Television Interview, Sky Politics Now

Subjects: One Nation Defence policy, Defence Spending 

TOM CONNELL [HOST]: After stumbles over housing last week, there are questions being asked about the Defence plan that Pauline Hanson has previously mentioned. Joining me live now, Assistant Defence Minister Peter Kahlil. Thank you for your time, so being zeroed in on today - a line in a Pauline Hanson speech of a five per cent of GDP policy on Defence. It's not on their website, so I'm not sure how official it is, but would Labor be willing to go all the way up to five per cent?

PETER KHALIL [ASSISTANT MINISTER]: G', day, Tom, how are you? Look, slogans, not solutions. I think that's a characteristic of some of the populist politics that we're seeing from One Nation at the moment. There's nothing on the website. I actually went to the website, I saw the health care policy on the website was three paragraphs on medicinal cannabis, fair enough. And one sentence on supporting regional hospitals, also fair enough. But no other policy detail. And there was zero when it comes to Defence. And I think the real danger here is these slogans, if they were ever implemented or executed, would blow out the budget in a Defence sense by $400 billion. It's also a misunderstanding about how Defence capability works and acquisition. There's been no work done, obviously no policy work done by One Nation. It's all slogans, no solutions. It would mean that you'd have to decide on cutting aged care, health care, education, or you'd raise taxes at massive amounts to be able to fund that extra $400 billion. Look, this is just an example of a populist party that is saying all these slogans, saying what people want to hear, whipping up division and anger using the algorithms that you get on social media without any real work. They don't do the hard yacka, they don't do the work to actually do the policy development. It's all about grievance.

CONNELL: We are a year since the election. One Nation got six per cent then it wasn't the Opposition. I mean it's not the Opposition now. Now it's fair enough to ask for detail on policies given their leading in the polls, but isn't it also fair enough for them to have some time to develop those policies? If they rush them all out now, they would be half formed. Its two years until an election.

KHALIL: Sorry, Tom, sorry. I'm just going to call that out. How long have they been a party, a political party? Same goes with the Greens, same goes with all these minor parties. They've gone far too long without any scrutiny from the media. They get an easy ride. If they're serious about representing the Australian people in a sense of being a party that is taken seriously, they have an obligation, a responsibility, I would say, to actually do the work. There's no work there and they're not being held to account, now that they are getting this polling, and again, I will say about polling this, the only poll that matters is the one on election day. But set that aside for the moment. Everyone's talking about them. Ok, show us what your policies are. Stand up and explain what you're going on about. I'm sorry, they don't get away with making all these claims and all this rubbish that's been put out there without anyone actually clearly articulating what it would mean for the Australian people. And frankly, let's have a look at their actual record of what they've voted on. Okay? They've voted against increases in minimum wages, they've voted against the rights for workers and better conditions. They've actually got a substantive record that if anyone had a look at it, anyone held them to account, and they would see very clearly who they're actually supporting and who they're not supporting. And they're certainly not supporting the vast majority, $10 million plus more Australian workers, who they've voted against time and time again. So, let's call out, call out what they're doing here and actually put some focus on their claims and test them

CONNELL: and there will be plenty of focus on them. And I'm not saying they don't need to resent policy in detail. I'm just talking about that if that's still being developed, that wouldn't be totally out of the ordinary, given where a year from the election when they were absolutely no chance of a forming government and therefore didn't have an entire suite of policies.

KHALIL: Sorry, I know you might be running a very soft Defence on One Nation right now.

CONNELL: Well, no, I'm not…

KHALIL: …how long do they need to develop as a party? We have, we have our national conference, our state conferences. We go through democratic process, we put policies forward. 

CONNELL: Yes, but you also debate them, 

KHALIL: We debate them, we argue about them.

CONNELL: Yes, but you’re also the government, you've been in the opposition. You're big. You're a huge political operation. One Nation, until recently, was tiny. So, I'm just saying you wouldn't expect them to have the same policies at the last election.

KHALIL: That's the defensive line now is it?

CONNELL: Well, I'm not defending anyone. I'm saying they need to have. I'm saying they need to have policies in detail.

KHALIL: The reason I'm a bit annoyed about this.

CONNELL: Name another party?

KHALIL: I'm not having a go at you.

CONNELL: Well, let me put something back to you, name another party that was getting four or five per cent of the vote and had an entire opposition policy.

KHALIL: The reason I'm annoyed about this, so, and I'll answer your question, the reason I'm annoyed about this is all the circus that's going on, all the attention that is focused on and all the slogans that they're putting out there, which, if anyone had a really close look at, would see how detrimental it would be to the Australian people, to our budget, to aged care, to health care, to workers’ rights, to the Defence budget, all of these things. It annoys me because I care about this country, I care about Australia, and I'm in the game of politics because I want to serve the country that has given me so much and I've actually done the work, you know, I haven't gone around and just thrown out slogans. I'm going to spend 7% on this or 5% on this and do no work to back it up. And that's exactly what they're doing. And I tell you this now, if people are watching this, when people. When this settles down, people actually have a look at what they're putting up and realise how it's going to affect their lives, their children's education, their parents, aged care, their national security, then they're going to have to think really hard about what this party is offering. I don’t care how tiny they are, I don't care how long they've been around. If they're in the game, they need to front up and explain what they’re putting forward, and they haven’t done that.

CONNELL: They’re in the game now. They're leading the polls. They weren't before. Now you say, oh, when's the media going to do its job? Andrew Bolt last week called out Barnaby Joyce for getting the policy wrong. There’s the story we're talking about today on Defence, because another media company, Sydney Morning Herald, published that story. So, that's my point. Not that they wouldn't be expected to give detail. It's just that they don't have every policy developed from last election because they were absolutely no chance of forming government. Let me ask you this.

KHALIL: But the ones that they have put forward are pretty problematic.

CONNELL: Yeah, well, they will be gone through. She's at the Press Club. In a week's time, I'm sure you'll tune in and you'll see what policies they're offering and what detail we have as well. 

KHALIL: I might.

CONNELL: You might. Alright. Let me ask you this, though. We heard the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, mention specifically One Nation in some detail. You're fired up about them today. Is Labor realising the gloves need to come off now and you can't just ignore one nation into irrelevance?

KHALIL: Well, I'm fired up. We call it fired up. Well, first of all, I'm upset because Collingwood lost the game yesterday, but it was a great day for the Big Freeze. But I'm fired up for other reasons. I'm fired up because, you know, all the people across the political spectrum, and that includes everyone. This is not a personal attack on any particular, particular one. But I'm fired up about the fact that people need to be held accountable and responsible for what they're putting forward. And we're hearing a lot of slogans and a lot of sloganeering, if you like. A lot of, you know, stuff that's being put out there that if it ever actually hit the reality, the cold reality of the air and was ever implemented, would be disastrous for Australians. And these are the people that we represent. There's a responsibility in being in Parliament and being in a political party. You represent people, you serve the community. And I think it's highly irresponsible to put out the stuff that they're putting out without anything to back it up. And then even if you look at it with a bit of attention, you'll see how damaging it would be to Australian people. She's telling people what they want to hear because there is grievance, there is anger. The system is not working for a lot of people. But guess what? The government's been working hard to address that very issue. You know, we've been working really hard on real policies. I mean, I opened up a Medicare urgent care clinic in my electorate. That is really important for the people that I serve, people that I represent. That's real work. I had to go through the policy work. We had to do it with Mark Butler. These are things that we deliver as a government that makes a difference to people's lives, not just telling them what they want to hear.

CONNELL: Let me get to policy detail. In your area, you had an announcement pre budget, of course, on Defence, Labor shifted to counting defence by NATO. I'm just wondering, given NATO's not a true representation or that way of counting of our ability to defend ourselves because it includes things such as Defence pensions and I know that's not labour including it, that's NATO rules. That's fine, but why not also provide the previous figure your government did of what the actual spending as percent of GDP on Defence. On things that we are using to defend the country. Why not provide that as well?

KHALIL: Again, this is about the media, not you, Tom. But again, prior to us putting out the figures based on the NATO calculations of how you do Defence spending as a percentage of GDP, which most countries do, including the United States and so on, everyone was saying, oh well, you're comparing apples to oranges. You're talking about one thing they're talking about another. Now when we actually have something that can be the same. So, you can compare. When you're talking about a percentage. 

CONNELL: Why not both?

KHALIL: Hold on, let me answer your question. When you have a percentage that is clear, that includes things like Defence infrastructure and all those other things that are included in the NATO calculation. Something you're saying, oh no, why don't you give us the other figures? Let me be really clear. Anyway, you cut it.

CONNELL: I just said do both.

KHALIL: We have increased. We have increased Defence spending $14 billion over the forward estimates. Tens of billions of dollars over the decade. The biggest increase in Defence spending in peacetime. So, I don't care what anyone in the Opposition says. They can bleat all they want. They never did this. They haven't increased in the same way that the Albanese Government has.

CONNELL: I don't think you've answered, but we're out of time. But I'm just saying why not provide both? Sure, you give the NATO one you can compare apples to apples, but you give the old one to show where we've tracked competitive figure we got for the past number of years. Why not have both?

KHALIL: Any way you look at it, whichever percentage way you calculate it, there has been an increase in Defence spending. I don't understand why you don't understand that part. Tens of billions of dollars increase in Defence spending. 

CONNELL: Well, I’m just saying provide the figure.

KHALIL: It’s real its acquisition of capability. That hasn't happened. So, whether you calculate it in the old way, whether you calculate in the NATO way, it is an increase in Defence spending. Our Defence spending is going up. We need to do that. I've always argued for the point that we need to increase our Defence spending because we have national security responsibilities and we're fulfilling them.

CONNELL: Right. We've got to go. My point is if you would be able to compare year on year, when it goes up under the old rules, we can no longer got to leave it there. Peter Khalil, appreciate your time. Talk soon. Thank you.

KHALIL: Thanks for having me, Tom. Cheers.

ENDS