Television interview with Tom Connell - Sky News Afternoon Agenda

TOM CONNELL, HOST: Joining me, the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, Patrick Gorman, and former Liberal MP, Jason Falinski, for our regular hit out. Patrick. So, we heard a lot from Labor in the lead up to this potential decision, no role for Hamas in the future of Palestine. But this condition - they won't play a role in the future - recognition can still come, while Hamas is in power. Am I reading that correctly?
 

PATRICK GORMAN, ASSISTANT MINISTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER: What we have said, is that we will take steps towards recognition of Palestine at the UN General Assembly. The 80th General Assembly held in September in New York. What we have also outlined is that there have been serious and firm commitments given to us around some of the actions that the Palestinian Authority will take, around integrity in their education processes, making sure they take steps towards free and fair elections. 

And you also saw in that press conference with the Prime Minister, a point towards the comments from the Arab League, amongst other nations, and the nations of the Arab League, around ensuring that what we see is no role for Hamas in that future leadership of - 

CONNELL: But then it can still be in charge. So, when this happens, if it's still in charge in Gaza, you'll still recognise Palestine? That's accurate, right? 

GORMAN: As the Prime Minister outlined, just over an hour ago, Hamas are not friends of the aspirations of the Palestinian people. They are not friends of a two-state solution. The actions that we are taking are actions towards a two-state solution. Actions towards recognition of a Palestinian state. Working with like-minded countries like the United Kingdom, Canada, are working towards that outcome. 

Because what we want to see, Tom, let me be really clear for you and everyone watching, what we want to see is peace. We do not see that a military solution to the absolute catastrophe we see in Gaza, is the solution that the world wants to see, nor the path to a lasting peace. 

CONNELL: Jason is there at least an element to which Israel has brought the shift in many countries, not all countries around the globe but many countries, in terms of sentiment? Not allowing aid in properly, and that humanitarian crisis that spawned in it, and as well, which was singled out today, expansion of West Bank settlements. That's not a genuine move towards a two-state solution when they're expanding West Bank settlements, is it? 

JASON FALINSKI, FORMER LIBERAL MP FOR MACKELLAR: Expansion of West Bank settlements has been problematic for about 27 years, Tom. I dispute that Israel has not been allowing aid into the Gaza Strip, and indeed has not been facilitating it as much as it possibly can. According to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation run by John [inaudible], the problem with food distribution in Gaza has been the outright theft by Hamas, and that they have made nearly a billion dollars from food aid in this calendar year. 

That's the problem. Recognising, as Marco Rubio pointed out today, when Emmanuel Macron decided to do what he did, he actually set back the cause of peace in the Gaza Strip and the Middle East and the humanitarian disaster that we have seen unfold there. He set all of the resolutions back on that, months. It was at the point when he made that decision, and made that announcement, that Hamas walked away from the negotiating table with absurd demands of Israel. 

Patrick is right, Hamas is not a friend of the Palestinian people, but it enjoys over 90% support, or did enjoy over 90% support from the people of Gaza. What Australia has done today is unfortunately, made the likelihood of peace in that troubled region less likely, rather than more likely.

CONNELL: How do you feel so certain about what's happening with aid, considering Israel won't let journalists into Gaza?

FALINSKI: Israel won't allow journalists into Gaza, Tom, because it is a war zone. The reason that people are certain - 

CONNELL: But that can be up to journalists - 

FALINSKI: - confirmed by the United Nations - 

CONNELL: But that can be up to journalists to take that risk. 

FALINSKI: - that's not - their rationale, yes. But your underlying premise is, that Israel is trying to hide something that's going on in Gaza. My read - 

CONNELL: Well, what I said was that you have certainty, - 

FALINSKI: That underlying premise isn't correct. Secondly - 

CONNELL: Well, you have certainty about it, but I would have thought that letting journalists in, and it's on their own risk, means the true story is more likely to get told in any situation?

FALINSKI: Yeah, so my answer to your question is, I don't believe your underlying premise is correct, and I can cite examples of why it's not. Secondly, the reason that I am certain of it is, that it is not the Israeli government that is saying that. It is Gaza Humanitarian Foundation who is saying it is a billion dollars. And the United Nations itself has confirmed that, in their view, half-a-billion dollars has been stolen and resold to benefit Hamas - 

CONNELL: The UN has also said that Israel is in part - 

FALINSKI: So, whether it's - 

CONNELL: - standing in the way of aid being distributed. 

FALINSKI: - whether it's half a billion. Well, if the UN had said that, they are yet to cite examples of where. One example that they may be referring to, is where Hamas would not allow a food convoy into the Gaza Strip to distribute food. And we're talking about 950 trucks, because the Gaza Humanitarian Fund wanted the IDF to escort that convoy in. 

Because the convoys were being looted by Hamas, and Hamas would not allow it in. Now, if the United Nations is referring to those examples, then once again, Tom, I just think the Australian media needs to actually dig a little deeper on some of the things that are coming out. 

Because whether it's half-a-billion or a billion dollars' worth of food that has been stolen by Hamas, the real cause of this is not going to be found on TikTok videos, but rather in actually finding out what the facts are. 

CONNELL: Or maybe journalists getting it on the ground, that'd be good to dig that way, but they're not allowed in. Patrick, final question on this. Do you have any discomfort, that many surveys have still found high support for Hamas in Gaza, and yet you'll still go ahead with this move as Gaza is, ostensibly, the authority in Gaza?

GORMAN: We don't see that there is anyone who should be out there supporting Hamas - 

CONNELL: - but they do. 

GORMAN: And again, I take great comfort from what the nations of the Arab League have said in terms of, the fact there is no role for Hamas in the ongoing work of getting a lasting and enduring peace. When I look at what the Prime Minister said, 'the cause of peace and a functioning democratic Palestinian state is not what Hamas wants.' They do not want a two-state solution at all. 

CONNELL: Okay - 

GORMAN: This is about driving Hamas out of the region. Out of those positions that they hold. And making sure that it is indeed the Palestinian people, who can determine their own future, in a future state recognised by Australia. 

CONNELL: Let's get to domestic matters. We heard Jim Chalmers say, 'let's not rule anything in or out' ahead of the productivity roundtable. The PM subsequently ruled out any new taxes this term. Where does that leave us, Patrick? Either, the Budget the Treasurer says needs to be more sustainable - can't do that this term, or cost cutting. Which one's it going to be?

GORMAN: The focus we actually had going into this roundtable was productivity. Productivity is how we get the best for everyone. We get more out of inputs we put in. Productivity is how we make sure that we have people earning more. And indeed, it's how we grow our economy.  We don't need - 

CONNELL: But the more efficient the tax system is, the more productive you can be. Are you saying tax plays no part in productivity? 

GORMAN: We are already taking steps to make our tax system more efficient. You saw us go to the election. My side of politics went to the election saying we wanted to cut taxes. Putting more incentive in the system and putting more money back in the pockets of working Australians. 

That was not the proposal that the Liberal Party took forward. Indeed, their tax policy that they took to the last election, could be summed up as tax hikes for every working Australian. 

CONNELL: Alright. 

GORMAN: - that is all they took. When it comes to - 

CONNELL: Let me jump in because I'm going to cough our viewers to death, otherwise. Jason, you can take the talking stick for cost cutting. Given the last election, will the Liberal Party not touch the cutting of public servants again?

FALINSKI: I don't know Tom, is the answer. But look, we have a spending problem in Australia. We already have the highest income marginal tax rate in the world. The highest income cutting in at the lowest rate. We have an absurdly narrow tax base, which is, even Ken Henry can work out. You know, we have no solutions for that. 

We've got GDP spending, as a percentage of GDP, out to 27 and a half percent. Under the last three years of this government, debt increased by $120 billion because of all their off budget spending. 

Look, the whole thing's out of control. And we have today from the Australian Financial Review, last week, we had the AFR reveal, when you look under the figures, that more than 60, more than two-thirds of Australians rely directly or indirectly on the Federal Government for their income. You've got funding cliffs coming of cuts up to 50% in 2026-27, which isn't that far away. 

So this whole fiscal situation created by this government in three short years, is just completely out of control. And we've got a Productivity Commission that wants a productivity roundtable that wants to talk about everything but productivity. So, I don't quite understand what the plan is at this point in time.

CONNELL: Alright, we'll find out next week, and you'll get your right of reply then, Patrick. I'm just going to scull a litre of water and see if I can survive the program. Appreciate your time, and yours as well, Jason, we will talk next week.