Interview with Patricia Karvelas on ABC Afternoon Breifing

SENATOR ANDREW BRAGG

Shadow Minister for Productivity and Deregulation

Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness

Liberal Senator for New South Wales

TRANSCRIPT

INTERVIEW WITH PATRICIA KARVELAS ON ABC AFTERNOON BRIEFING

19 November 2025

Subjects: Wage Price Index, CSIRO funding, climate policy, EPBC Act, Liberal Party

E&OE………

Patricia Karvelas

Let's bring in the Opposition now with the Shadow Housing Minister, Andrew Bragg, joining me. Andrew Bragg, welcome.

Senator Bragg

Hi, Patricia.

Patricia Karvelas

Wages data out today. In fact, it does show that there has been eight consecutive increases. That's a better record, isn't it, than under the Coalition?

Senator Bragg

Well, unemployment is actually up compared to where the government started when they were elected back in May 2022. So, there are fewer Australians in work. That is the key test when you look at the overall unemployment position. Right now, you've got flatlining investment, you've got low productivity, and you've got a ballooning debt with red ink as far as the eye can see. The economy last year in Australia saw most of its jobs growth in the non-market sector. So, 85% of all jobs created were in the non-market sector. So, I don't think it's anything to crow about and I think the economy could be much better.

Patricia Karvelas

Okay, you think the economy could be much better. Obviously, the Budget is in focus today, and the budget of the CSIRO has been a very big story, as you know. Just a simple question, do you think the CSIRO should be better funded?

Senator Bragg

It's always sad to see people lose their roles. The CSIRO has done great work over many decades. As to its exact funding profile, that's not something that I am completely across all the detail of. But I'd say that these are the agencies that have done great work for the country over the long term, and they need to be properly resourced.

Patricia Karvelas

Okay. So broadly, you think that there might be a case for spending more money on science?

Senator Bragg

Well, of course. I mean, we support science, and how will we solve future problems without science?

Patricia Karvelas

Well, let's go to that. Future problems. What could a future problem be, Andrew Bragg? Net zero by 2050 - you lost that one. You did tell my colleague, David Speers, that you would consider leaving the Frontbench if the Party dropped that policy, but you haven't left. Why not?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think in that answer, I indicated that it was very important that we be in Paris and we have a commitment to net zero. We've ended up being in the Paris Agreement, which, of course, is ultimately about net zero. And we have a different policy now, which is to focus more on power prices through a technology agnostic approach. Ultimately, though, the two things are not inconsistent. I mean, you can be pursuing an energy abundance agenda which uses all the technologies, but you can also pursue decarbonisation. And in fact, many studies show that the two actually do go hand-in-hand.

Patricia Karvelas

Just to be clear, because there's a lot of confusion about your policy, the Liberal Party's and the Coalition's energy policy. Do you think money should go to coal?

Senator Bragg

No, I don't. But there is a scheme which is technology agnostic to ensure that there is going to be capacity through an underwriting process. That doesn't mean the taxpayer would be building a new coal-fired power station. That means that the taxpayer would be, through contracts, ensuring that there is the requisite supply of energy into the system. Now, the broader point here, though, really is that we haven't had the ability to access all technologies in the past. There hasn't been enough gas. The coal probably was closed down too fast, and we have a prohibition on nuclear. And so one of the reasons you need to see the EPBC reforms go through is because it's hard to get big projects approved. Big projects, whether they be renewables or gas or other projects.

Patricia Karvelas

Okay, look, I've spoken to many of your colleagues, as you know, is my practise. It's my view after many of these conversations that there are many who are concerned there are holes in your policy in relation to energy. Will it need to be revisited? Will there need to be more work on this policy because of these holes?

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, the policy is the policy. It's a foundation, and from time-to-time, all policies need to be revised. But the broad thrust of it is that we want to use all technologies to get prices down with a focus on supply. And we also want to pursue emissions reduction. And that's why being in the Paris Agreement is so important. And as you know, the Paris Agreement requires you to set Nationally Determined Contributions or targets, which we've committed to doing. And you have to ensure that your future targets are at least as good or better than the former targets that you inherit. I think that builds in some strong accountability into the overall emissions reduction side of the policy. But as I say, there's two parts of it. There's the idea that we want to have more supply and cheaper prices, and then there is the emissions reduction part.

Patricia Karvelas

You've written to New South Wales Liberal Party members telling anyone that is disappointed with the policy outcome on net zero not to walk away from the party and that you will keep fighting for credible policies. Why did you send that message?

Senator Bragg

Well, because there are a mix of views inside political parties. That's not unusual, and that's actually a good thing, I think. But there are a number of people in the Party that are disappointed with that particular judgement. There are a lot of people who are also probably quite happy. But it's important that we don't see a fragmentation of the centre-right. It's important that we recognise that there are more than just one or two different policy issues at any time, that there is a broader objective of having a Liberal Party; which is to develop coherent policy, economic policy, foreign policy. Being together and being in one bigger party is going to be better for Australia.

Patricia Karvelas

You're worried that people will walk away and that the Party will move further to the right?

Senator Bragg

Well, there's a mix of views on these issues. And so I received a lot of feedback from members who were disappointed with the exact prescription that we ended up with. And so my message to them is that they should stay. They should stay and engage. And the worst thing that they could do would be walk away. Because I think if you had a bigger, let's say, hypothetically, if you had a bigger One Nation group and a bigger Teal Party and a smaller Liberal Party; I think that type of fragmentation on a permanent basis, I think, would lead to incoherent policy, particularly on the difficult issues like economic and foreign policy matters.

Patricia Karvelas

It's a warning shot in many ways. How about Holly Hughes' point that she's been making that Sussan Ley has been undermined. Do you agree with Holly Hughes?

Senator Bragg

Look, I think in political parties, people will always have different agendas. I think Sussan has taken the reins in a very difficult circumstance, the most catastrophic defeat in the Party's history. Of course, we are trying to make sure that we can hold this government to account by fashioning together our own policies. I think in the last three year Parliament, we probably took too long to adjust from being in government into Opposition, and that is still a work in progress.

Patricia Karvelas

Is Sussan Ley safe next week?

Senator Bragg

Well, I would imagine so because she was only elected six months ago, and it's pretty early days. We've got two key jobs. We've got to hold the government to account and develop our own policies. I would say on the latter category of policy formulation, that is starting to build up a head of steam. What you'll see over the next few months is more policy down payments because I think Australians are hungry for our ideas. Frankly, for people who do watch politics a lot, they're probably sick of us talking about ourselves. It's a good thing to actually do some policy work.

Patricia Karvelas

And has that been lacking?

Senator Bragg

Well, it's on the tracks. It's going to come soon.

Patricia Karvelas

Well, one thing that's meant to come soon is your migration policy. Why is there an obsession and a rush to get to this?

Senator Bragg

I don't think there's any obsession. I think it'll be one policy that we have. There'll be policies on housing, there'll be policies on business and investment and tax. These are all the things that are germane to a party of government, and they'll be properly calibrated. They'll go through a Shadow Cabinet or they'll go through an expenditure review process, if need be. And these things will to be done properly.

Patricia Karvelas

When you do address people that are disappointed, can you be clear, are you yourself disappointed?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think people understand that you don't win every single debate internally. What you've got to do is take a broader view of your obligations as a member of a party which is seeking to be a government for our country. You've got to work on what you can control. I've got important portfolio responsibilities. I'm focused on housing. I'm focused on cutting red tape. Those are my focuses.

Patricia Karvelas

Yes. And you're going to stay on the Frontbench?

Senator Bragg

Well, of course, I've got important work to do. As I said to you before, on the emissions reduction point, I think it's very welcome that we are remaining a signatory to the Paris Agreement, that we have those Nationally Determined Contributions as part of our overall formula, because that will drive great accountability, and that will drive a focus on our side of politics on emissions reduction. That emissions reduction is important; it is just as important as price and reliability. Those three things are not inconsistent.

Patricia Karvelas

Well, I have to ask just before I let you go. Next week's a big week. Parliament's returning. The last parliamentary week of the year is always rather intense in my experience. I'm sure yours, too. The environment laws will be up before you, given, as you say, there are people disappointed with the Liberal Party in relation to abandoning net zero by 2050. Isn't it important to try and get a deal on these environment laws with the government? Jim Chalmers told me a little earlier that he would prefer a deal with a Party of government i.e. your Party, not The Greens.

Senator Bragg

In the ideal world, yes, because business is saying this is a massive drag on productivity, and we know that this is holding back new housing supply. It's holding back new energy development. So if we want to be serious about energy supply, then dealing with the EPBC is important. Of course, that's not a blank cheque, but I'd say that in the housing area alone, there are 25,000 maybe 40,000 houses not being built because of the EPBC. In fact, I've visited sites in Queensland where houses would be, but they aren't because a cockatoo flew over a block of land in 1971, and therefore, you can't have a house there now, which is ridiculous. So, I think we should try with best endeavours to get there. But of course, we can't give a blank cheque. If it's a bad proposal, it's a bad proposal. But in general, we should be trying to do it.

Patricia Karvelas

Especially, I set up that juxtaposition if you like, with net zero, just because the party, you know it, is struggling with your credentials on climate and the environment. So, doesn't that create an extra impetus to try and get a deal, not a blank cheque, but a deal to show that you are serious about the environment?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think that we can burnish strong credentials when it comes to emissions reduction by virtue of our involvement in the Paris Accord. The Paris Accord is actually about getting to net zero. That's the whole point of it. If you weren't wanting to do that, then you wouldn't be in it. I think that's important to make clear what our position is. But in relation to EPBC, business has identified this as a massive drag on productivity. Of course, we should try, but we're also not in the business of giving the government a blank cheque. This is a government that's brought in 5,000 new regulations in one Parliament alone, 400 new laws, costing $5 billion. So far, Labor have been the champions of red and green tape. If they want to do an about face and do this properly, then, of course, we're keen to help.

Patricia Karvelas

Just finally, you've said a few times that Paris is about getting to net zero. It is, isn't it? It's really clear.

Senator Bragg

Well, that is the point. It is about netting off emissions over the course of this century with offsets.

Patricia Karvelas

Andrew Bragg, always good to speak to you. See you next week in Parliament.

Senator Bragg

Thanks a lot.

[Ends]

Media Contact | David Nouri | 0401 392 624

‍