INTERVIEW ON AFTERNOON BRIEFING WITH PATRICIA KARVELAS

INTERVIEW ON AFTERNOON BRIEFING WITH PATRICIA KARVELAS

‍

14 August 2025

Subjects: Productivity roundtable, Treasury backing Coalition policies, Labor’s housing failures, unemployment figures, Gaza

E&OE………

Patricia Karvelas

For the Opposition's view, I want to bring in the Shadow Housing Affordability and Productivity Minister, Andrew Bragg. Andrew Bragg, welcome.

Senator Bragg

PK.

Patricia Karvelas

The government says it hasn't finalised any ideas yet. It is pretty standard, isn't it, for Treasury to come up with some policy suggestions that it puts to the Cabinet?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think it's very curious that two of the Treasury ideas were actually ideas that we had at the last election. So, tells you that the central agency thinks that Coalition policy ideas are credible. The other idea we've seen bandied around is the idea from the super funds, which Jim Chalmers has already executed through ASIC, which is where they own more houses compared to individual Australians.

Patricia Karvelas

Okay, so you're basically saying Treasury likes your ideas. Maybe they do. If they do, why not halk it as a win that this is now on the agenda?

Senator Bragg

Well, let's see where it gets to. The Government have put in place thousands and thousands – over 5,000 regulations, actually – and they have put red tape around the housing sector. If they are going to now change course and remove some of that red tape – and don't forget, they actually changed the NCC in their first term – then if they're going to change direction, then we're happy to support that.

Patricia Karvelas

Okay, so these leaked Treasury documents obtained by the ABC revealed this list: advice on the pause of the National Construction Code, cutting environmental red tape, all of this. These are all ideas that you would support, right?

Senator Bragg

Well, these are good ideas. In fact, the government said during the last campaign that changing the NCC was a bad idea. In fact, Ed Husic said that it would result in there being bad houses or shoddy housing in Australia. So, there was a reason this was our policy, which was because we knew there was a lot of red tape in the housing sector. In relation to the EPBC, we also had a policy there to remove some of the red tape and to get the approvals moving. So, these are not new ideas. These are ideas that Labor would have known about last term. But instead of actually helping housing, in the last term they put in place lots and lots of red tape.

Patricia Karvelas

Okay, so Jim Chalmers spoke about housing today, he was peppered with lots of questions. He says there's no change in the housing market they could make today that would make housing more affordable tomorrow. Is that right?

Senator Bragg

Well, you need to build more houses. Now, what we've seen is a massive surge in population growth, the biggest since the 50s, and a massive collapse in housing construction under this government. We've gone from an average of 200,000 houses a year under the Coalition down to 170,000 houses. So, all the bureaucracy that Labor have put in place has failed to yield houses. And so, if you want to get supply moving, you've got to work out actually how to do that because so far, they’ve put all their faith in Canberra-based bureaucracies which don't build houses.

Patricia Karvelas

Well, on that population issue, at the last election, Peter Dutton firmly linked the number of people coming into Australia with the housing crisis. I talked about this with Andrew Hastie last week, on your side of politics, and he said the cut that you put forward is something he still supports, it was just badly sold. Do you still support the cut that Peter Dutton took to the election?

Senator Bragg

Well, our policies are under review. I know you've heard that ad nauseam…

Patricia Karvelas

…I have, I'm dying of boredom. So, add something that makes it more exciting. What do you think should – don't bore me, tell me – where do you think it should land? Because you can.

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, the point is that having a large growth of people means you need to have more houses. What we've had is lots of people and fewer houses. So, it is one of the driving impacts of the housing crisis. There's no question about that. So, we will look at that again as we pull together our housing and our migration policies. But, you can't just blame migration for all the problems that we have. You can't just blame the housing crisis on migrants. I just don't think that's fair.

Patricia Karvelas

No, it seems very unfair, in fact. But on that cut that was proposed by Peter Dutton, do you think it's too high? Too dramatic?

Senator Bragg

We'll have to look at where we get to with housing completions by the time the next election rolls around. I mean, as I say, we've had a massive collapse in housing construction and we've had a huge influx of population, so, there is a nexus between those things. Let's see where we get to under this government. We want the government to build houses, but they've failed to build them. If they have ideas to help build houses, we'll back them.

Patricia Karvelas

Today, new figures out, the jobless rate fell to 4.2% in July, we’ve had an interest rate cut. Unemployment is low. These are all good things, aren't they?

Senator Bragg

It's always good to see more workers employed. But one of the most troubling factors here is that so many people are now working for the government, or working in a non-market scheme. And so, we want to see the market economy come back to life. We're worried that over the long term, 80% of the jobs growth over the last year has been in that non-market sector. So, that's not a good sign of health for our economy.

Patricia Karvelas

So, the other news that was out is that wages are up too and that the gender pay gap is at the lowest it's been since the published figures. That's the ABS today. Again, these are positive figures, aren't they?

Senator Bragg

Well, that's great, but I mean ultimately, you've got to look at the long-run indicators. You've got very bad productivity; you've got negative 5% since the Labor Party came to office. Plus, you've got anaemic growth. And so, you've got those jobs figures which indicate that most of the jobs growth is in the non-market sector. So, that's not a great long-term position for the country to be in.

Patricia Karvelas

I just want to change the topic before I let you go. Do you accept that many peaceful Palestinians want their own state, and that attributing statehood as if it's all a Hamas project really distorts the reality on the ground?

Senator Bragg

Look, I'm sure that's right. But right now, there is no state of Palestine. You would have no idea where the borders are. If there was a government today, it would be Hamas. So, recognising Palestine while Hamas is running a part of it is ridiculous; it’s a deeply unserious concept. Keir Starmer started all this a few weeks ago. I think it's actually had the reverse impact of what he wanted. It wasn't a serious contribution. Unfortunately, now, Mr Albanese has spent Australia's capital on this ridiculous undertaking.

Patricia Karvelas

How has he spent Australia's capital?

Senator Bragg

Well, he's putting all the pressure on Israel rather than putting pressure on Hamas.

Patricia Karvelas

Don't you think there should be pressure put on Israel, given the starvation we're seeing there?

Senator Bragg

I think we should be putting maximum pressure on Hamas. They're a terrorist organisation…

Patricia Karvelas

…There's a starvation crisis, Andrew Bragg. Shouldn't there be pressure on the Israeli Government?

Senator Bragg

We also want to see food get to Gaza. That's very important. We've made that very clear. But, this is a terrorist organisation which has tried to destroy Israel. It should be eradicated, and we should be putting maximum pressure on Hamas, not putting maximum pressure on Israel.

Patricia Karvelas

Isn't putting maximum pressure on Hamas trying to build the political firepower and the hopes and dreams of Palestinians who don't want that militant option?

Senator Bragg

Well, the separation of issues here is very clear in my mind. You've got a humanitarian issue, which is separate to statehood. You've got to get the food and got to get the aid through. That's quite separate from where exactly a future Palestinian State would be. Everyone thinks it's a good idea to have two states, including myself. But you've got to get the timing right, and rewarding the current organisation is a ridiculous proposition, and it won't work.

Patricia Karvelas

How does it reward them? They don't even want two states. They want to get rid of Israel. How does it reward them? Where's the reward for them?

Senator Bragg

Of course it is. It's one of their objectives. That's why the statements have been made in the Australian media today about this, which you've read and have been canvassed widely. So, the position we should be adopting is to put maximum pressure on Hamas. That's what we should be doing, but we're not doing that at all.

Patricia Karvelas

We're out of time, but thank you for joining us.

Senator Bragg

Thanks a lot.

[Ends]

‍