragg

We would not have the Reconstruction Fund, we would not have the Housing Fund, we would not do the Rewiring Fund, we would not go ahead with the FBT changes to electric cars, and then we would do a huge body of work over the rest of this term to identify more savings. I mean, to give you one example, the government will spend almost $80 billion on housing to build fewer houses. So there is going to be a National Audit Office inquiry into that expenditure; I think that will give us a lot of opportunities for cost savings.

Laura Jayes

Yes, but that is not directly transferable. If you did not have the housing fund, you would still have to spend billions for another way to do it, wouldn't you? So they are not direct saves. I guess this is the right time for reform. How ambitious do you think this government would be if they seriously make a dent in the spending side of things? What is the likelihood that you and the Coalition would back in other contentious changes, like capital gains tax, like stamp duty—things that the states need to be involved in that have been talked about for literally decades as inefficient taxes?

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, there is a lot in that question, Laura. But if you could pay the states to abolish stamp duties and you could afford that, then that would be a great thing. But I think that is probably unlikely given the current state of the Budget. But the broader point about spending restraint is that you have currently got a Budget where you are seeing a 27% spending-to-GDP ratio—the highest at any period outside the pandemic in living memory—and so you want to get that down. I do not think the answer is increasing taxes. And if you look at, for example, the CGT idea that's been bandied around—I mean, the taxes and regulation burden on housing is already through the roof. I mean, increasing taxes in the housing sector is not going to build more houses.

Laura Jayes

Let's talk about the Coalition for a moment. Do you think you should have had further time apart?

Senator Bragg

Well, that's really a matter for others, I guess, at the apex of these parties to determine what will happen. My view is that we're always better off in coalition, but it cannot be at any cost. So we've tried to make it work with the Nationals, and if it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out.

Laura Jayes

Are they just holding out to see who might be leader? Because obviously it doesn't seem like they're confident that Sussan Ley's going to even last to the Budget.

Senator Bragg

Well, I do not think that we can have a position where the National Party can determine who will be the leader of the Liberal Party. And we have had a very strong and good coalition that has been invariably very good for Australia. And I would prefer that to be a feature of the future. But it cannot be at any cost. So we are looking for a reliable partner. If that can be worked out, great, but if it cannot be worked out, we are very capable of running a Liberal Party organisation to the next election.

Laura Jayes

What did you think of Paul Kelly on my show the other day? It seems that—I haven't had that much feedback on a guest on my show in a very long time. It felt like it was a bit of a mic-drop moment.

Senator Bragg

Well, look, I think that there is a lack of sophistication at the moment, and we have to take a broader view of our obligations. I mean, I think the Australian people want us to be a strong opposition. I think whether they love or whether they hate the Liberal Party, they want us to hold this bad government to account, and they want us to develop coherent solutions—alternatives. And if all we do is spend time talking about ourselves, then we are not going to be able to do that. So I think we have a huge amount of work to do, whether it is finding spending cuts or developing alternative policies, and that is what the focus should be.

Laura Jayes

Senator, good to talk to you, we will speak soon.

Senator Bragg

Thanks a lot.

[Ends] - Media Contact | David Nouri | 0401 392 624

‍