Interview with Patricia Karvelas on ABC Afternoon Breifing

Subjects: First home price increases, Labor’s housing failures, Net Zero.

E&OE

Patricia Karvelas
Andrew Bragg, welcome to the programme.

Senator Bragg
G'day.

Patricia Karvelas
Let's start on housing. The ABC is really focusing on housing as an issue this week. New data out today shows national home values rose by just over a percent in October and around 6% over the year. That's the fastest home value growth in more than two years. What do you put it down to?

Senator Bragg
Well, house prices are too high, especially at the entry-level point. They've been supercharged by the government changing the 5% mortgage scheme. And so what you've seen in the past month is the biggest increase in living memory in entry-level house prices. That's making it harder, not easier, for people to get a first house.

Patricia Karvelas
Do you think we yet have the evidence, if you look at the lag effect of the 5% in the market already?

Senator Bragg
We do because we have the first month of data from Cotality, and they're saying it's the biggest increase in years at the entry-level point. What they're saying at the higher point is there's no change.

Patricia Karvelas
What's the solution to that? Because at the last election, you had a lot of policies for the demand side, and in fact, the 5% that Labor's made available to everyone, almost, is about demand side. It has to be a supply side solution, doesn't it, in terms of your settings?

Senator Bragg
The government have failed to build houses. Now they've opened up this demand side measure. That means higher prices. You don't want to do that. You want to get the houses built, and we will have policies that will ensure that we get more houses completed. That's the only way out of this crisis, because what we've got is the biggest population we've ever had and the fewest number of houses being built per capita. Therefore, a massive housing crisis.

Patricia Karvelas
Okay, so if we were to apply your logic about 5% basically inflating house prices, your policy of Super for Housing has to do the same thing. It is not possible that it couldn't?

Senator Bragg
Well, the 5% scheme is a government scheme open to anyone. There's no place caps, so anyone can use it for no cost. Super is your own money, and people would have used it at different points in the cycle...

Patricia Karvelas
It is your own money, 100%, no one would dispute that, but it puts pressure on housing prices. That's a fact.

Senator Bragg
Any time if you fail to build houses but you have demand side policies in isolation, it's going to make the problem worse. That's what the government have done. They've failed. They've wasted $60 billion to build fewer houses, and now they've got the 5% in mortgages, which is making the whole problem so much worse. We won't be doing that.

Patricia Karvelas
But you do concede that Super for Housing puts pressure on house prices?

Senator Bragg
Any demand side measure which is not properly thought through or targeted could make the problem worse.

Patricia Karvelas
Including your policy?

Senator Bragg
Well, potentially, but we won't have that policy again.

Patricia Karvelas
What do you mean?

Senator Bragg
We're reviewing everything.

Patricia Karvelas
What do you mean you won't have that policy again?

Senator Bragg
We won't have that exact same policy again. We're looking at all our policies.

Patricia Karvelas
You've piqued the Karvelas interest. Tell me more.

Senator Bragg
Well, most of our policies...

Patricia Karvelas
Super for Housing has kind of now been a little embedded as a policy. Are you saying it's under review and you don't think it's necessarily going to stack up?

Senator Bragg
I think it's very unlikely we would have that exact same measure, yes.

Patricia Karvelas
Why?

Senator Bragg
Well, I think it's not necessarily going to solve the problem. I think we need to have more effort on the supply side. There may be a case for some demand side measures, but I want to reorientate, reorient...

Patricia Karvelas
I'm getting it.

Senator Bragg
Reorient our overall position...

Patricia Karvelas
You want to change the position.

Senator Bragg
I'm worried that the Liberal Party, in some quarters, has been seen as a party of NIMBYs. And I want to make sure that we are a party of supply and development.

Patricia Karvelas
Okay, so you want the focus to be there. And your instinct, of course, it has to go through a process, I accept that, but your instinct is that Super for Housing is not the right policy.

Senator Bragg
I think in the way that it was designed, we can pretty much close the book on that one.

Patricia Karvelas
Why, what's the design that you don't like?

Senator Bragg
Well, I'm not sure necessarily that everyone has $50,000...

Patricia Karvelas
Well, they don't.

Senator Bragg
I'm not sure that necessarily we should be leading with a demand side policy. I think you have to have an overall agenda on housing. There may be room for demand side measures, but we have to start with supply. I think, frankly, the government have wasted $60 billion to build fewer houses. We've got a lot to work with. The government's been terrible on housing, so we need to hold their feet to the fire and expose their bad plans and have our own, more productive supply plan.

Patricia Karvelas
I need to talk to you about net zero by 2050. The Nationals have killed it off. The Liberal Party has had a leadership meeting this morning where the dominant view, it seems, is that you need to dump net zero by 2050. Do you support that?

Senator Bragg
Well, I don't think we should be leaving the Paris Agreement. I think that is well known to your viewers as Australia is a trade-exposed nation, and we have obligations to meet. The Australian people expect that we will do our fair share on emissions reduction, but that we should also ensure that we get power prices down and keep industry on shore. I think that we need to keep working through this.

Patricia Karvelas
But do you accept that the leadership at the top of the party, including Sussan Ley, believe now there's been a shift that they want to dump net zero by 2050...

Senator Bragg
A shift where?

Patricia Karvelas
A shift in your party at the top?

Senator Bragg
Well, I mean, my...

Patricia Karvelas
Do you contest that that's the case? Because it's been heavily reported. I've spoken to people who've confirmed it.

Senator Bragg
Well, I mean, we've got to base our policies on what we think is going to be the best outcome for the country. That's the consideration. If you believe that Australia has international obligations, if you believe that Australia can reduce emissions, reduce prices, and keep industry on shore, and deal with some of the regional legitimacy issues, then I think you're obligated to pursue those because that's the best outcome. The idea that you would repudiate, in its entirety, the idea of emissions reduction, I think is crazy.

Patricia Karvelas
It's more about the binding target, the net zero by 2050.

Senator Bragg
But you can get there. The Paris Agreement says you can get there this century...

Patricia Karvelas
What does that mean? At the end, you get there. It's all, you just put an accelerator at the end.

Senator Bragg
But this century is this century. No one believes Labor will get there in 2050. Not many people. I'm not sure we need to be wedded to the 2050 date anyway.

Patricia Karvelas
What do you mean?

Senator Bragg
Well, I mean, the 2050 date would be ideal, but if you can't get there, you can't get there. I think the main point is you want to be in the agreement. You want to be committed to emissions reduction. The Paris Agreement says this century. China and India are looking at 2060–2070. Why wouldn't we be flexible, as long as we stay inside the treaty?

Patricia Karvelas
If the party decides to keep net zero, although that seems to me unlikely, but let's see — your party — how can you stay in a Coalition with the Nationals?

Senator Bragg
Well, I'm not aware that they are wanting to repudiate the Paris Agreement.

Patricia Karvelas
They've just said they want to pull out of net zero by 2050.

Senator Bragg
I think the repudiation of net zero mandates is not the same as removing any agreement part of Paris.

Patricia Karvelas
Aren't we having a wild linguistic?

Senator Bragg
But I mean, most Australians don't...

Patricia Karvelas
You're either in it or you're not.

Senator Bragg
But I mean, as you know, most Australians don't understand or are necessarily across all the detail of what exactly net zero is...

Patricia Karvelas
Sure.

Senator Bragg
There's a vibe here, which is very important, around whether you want to reduce pollution and emissions.

Patricia Karvelas
What would happen if you then formally say you want to pull out of net zero by 2050? What are the electoral consequences...

Senator Bragg
Well, hang on. I don't think what the Nats are saying is necessarily unreasonable — that regional communities have been trampled upon in terms of transmission and new energy infrastructure. I don't think it's unreasonable, some of the points they've made. I think we should try and thread the needle on these issues before we give up.

Patricia Karvelas
When do you need to resolve this issue as a Liberal Party?

Senator Bragg
I think this should be resolved this year. I think this is damaging our ability to hold the government to account. There is significant maladministration in this government. There are significant failures. I'm noticing it across the board. Until we resolve this, it's very hard for us to hold the government...

Patricia Karvelas
How lousy are you as an Opposition at the moment at holding the government to account? Give yourself an assessment.

Senator Bragg
Well, I think in the housing space, which is one of my portfolios, we are trying very hard.

Patricia Karvelas
But do you accept that as an Opposition, pretty lousy at holding the government to account?

Senator Bragg
I think across the board, it is definitely hampering our ability to do that. That is very bad for our democracy because it transcends any individual or sectional interest. Holding the government to account in terms of its financial management and its administration programs is essential.

Patricia Karvelas
Do you think it's possible for the Liberals to split from the Nationals?

Senator Bragg
Well, it's always possible, but I don't think it's desirable. My view is we should try and thread the needle. My point to you is I haven't seen any repudiation of the Paris Agreement.

Patricia Karvelas
I believe that the Nationals' position is a repudiation of the Paris Agreement. It looks pretty straightforward, right? If the Paris Agreement is to get to net zero by 2050, and we're meant to reach that, and they say they don't want to track to that, how is it not?

Senator Bragg
I think the Paris Agreement dictates that it happens this century. My understanding is that we should be able to work through these matters. If we can, that's the best thing for the democracy, because having a consolidated centre-right is going to make for more coherent policy on economics, on national security, and the like.

Patricia Karvelas
You don't see a scenario where you could split from the Nationals and form an alliance at times for majority government with the Teals?

Senator Bragg
That's not something I've ever considered.

Patricia Karvelas
Why not?

Senator Bragg
Because we've been in Coalition with the Nats for a long time. It's been productive for Australia. That's my expectation — that we can hopefully preserve that. That would be my strong preference. I think that's the best thing for the country.

Patricia Karvelas
Why is it better for the country than perhaps being in an alliance? That's a legit question. There are a lot of the Teal Independents, there's a sizable number now. They're obviously often very impressive women, forming an alliance with them, possibly to form government or even in opposition. Why not?

Senator Bragg
We work collaboratively with the Nats. The Teals were designed to disrupt the Liberal Party. I don't think you could imagine that we would be wanting to be best friends with an organisation that's been designed to destroy our ability to represent parts of Australia. You never say never, but I don't see how, on the horizon, we could ever do that.

Patricia Karvelas
Andrew Bragg, I always love interviewing you. You're not afraid to call a spade a spade. Thank you.

Senator Bragg
Thank you very much.

[Ends]

‍