Interview with Patricia Karvelas on ABC Afternoon Briefing

Subjects: Artificial intelligence regulation and competition, copyright laws and AI investment, housing and red tape, self-managed super funds (SMSF’s), net overseas migration targets, One Nation migration policy, Pauline Hanson comments on Indigenous Australians.

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

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

For a view from the Opposition, I want to bring in the Shadow Housing and Environment Minister, Andrew Bragg. Welcome to the program.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Hi PK, how are you?

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Oh, so much to talk about. Can we start on, I think, the biggest existential threat we really face: AI? Also an enabler, depends who you believe. Do you think these AI warnings are a hoax? They're from the big companies, the people who know AI because they're in charge of it. The US President thinks it's a hoax, it's an exaggeration. Is he right?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

What it means for Australia is that we must continue to be as competitive as we can be in terms of our taxes, our regulatory environment, energy, because this is not going away. We want to be a country that can generate AI applications. We might want to have the next Afterpay or Canva which is supported by AI that can be used by businesses and people. That's something that we can control and focus on.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Okay, but you didn't answer my question.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

We're not in control of what Anthropic and what OpenAI do, and we're certainly not in control of what the Chinese developers do. So I would have thought that it would be very important for the United States to maintain its leadership in artificial intelligence.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

So you do have some sympathy for the President's view, because his view is it's an arms race essentially, AI, and if you're slowing down, you're surrendering. Do you think he's got a point?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

I do, and generally I don't always agree with him, as you would expect, but I think on this front, if we pull back on the accelerator, I'm not sure what that means for the Western world, because we generally have been well served by having a lot of this technology led by the West.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Okay, this is where I get confused. Why would a whole bunch of bosses—Sam Altman, the Anthropic CEO—these people who stand to gain enormously from the money they're making from this, why would they want to slow it down if they were going to let go of their advantage, unless they thought something seriously was wrong?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, some of them have indicated they thought that AI might be able to murder humans on a mass scale. That's not something that's been explained to me, how that would actually work. But...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

But it's pretty alarming, and if the people who know the thing reckon it's possible, how can we not be alarmed?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

I'm not sure what we can do here, because if we pull back on this technology, it doesn't mean that the other countries will stop what they're doing. I mean, they will continue to develop this at a rate of knots. So I just don't think we can do much with it, frankly.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

In terms of what we can do, because there are some things we can do, our laws that we're going to have at the beginning of next year, should Australia be moving on our copyright laws to guarantee investment in AI? That's what OpenAI wants.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, I'm not sure how we could loosen these laws in a way that would suit the artificial intelligence organisations, because we have to maintain the idea that the laws that exist on the books apply across the board. They don't change.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

So we shouldn't be compromising on that?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, I'm yet to see a compromise that could work. I make the general point that what we can control is how competitive our jurisdiction is in terms of the taxation, in terms of the regulation, in terms of the energy. I'd say the government have made it much harder because of their tax policies and their energy policies than it needs to be for Australia.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

So, do you think we should be advocating for AI companies to incorporate a kill switch in their models? Because we can advocate, we do have some muscle. We're not in charge, but we have influence.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

The big applications are seeing a race between China and the United States. We're not part of that. I mean, the opportunity for us is, as I say, developing enterprise-level, business-level, or individual-level focused applications. That's where we're going to play.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Should we be offering an opinion on a kill switch or just surrendering that space?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, I think we should be very careful about looking to impose more regulation, because we want to be a destination for AI investment. We want to be more than just a place where you stick a few data centres. I think that's really important, because in the last 10 years, you've seen in the fintech space, you've seen things like Canva and Afterpay which have gone on to become global sensations. So if you add more red tape and more regulation to already a very uncompetitive tax system, as we've seen with this new Albanese crazy taxes, it's going to be ugly for Australia.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

The PM is actually going to meet with the heads of tech companies on Friday. Do you think he should be using that opportunity to talk about any of that regulatory part of the story, or should it just be an open-door policy?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

I think he should be looking to make Australia more competitive, because what he's done is damage our competitive profile by imposing more laws and more taxes. And so I think he has chased away investment, as you've seen. You're more likely to see an Australian idea now come to life in Tel Aviv, or Singapore, or California than you will in Sydney or Melbourne, and that's because of Mr Albanese's crazy policies with a 30% minimum tax on everything.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

I want to change the topic a bit and talk about your housing portfolio. Do you support the proposition put forward yesterday by Nicolette Boele, and actually yesterday the Minister responsible, Clare O'Neil, confirmed she's working towards this, the creation of a national definition of affordable housing?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

What would that achieve?

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Consistency, she says, and more investment in affordable housing.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

So effectively federalising the state definitions? I guess that's what the proposal is, if I understand it.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Having the same definition, I think it is.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Okay, well, it sounds like more regulation to me. And what we see in housing is the same problem: we see more and more red tape and more and more taxes, which mean we have fewer and fewer houses. So at the end of the day, you can't have your own facts, and we have 30,000 fewer houses a year on average...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

So you're against it?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, there's no way that more regulation and more taxes is going to build more houses. So...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

To be fair, that proposition, a sort of national definition, doesn't have to inherently have in it more taxes or more regulation.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Yeah, but Jim Chalmers and Clare O'Neil said that they read the book Abundance...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Everyone's read it now.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

...and I think that they've told porky pies. I don't think they read the book, because if they had...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Maybe AI summarised it.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Maybe it did, maybe they used a chatbot or something. But if they'd read the book, they would have known that these sort of ordinances and rules make it worse than better. And unfortunately, we're not getting the houses we need, and until we have a stripped-back policy of regulation and tax, we're going to go nowhere. And housing in Australia is going to get worse and worse, not better.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

A couple of other issues. Mentioned Clare O'Neil, who was on the program yesterday, your Shadow counterpart. She said, and I quote, "We certainly need house price growth to slow around Australia." It has already slowed. Do you agree with that?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

But not through taxes. I mean, if you want to have moderation, you don't get that through imposing taxes which give you higher rents and lower levels of supply.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

How else do you get it?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

By building more houses. The fact that we're 30,000 down on average over the course of this government compared to the last government is a terrible stat. And now the government wants to reduce it by another 35,000 with their new taxes in the Budget. I mean, why the government wants to restrict supply is beyond me. I mean, I may not be a very smart person, but why would you want to reduce housing supply in a housing crisis?

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Well, they say they don't want to, so they'd contest that.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Their Budget papers say 35,000 fewer houses because of the taxes. Then they've banned SMSFs from borrowing to invest in new housing...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

The net number is different to the one that you claim, though.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

That's not when you include the SMSF ban, which could be as many as 16,000 houses a year, which is insane. I mean, these people hate the investors more than they want to build houses. They hate investors in SMSFs, and they hate people negatively gearing, more than they want to build houses. That shows you how sick the Labor Party has become.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Let me ask you about migration, because you've had lots to say about migration and you put out a figure, that 180,000 in terms of net migration, right? And you haven't settled on a figure as a policy, as a political party. On migration, Nationals leader Matt Canavan has assured industry the Coalition will not make cuts to the working holiday maker visa program. Is that a policy you have?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, I mean, of course, we're working through it, but...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Is that quarantined?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, we're working through it, and...

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

So is it quarantined or not?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

We're working through that.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

So it's not quarantined, because he says it is.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, look, we're obviously working through the final policy, and everything Matt has said has been very sensible here, and Matt's generally quite a sensible guy. But I make the point that the range that you need to get to, if you want to close the migration and housing gap, is going to put you somewhere around 180,000.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

So, you need to get there somehow.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Yeah, we're working on it.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

You kind of need to go there then, if you want to get there, right?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

It's a work in progress.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

It sounds hard.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

No, we'll get there. I'm optimistic and confident.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

You are that type of guy. But let me ask you this: One Nation announced their policy yesterday, 750,000 fewer people over three years, that's the policy, there's lots of elements to it. They've kind of driven the agenda, haven't they? You don't have a policy, they have one.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

I think in terms of migration and housing, that's a policy that we've had in our bailiwick for a while. That was in the Budget Reply, and we look forward to building on that policy over the next couple of months.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Is there a vacuum, though, while you don't provide an alternative which is specific?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Look, we have to get all the details right. I mean, they can announce and re-announce their policies and say crazy stuff about Aboriginal people and whatever else, and they can kind of maybe try and get away with that as a challenger party. But we have to be responsible and make sure we get all the details right.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Okay, I will end on that because you mentioned it. Pauline Hanson has offered some kind of a qualified apology. Some people think it's not much of an apology, but she kind of still stands by that at colonisation they were the most primitive race, it seems to me. She says her views now are different. Is that an apology to you?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, look, it was a silly thing to do, but it's all part of a business model where you tee off on minority interests. That's a business model One Nation has had for years, and I suspect there'll be more in the future.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Was it offensive to Aboriginal people?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Well, of course. And I don't see how it helps the nation. I don't see how it helps anyone. There are no winners from that sort of attack. Obviously welcome the retraction, but as I say, it was silly, and it's part of the One Nation business model where you tee off on minority interests and you try and rile people up, and that's not leadership.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

And is that a business model that works?

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

That's not leadership, so it can't work. And in public life, you've got to do better than that.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

Thank you so much for coming in.

‍

Senator Bragg:

‍

Thank you.

‍

Patricia Karvelas:

‍

And that's Liberal Senator Andrew Bragg discussing AI, housing policy, and of course, Pauline Hanson's comments, too. 

[Ends]

‍