Television Interview - Sky News Newsday

Subjects: Most recent Newspoll data; the Prime Minister’s visit to the People's Republic of China; the future of Australia’s trade relationship with China; the Australian Government’s Prominence framework for connected TV devices.
 
TOM CONNELL, HOST: Joining me for more on this, the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, Patrick Gorman and NSW Liberal Party President, Jason Falinski. Gentlemen, thanks as ever for your time. So, there’s sheen coming off. The interesting thing, Patrick Gorman, is that the approval rating on Anthony Albanese's job. It's gone from +35 to -10. Why is that so, do you think?
 
PATRICK GORMAN, ASSISTANT MINISTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER AND ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE: Look Tom, what we know is that this poll is different to the previous poll and the next one will be different as well. We recognise that what the Australian people want us to be focused on is not on polls. They don't want us to be focused on ourselves, they want us to be focused on making sure we're supporting household budgets. That's exactly what we're doing. And you see that every day, in terms of the announcement we're making around Fee-Free TAFE, cheaper childcare, expanding access to bulk billing general practitioners; all of these things make a real difference. And I think also, the Australian people know, the last Prime Minister we had was a pretty marketing, poll-driven guy and the Morrison/Dutton Government were pretty poll-driven. It didn't serve Australians well. That's not our focus. Our focus is on delivering what we said we would do for the Australian people.
 
CONNELL: Well, you know, you can do the deliveries and the polls will look after themselves. But polls matter, they’re basically right. Let’s just carve out 2019, it was slightly wrong, it did matter. But, Patrick, this result on the net satisfaction for Anthony Albanese hasn't been bouncing around, it's steadily down. Why do you think that's the case?
 
GORMAN: Tom, as you would expect me to say and I've said on your programme before; I will leave the analysis of such things to others. The Prime Minister, as we've seen on your programme this morning, is getting on with the job of working for Australia, advocating for our interests, both at home and abroad. That's the job he's elected to do, and it's the job we'll continue to do. Making sure that we get good outcomes for Australians, for our economy, for our people-to-people links. That's what we're going to get on with.

CONNELL: So, Jason, on your side of things, Peter Dutton's net satisfaction with his job. That's down considerably, even from a pretty low level just after the election. He's always in negative territory and has gone further backwards. Why do you think that's the case?

JASON FALINSKI, NSW LIBERAL PARTY PRESIDENT:  I think it's the curse of the Opposition Leader, Tom, where you're constantly having to hold your opponents, whether they be Red, Green or Teal to account, and people want to hear some more positive stuff. There'll come a time when Peter Dutton has to throw the switch to vaudeville, but at the moment he's holding the government to account. He's doing a good job at that. But you know, look, there's no doubt these polling numbers are encouraging for us, but they also point to the fact that we've got a lot of work to do and we will. Australians are suffering a cost of living crisis created by government waste and mismanagement, whether it be at a federal, state or local government level. And all those governments are currently controlled by the Left.

CONNELL: Do you think Peter Dutton could ever aspire to be genuinely and broadly popular, or is he going for respected instead?

FALINSKI: I think that he's going for actually getting on with the job. So, his pitch to the Australian people is, ‘you know me and I will get on with the job.’ And that will include fixing the cost of living crisis, whether it be in housing, whether it be the energy cost crisis that we're facing, whether it be the levels of unplanned health expenditure that we have that are unsustainable, which means that future generations will not have the same sort of access that we have to our health system today. All those things will be the sorts of things that he will be talking to the Australian people about over the next 18 months.

CONNELL: Okay, I'm going to take that as you saying he's going for respected. No disagreeing? Good. Let's talk about China. It wants to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Patrick, it says, ‘oh, no, we'll play by the trade rules now.’ Do they need to show they can do that for a few years before Australia would support that push?

GORMAN: Yeah, well, I'm not going to preempt any of the discussions that are happening this week in China, but obviously, they are currently not a member. I don't want to preempt anything about how that would change. And obviously that's not just a decision for Australia.

CONNELL: But it's fair to say China doesn't have a good recent track record on obeying rules of trade, does it?

GORMAN: Well, as you know, Tom, and as your viewers know, we've raised concerns about ensuring a fair trading system with a range of countries, including China. When we came to office, there was some $20 billion of trade impediments on Australian goods. We've got that from $20 billion down to just $2 billion of trade impediments. That's something we're very proud of. It comes about through careful dialogue. What the Prime Minister is doing in China this week is just part of a long-standing effort from our government to make sure that we do have Ministers engaging in bilateral discussions, engaging with counterparts, advocating for Australia's interests, and you’re starting to see some results, which I think is very welcome for wine producers and many others as well.

CONNELL: We were in the freezer with China, Jason, this might be an opportunity for us to put them in a bit of a freezer. What are your thoughts on whether we should support or otherwise this push for them to be part of this big trade pact?

FALINSKI: Well, Tom, like, Pat, I'm very much in favour of free trade. It has done untold good for the globe and for people around the world. But the fact of the matter is that in the 1990s, we believed, as Bill Clinton famously said, that ‘we would get more from China with an open hand than a closed fist.’ However, they use the trade rules to their advantage while breaking them openly themselves. And any trade agreement that we enter into with the Chinese Government would have to have very careful sanctions so that they are encouraged and incentivised to abide by those rules. That has not happened since they joined the World Trade Organisation. As Patrick just pointed out, then we were punished for pointing out some home truths about the COVID pandemic, and that was coercion on behalf of the Chinese Government against the Australian people.

CONNELL: Yeah. So, should it have to show a sustained good track record to join this sort of deal, rather than a quick sort of neatening and cancelling of these sanctions, and then let us join this big pact.

FALINSKI: Look, my view is pretty simple on this. It's that we want China a member of as many trade deals and international organisations as possible part of the global legal order, but the sanctions for breaches of those laws, whether it be in the South China Sea, or whether it be by trade, or whether it be in Tibet or elsewhere, needs to be pretty clear. And when those laws are broken, those sanctions need to be both imposed and enforced.

CONNELL: Okay, just one final topic. This is for you, Patrick, in particular. It's to do with Smart TVs, so just about every Australian has one. And that Labor is looking at changes on so-called ‘Prominence Laws.’ So, when you turn on your TV for the first time, what order are the apps in? Which matters. And of course, it matters for companies, including ones that we're showing on Binge and so on. What's your view on this? Should Australians be free and TV companies be free to have those apps in whatever order they like? Or should free TV, for some reason, get prominence?

GORMAN: Well, Tom, we went to the election saying that we recognised that there was an important role to play in the Australian Government taking steps to ensure that those free-to-air networks that have served Australia for many decades do continue to serve Australia. They tell Australian stories, they are some of the largest funders of Australian content and production. They give fantastic media careers to many and so we took that to the election. Michelle Rowland has been working on that policy ever since. We hope to be able to legislate in the near future. We recognise that there are always, in these things, there are a range of different views and that's why we've gone through a very thorough consultation process to make sure that we hear all of those views and we land it in a way that's right for the Australian people. And what I think the Australian people want is a system that - we're not taking anyone's apps off these Smart TVs. They come with gigabytes and gigabytes of memory. Now, you can put as many apps on as you like, but let's recognise the important and unique role that free-to-air broadcast television has played in this country for decades and let's make sure that we continue to have those benefits for the future.

CONNELL. So, on that and what it could means, you said Australians, you know that they can fit as many apps as they want, would at least be a first principle that if you get the TV and you want to change the app or whatever it be to have certain ones more prominent than others, you can lock in your own settings? You wouldn't be locked into free TV as the first five, no matter what, and that can't be changed?

GORMAN: Well, this is where we all have our own television experience. I could talk about the Smart TV I have, and the free TV app is one particular button - it says ‘terrestrial TV’. And so how you would do that across the various different ways? We’d try and have some legislation that would clearly mean that it's reasonably consistent across all of the different brands and manufacturers. And I'd point out again: this is about requirements on manufacturers who bring products into Australia.

CONNELL: Yeah but when you say that - but this is about configuration, right? And if that's so, it might come in a certain way. But surely if you're sitting at home and you decide to, if you watch a lot of Sky News and a lot of AFL footy, don't know what households would possibly do that, apart from my own but, you know, you configure it how you want. I mean, you still want people to have choice on their Smart TV, don't you? 

GORMAN: And I think the idea that this takes away all of that choice is wrong. It's about make sure you've got prominence for those Australian free-to-air networks. That's something I think is quite reasonable. You know, I'm sure if you could have a standalone Paw Patrol app, that's what my kids would want to have. I'm sure others would have different requests, but just making sure we protect that free-to-air TV, I think is a pretty reasonable thing that most Australians would understand why we took that idea to the election and why we're acting upon it now.

CONNELL: Jason, your thoughts on this? I mean, media is increasingly sort of diverse in Australia. Does free TV deserve a legacy, if you like? Or should manufacturers be free to put whatever order they want and people be free as well?

FALINSKI: Yes, yes, I mean, talk about misplaced priorities. Tom, we're in the middle of a cost of living crisis. Labor's cancelled weeks of sittings because they've got no vision. They took a small target to the election, but it was really small ambition. So, now we're going to regulate what order the apps are on your TV. Um, you know, this is regulation looking for a problem. And the problem here is: it's about Labor protecting their friends at the ABC and punishing their enemies elsewhere. Because if we know one thing about Labor, whether they be, you know, the Greens or the Teals, they're all about using government to hurt the people who didn't support them and make sure the people who did, get rewarded.

CONNELL: Patrick, Jason, we will talk again in fortnight's time. Stay well. I should give you a shout out, um, Jason, you were erroneously told it would be quarter past 11. That's my fault, as it usually is. And you stuck around and Patrick, you always get credit for turning up as well even while over there in Perth.

GORMAN: Thank you, Jason!
 
CONNELL: Let's end it on a warm note. Talk to you in a fortnight guys. Thank you.

 
ENDS