Interview with David Speers on ABC Insiders

INTERVIEW WITH DAVID SPEERS ON ABC INSIDERS

09 November 2025

Subjects: Net zero, Climate policy, Labor’s 5% deposit scheme, Housing affordability

E&OE………

David Speers

Andrew Bragg, welcome to the program.

Senator Bragg

Good morning, David.

David Speers

Should the Liberal Party dump net zero in its entirety, as Sarah Henderson says there?

Senator Bragg

Well David, the Australian people are worried about climate change and so are we. And that's why I would have thought that the most reasonable position here would be to stay in Paris, maintain our commitment to do a better job on net zero than Labor, and maintain a goal. Because I think if you have anything less than that, then you are giving up on the idea that you will try and reduce emissions for future generations. And after all, we are the trustees for future generations.

David Speers

So just so I understand your position, you're happy to give away net zero by 2050, but you want to maintain net zero as a goal in some part of the second half of this century?

Senator Bragg

Well, of course, because that is the international standard on emissions reduction. You can't create your own standard. And in terms of the date, I don't think even experts like Grattan and the ANU think that Labor will get there in 2050. So, I think that's a debate we need to have about the exact date.

David Speers

And look, the Paris Agreement itself does say member countries should aim to quote 'achieve a balance between emissions and removals in the second half of this century'. So is some sort of net zero commitment, be it in the second half of the century, is that in your view a requirement of remaining in the Paris Agreement?

Senator Bragg

Well, as you say, it's in the text of the agreement. So I don't see how you can create your own standard. I mean, we're all in this together as an international community. Of course, Australia should set its own domestic rules - but the real enemy here has been Labor's attempt to reform the electricity system. I mean, that's what is causing higher power prices. It's not the international agreements or the Net Zero Accord itself that is the problem, it's been Labor's electricity policies.

David Speers

But you understand the Paris Agreement to require Australia to have some sort of net zero commitment? Because there's a view that it's an international commitment, Australia doesn't have to have a commitment of its own.

Senator Bragg

Well, it doesn't talk about net zero in those exact terms, but it talks about net zero in a functional sense, so it talks about the offsets.

David Speers

The other thing the Paris Agreement says though, is that member countries should be updating and enhancing their targets. Is it possible to stay in Paris if we're backsliding on our targets?

Senator Bragg

Well, you've also got to have a credible agenda to actually achieve your targets, because at the moment, I don't think many experts are of the belief that Labor will actually get there. And so what you're seeing is higher power prices, industry moving offshore, and frankly, not a great record on decarbonisation. So, I think the main game here is, Australia is a serious country, we can't repudiate our treaty obligations, and we should maintain a policy to do net zero better than the government. I mean, we can't create our own standards here.

David Speers

But can we weaken our targets while staying in that treaty?

Senator Bragg

Well, if you're not going to meet your targets, then you're in a different realm, aren't you?

David Speers

So you're adamant Australia needs to stay in the Paris Agreement. Can I ask, is this a red line for you?

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, how would we leave the Paris Agreement? If we left Paris, we'd be with Azerbaijan, Iran, Syria, you know, and a few other baddies. I mean, Australia has never been with those people before.

David Speers

So what does this mean for you personally, Andrew Bragg? If there's no commitment of some sort to net zero, and no commitment to stay in the Paris Agreement, will you stay on the frontbench?

Senator Bragg

But I mean, it's not about me. I mean, the Liberal Party historically has had a reputation for fixing things and doing things better than Labor. So I don't think we can give up on it. Our policy has to be to make it actually work. So, I'm not really focused on what it means for me. I think we're all in leadership roles and it's important that we don't give up on things that are hard.

David Speers

But what would you do?

Senator Bragg

Well, I don't imagine that Australia is going to be in a grouping with Azerbaijan, Iran, and Syria.

David Speers

But what if that's the decision of your Party Room? Do you stay on the frontbench?

Senator Bragg

Well, I just don't believe that that's going to happen. I don't think it's in the realm of the possible.

David Speers

Well, it seems that's the view of many of your colleagues. So they want to ditch any reference to net zero. We just heard from Sarah Henderson, 'remove net zero in its entirety'.

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, I will do the right thing, but my view is that we won't get to that because I don't believe that my colleagues want Australia to be ranked with those baddies.

David Speers

What's the right thing? Is that staying on the frontbench and changing your view or quit?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think you know that that's not on the cards. And my view is...

David Speers

What's not on the cards?

Senator Bragg

Well, I'm not going to... I mean, you can't change your fundamental views. I mean, you can't do the, 'here are my principles, but I have these ones if you don't like those'. I mean, it's pretty much the case that Australia needs to be in Paris, in my opinion, and then we need to try and find a way to do net zero better than Labor; that is better for jobs, better for industry, and better for decarbonisation. I mean, the fact is that Labor is trying to do this without nuclear, right? I mean, almost all the G20 countries are doing nuclear. They're trying to do something which is probably impossible according to the Grattan Institute and ANU.

David Speers

So, just to be clear here, when you say you're not going to change your principles, am I right to interpret that is, if the party doesn't stay in Paris, and some sort of net zero commitment, you'll quit?

Senator Bragg

Well, sure, but I don't imagine we would ever leave Paris. I mean, we're a party of government, right? We're not a fringe party. We're not fringe dwellers. Most Australians want us to play our fair role in terms of emissions reduction. So, I just don't think that we're going to be leaving the Paris Agreement.

David Speers

Do you think dropping net zero brings down power prices?

Senator Bragg

I think that net zero, if done properly, could reduce power prices and will reduce power prices over time…

David Speers

How would it do that?

Senator Bragg

Well, the way Labor have done it has resulted in higher power prices because of the way that they have played with the energy system. But ultimately, more renewables and a technology-agnostic approach where you have more gas and even more coal in the short term, and nuclear, would have given you lower power prices, more industry, and a better story to tell on decarbonization. But we don't have that in Australia.

David Speers

Is there going to be investment in new coal, though? Do you see that anywhere?

Senator Bragg

I think the best you can hope for now, given you can't turn back the clock, is having those assets work for longer. But we should have had more gas. We should have nuclear. We should have more renewables. I think the story here is that Labor have completely destroyed the net zero agenda. I think they have destroyed, or are destroying, support for it. And in the long term, we have to do a better job on this because we are a party of government. Australians want action on climate change, but Australians also want to have jobs and industry onshore. I don't think it's a choice.

David Speers

Well, I mean, Japan has a net zero by 2050 target enshrined in law. Canada has a net zero by 2050 target enshrined in law. The UK, France, South Korea all have their net zero by 2050 targets enshrined in law. Why shouldn't Australia?

Senator Bragg

But who cares if it's enshrined in law or not? I mean, what matters is the...

David Speers

Well, maybe investors do. Maybe investors like that certainty.

Senator Bragg

But there are mixed views about how this works across the G20. You don't have to enshrine things in law. What matters is your commitments and having clear policy settings. And the fact is, we're trying to do it without nuclear, without much gas. We turned off the coal too soon. I mean, it's been a disaster, and I feel sorry for people that are paying high power prices because of Labor's mismanagement of these energy policies.

David Speers

You've talked about your own position. What about Sussan Ley? If she bows to the National Party position on this, is she done as leader?

Senator Bragg

But as I've said to you, David, I don't believe that we will be leaving the Paris Agreement. We're not a fringe party.

David Speers

All right. But the National Party says the same. The question is, if you abandon net zero, can Sussan Ley survive as leader?

Senator Bragg

Well, I don't think you can have a fatwa on two words. I think that's too silly for words, frankly. And I think at the end of the day, this is the international standard on decarbonization. So, Australia cannot set out its own international standard. What Australia can do is work out its own plan for how it will get to net zero over the medium to long term.

David Speers

But you're the one saying net zero needs to be there in the policy, in some form.

Senator Bragg

What I'm saying to you is, we should do net zero better than Labor. Labor's net zero has been an absolute disaster for everyone in Australia, and we can do it better than them. We used to be known as the party...

David Speers

But if Sussan Ley as leader accepts a position that has no net zero reference at all, can she survive as leader?

Senator Bragg

But what do you mean by 'no reference'? I mean, how can...

David Speers

It's not in the policy at all.

Senator Bragg

Well, you can't have a fatwa on two words. I mean, it's ridiculous.

David Speers

So, if there is a fatwa on two words as you put it, what does that mean for the leader?

Senator Bragg

But you can't have a fatwa on two words. This is the international standard. I mean, trying to pretend that you're not going to say two words is absolutely ridiculous.

David Speers

But if that absolutely ridiculous position is adopted by your Party Room, what does that mean for the leader?

Senator Bragg

But I mean, I don't see how it can be because this is the international standard, okay? Australia is part of the international community. It is not actually the Net Zero Accord which is driving high power prices. It is Labor's disastrous energy policies.

David Speers

Okay. Let's turn to your housing portfolio, Senator. You said something the other day that I don't think I've heard a Liberal politician say before. You want house prices to fall. Why?

Senator Bragg

I think for entry-level houses, it is very hard for first home or prospective home buyers to get a first house. And I think anyone who's trying to buy a first house knows that it's too expensive. And so, I think we should be honest with the Australian people about that reality. Now, the reason that they're so high right now is because Labor have failed to build supply, and they have changed the 5% deposit scheme, and that has increased prices by 1.2% in one month alone.

David Speers

Well, I'll come to that. But do you really say to all those who've struggled to get their first home, you now want the value of that home to fall?

Senator Bragg

I think in relation to first home owners, we need to be honest with them and say that house prices are too high at that level. I mean, if you're wanting to buy a first house...

David Speers

You could leave them in negative equity, though, couldn't you?

Senator Bragg

But if you're wanting to buy a first house, like a flat in the city or a small house in a country town, the house prices are too high. And the government in Canberra is making them too high with their stupid policies. So, my job is to be honest about these things. I mean, Clare O'Neil says that there's no problem here. I just think that's ridiculous.

David Speers

Well, the Minister does point out, I think it's 5,778 first home buyers entered the market using the first home deposit guarantee in October. Would you rather they were all still renting?

Senator Bragg

Well, as you know, the government uncapped this scheme, they removed all the means-testing, and they didn't even model it until July, which is three months after they announced the policy, okay? So, this has been a reckless change, and I don't believe the taxpayers need to provide support to people who don't, frankly, need that level of support from the Commonwealth Government. And that is bringing forward demand. Don't forget, the government has failed on supply. They have built fewer houses...

David Speers

Well, I think successive governments have failed on supply over decades. But are you saying these people you'd rather still be renting?

Senator Bragg

Well, hang on. The last Liberal Government built 200,000 houses a year on average. This government's built 170,000 houses a year on average, despite spending $60 billion in rubbish bureaucracy. So, they have failed on supply. Then they've brought in this demand side measure, which is supercharged in one month - we've seen the biggest increase in entry-level house prices in years, in one month. So, these guys have made a complete mess of housing.

David Speers

The... the Cotality report that you're talking about there, it does point to the deposit guarantee as a factor, but the first factor it points to is lower interest rates, as well as 'persistently higher than average levels of investor activity'. Surely you'd agree there's more than just the government's policy here at play? Lower interest rates brings more people into the market.

Senator Bragg

Well, that report also makes the point that at the higher end, prices aren't changing. So, they make the point that the prices are changing at the first home level. That's where the deposit guarantee comes in - it was reckless. I mean, the fact that they didn't even model the changes before they announced it shows how bad they are on housing. The Prime Minister of the country's been using the wrong number. He says it's 0.5% increase over six years, which is laughable. It's actually 0.6%.

David Speers

Now, in any... Are you saying any policy then that pumps up demand is a bad idea? And does that include the policy you took to the election to let people dip into their superannuation, take up to $50,000 out to buy a home?

Senator Bragg

Supply is the main game, and the bulk of our policies will be here on supply. Now, unfortunately, Labor have spent $60 billion to build fewer houses. They've built lots of bureaucracies, like the Housing Australia Future Fund, which doesn't build a house...

David Speers

Just to come back to the question. It's about whether demand measures are a problem, including what you took to the election on dipping into superannuation.

Senator Bragg

In isolation from solving the supply challenge, of course, if you only have demand side policies, you make the problem worse. So, we're reviewing all our policies. You can expect to see a full refresh on our housing policies. And I want the Liberal Party to be a party of supply, development, and home ownership…

David Speers

Do you think dipping into super is a good idea or not?

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, what do you mean, dipping in? I mean, taking money...

David Speers

Taking money from your superannuation to buy a home. Is that a good idea or not?

Senator Bragg

Well, that policy has been to two elections. We'll look at whether or not there's any scope to use super in the future, but as it stands, I think it's unlikely we would continue with that exact policy because there might be a better way to do it. But I also want to be very clear with you, David, that we want to be a party of supply, okay? That is so important, because you cannot solve the crisis unless you build more houses. So that's going to be our laser focus.

David Speers

All right. Look, finally, you also told Triple J during the week that politicians should only own one home each. Why is that?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think there's a bit more context around that, David, but I mean, my point is that I think politicians shouldn't be tone deaf. This is a crisis for my generation, the Millennial generation, and I think people should be conscious that they're in leadership positions and they should take great care, because if people can't buy a house, it is changing the country.

David Speers

Well, Sussan Ley has three investment properties as well as her own home, according to her register. Is that a problem for you?

Senator Bragg

Look, I'm sure you can go through the register and find people that have got seven or eight or 10 houses. My point is, I think people should just be conscious that we're in a housing crisis. I think we are leaders, and generations now are looking down the barrel of never buying a house. So, I just think people ought to be careful.

David Speers

Senator Andrew Bragg, thanks so much for joining us this morning.

Senator Bragg

Thanks, David.

[Ends]

‍