Patrick Gorman MP on Sky News' Afternoon Agenda 9 December

TOM CONNELL, HOST: Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, Patrick Gorman, and former Liberal MP, Jason Falinski. Thank you both for your time. So just focusing on one element of this, Patrick, you've got a flight for Annika Wells' husband to go to the AFL Grand Final and back on the one day. So, a few hours in Melbourne. That's not really a family reunion, is it? That's just going to the footy.

PATRICK GORMAN, ASSISTANT MINISTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER: Look Tom, as has been explained on this program by the Minister herself, this travel was within the rules that were set by Malcolm Turnbull and his government back in 2017, it is consistent with those guidelines. That is what you would expect from any Minister in our Government, and that is what has occurred here.

CONNELL: But it's not a genuine 'let's spend a lot of time with the family'. Guidelines are one thing, you've said that, fine. But clearly, when you're doing that for one day - to fly in and out on the one day and go to the grand final, which is a big event, a lot of distraction, it's not family time is it?

GORMAN: I not going to sit here and criticise people for spending time with their families, and for doing their jobs in their ministerial responsibilities. That is what has occurred here, consistent with the guidelines.

CONNELL: Are the guidelines still fit for purpose?

GORMAN: I think they are starting to stand the test of time. As I said, they were brought in by the Turnbull Government back in 2017. They continued under the Morrison Government. We adopted the same rules when we came to office. I think that is the right thing to do. This travel was within those guidelines.

CONNELL: Jason, your thoughts?

JASON FALINSKI, FORMER LIBERAL MEMBER FOR MACKELLAR: Tom, look, the fact of the matter is that there are no rules that basically go to character. There's no law in the land that basically says you have to behave with good character. And I'm not saying that Anika hasn't, in this particular instance, but politicians, regardless of where they are in the political spectrum, have to treat other people's money like it's their own. And that's one of the issues with large government, it's the principal-agent problem. I think that a lot of Australians would be looking at this sort of askance, as you are, and Patrick is right she hasn't broken any rules whatsoever. But there's no rule that can basically say treat other people's money like it's your own. I'm more concerned with the outcomes of some of the policies that she has been part of - the under 16 social media ban. The outages on networks because of the mismanaged shutdown by ACMA over the 3G network in 2024. These are things that I think will have a much greater impact on Australians. And Australians have a ballot box, and if they want to exercise their views on this, they will at the election.

CONNELL: Energy rebate is gone. Patrick, is this Labor now beginning to rein in spending?

GORMAN: These were always temporary measures, and we listened to the views of people who wanted us to extend them and those who wanted us to cut them off much earlier. We took the view that we needed one more round, which we delivered this calendar year. We are always looking at the best way to deliver cost of living support. Two measures that I think will make a lot of difference to your viewers, is one; the cheaper medicines that come in on the first of January. Now you can go down to Beaufort Street Chemist in my electorate. They are open till 2am in the morning. So you can be one of the first people in Western Australia to get cheaper medicines through the PBS on the first of January at 12:01am. The other one is the tax cuts that come in in the middle of next year. We have made room in our budget for those tax cuts. Remembering it was not that long ago - this year - we were debating whether or not those tax cuts should go ahead. The current leader of the Liberal Party opposed those tax cuts, the future leader of One Nation opposed those tax cuts, but we thought it was the right thing to do. They kick in next year. That is what we have made room for in our budget, and we are proud of that.

CONNELL: There's a pivot there, asked a question on spending, we got to a plug for the local pharmacy. So get along and support them.

FALINSKI: Remorseless. He is remorseless.

CONNELL: Sometimes, it's, you know. I don't know. I guess it's impressive. Jason -

FALINSKI: No, it is. It's very impressive.

CONNELL: The Coalition -

FALINSKI: Yes.

CONNELL: The Coalition has this 23.7 - very specific - limit on taxation of GDP. That's just a number they set from many years ago. It seems slightly unscientific, but my question is this: they never had a cap on spending, is now the time to actually have one on spending? And then they can say, here's our cap on spending, Labor's way over that. Because when they just say, "oh, Labor should spend less", but the last Coalition budget was pretty high spending, though it's a bit hard to compare them.

FALINSKI: Yeah, well we did have COVID -

CONNELL: Post-covid, the last Budget in 2022 was well past COVID. It was a pretty high spending budget.

FALINSKI: It wasn't well past - oh my God. Gee. Talk about rewriting history -

GORMAN: - 2019 back in black, and it never happened.

FALINSKI: Yeah, it's called COVID. I mean, the two of you - talk about rewriting history. This is a memory hole. Number one, 2022, we were still having shutdowns at the end of 2021 and I remember - I still have PTSD over that Christmas-New Year period as the PCR labs couldn't get results out fast enough for people to go to Queensland. So yeah, look, I agree with you, Tom. I don't think we have a tax problem in Australia. We have a massive spending problem. And regardless of what you say about tax rates, your real tax rate is spending. Because you're either paying for it now or you are going to pay for it tomorrow with interest on top. So yes, in short, I agree with you -

CONNELL: Spending is actually more relevant?

FALINSKI: Yes -

CONNELL: Isn't that more relevant? No one thinks, 'my government will tax me too much.' It's spending.

FALINSKI: Correct.

CONNELL: Alright.

FALINSKI: I'm glad I have finally taught you something about tax policy. I feel like my role is done here now. Merry Christmas.

CONNELL: Oh yeah, what about me? I'm the one answering the questions. Anyway, we might have to do the 2022 Budget in detail, and see how much you really spent back then.

FALINSKI: Hey Patrick, how many times have I come on back here and said 'the question is not about taxes, it's about spending' and now Tom's asking me about spending.

CONNELL: Well, it was a specific question, though. The Coalition has long had a tax to GDP obsession. I'm saying have a spending to GDP.

FALINSKI: It should have a spending to GDP. You are right, Tom. I agree with you agreeing with me.

CONNELL: Yeah. Okay, no worries. I was going to ask you the next question, I don't know if you deserve it. Coalition on housing - your mate Andrew Bragg - so that means you'll agree with whatever I say here. Last election, I was pretty surprised the Coalition specifically mentioned Greenfield sites were what they wanted to do, and when pinpointing exactly where, I think the first answer I got from a Minister was something that's 85 km from the city. Was that a mistake? Andrew Bragg says, "sure, Greenfield is fine, but we need to really do development and density as well." Was the Coalition sort of, out of step last time? Just going sort of urban sprawl on steroids?

FALINSKI: No, I don't think so. I mean, look, I don't think that this is a solution that you will find in Canberra. You won't find it in Macquarie Street or St Georges Terrace. You won't find it in the planning departments. The best housing market in the world, quite frankly, is Texas. It has more affordable housing and has cheaper housing, has more range of housing, has cities with lower carbon footprints, because housing is located closer to areas of work, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And they don't have zoning laws. They have land use laws but not zoning laws. So, there will be some people who want to live in high rises. There will be some people who want to live on the edge of the city. But what we have in Australia is literally the worst of all systems, and -

CONNELL: Nothing at all. So, any - go as dense as you want? If a developer can buy in the most, you know, and get a big enough plot and whack up 20 levels - go for it?

FALINSKI: Well, that's going to get me in trouble if I give you the answer I want to give, but yes, that's the experience -

CONNELL: Well, give it.

FALINSKI: No no, well -

GORMAN: Say what you think Jason -

CONNELL: Hang on. You said Texas - even former Liberal MP Jason Falinski won't tell us what he thinks.

FALINSKI: Okay. Oh, all right, look, yes, is the answer. In short. It is unlikely that that would be what happens. But what is more likely to happen is, in places like Sydney, you would find on the outskirts of Sydney you would find new types of development where you would have integrated work, different forms of housing, mostly high density and low density mix with each other. That has been the experience of Texas.

CONNELL: Okay. Pat, very quickly, everything I read about the 5% deposit scheme, because I love, like any Australian, looking at the real estate section of a newspaper, whatever it might be. It has set alight certain segments of the market. Prices are up. Is this an okay outcome?

GORMAN: I think anything we can do to help first home buyers is good. This is -

CONNELL: Pay more -

GORMAN: We have got advice from Treasury -

FALINSKI: Build more houses.

GORMAN: - about what impact this would have -

FALINSKI: Which said, build more houses.

GORMAN: - very small impact. I am pleased to hear that some in the Liberal Party are finally supporting the initiatives to build more houses that we have brought forward.

FALINSKI: You have built no new houses.

GORMAN: It is a shame they didn't do that when they were in government. If I can just, very quickly, I have proudly never opposed a housing development -

CONNELL: Ever?

GORMAN: In my electorate. No, I haven't -

FALINSKI: This is a big call. Sounds like a fact check is on its way.

GORMAN: I would note that that is not something that many of Andrew Bragg's colleagues can come and sit here and say. So, I think he might start by having some conversations with some of his colleagues.

FALINSKI: Name them, Pat. Name them.

GORMAN: The problem with what he has put out, and I must be serious. Andrew Bragg is talking about jamming families of five into granny flats. He is talking about building houses in the middle of nowhere. His policies -

FALINKSI: What?

CONNELL: Where is his policy to fit a family of five in a granny flat? Where does he say that?

FALINSKI: I don't see it.

GORMAN: He doesn't care where we build them. He says the other solution is granny flats.

FALINSKI: Well, that could be a solution.

GORMAN: I mean, I have got nothing against getting more granny flats where that makes sense -

FALINSKI: Sounds like you've got something against them -

GORMAN: I don't think it's a serious solution. This is the same guy who put forward raiding your superannuation to buy your first home -

FALINSKI: But you want to raid superannuation for social housing.

GORMAN: We want superannuation to be for retirement. We have always been clear about that -

FALINSKI: No, it sounds like you don't care who raids it, as long as you get to choose who's doing the raiding. Yeah, sorry.

CONNELL: Jason, Patrick. I've been told people are sick of you. I'm not, but this is just what I get told. See if you can -

GORMAN: The people never get it wrong.

CONNELL: They never get it wrong. Jason, Pat, thank you.