³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾

TOM CONNELL, HOST: Joining me now, our regular Friday panel; Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister Patrick Gorman and New South Wales Liberal Party President Jason Falinski. Gentlemen, thank you both for your time. Why don’t we start on an easy topic for you, Pat – the GST. Has there ever been a more blatant exercise in holding on to seats than this?

PATRICK GORMAN, ASSISTANT MINISTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER AND ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE: Tom, I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to when you talk about a ‘blatant exercise.’ But if you’re talking about making sure that every state gets a fair share of the GST –

CONNELL: – the billions and billions of dollars that WA gets, thanks to the Coalition deal that Labor’s continuing.

GORMAN: Yeah, we’re making sure that Western Australia has a floor of the GST of 75 cents in the dollar. That’s a floor that we’ve implemented for every state and territory. And it comes with a ‘no-worse-off guarantee.’ That’s about making sure that our states don’t end up with the situation that Western Australia could have found itself in, where we’d be getting between 11 or 30 cents in the dollar of GST. GST that’s needed to support hospitals, schools, all of those things that it was intended for, back when the system was first put together by Mr. Howard back in 1999. So, obviously, we want to make sure that we continue to support –

CONNELL: – but before that even, though, WA was a net beneficiary. And for many, many years, it was happy, then it was worse off and suddenly, there’s a problem.

GORMAN: Well, you can’t be a net beneficiary of a GST that didn’t exist before the start of this century –

CONNELL: – Not the GST, the horizontal fiscal equalisation that happened, and other elements.

GORMAN: Yeah, well, the GST was a pretty big change in that system. What became clear, over the course of the period from about 2013 onwards, was that Western Australia wasn’t getting a reasonable share of the GST. I advocated for a change where the Commonwealth should step in. Many others did, across the political spectrum. It’s been a good thing. What has actually happened and the deal that Prime Minister Albanese, at the end of last year extended to 2030, is actually about meaning that your viewers don’t see this argument about the GST each year –

CONNELL: – They’re seeing it right now –

GORMAN: – They instead see their state or territory, wherever they live, getting a fair share of the GST. Seventy-five cents or more in the dollar, with no state worse off. I mean, that’s actually pretty good policy. And –

CONNELL: – well, yeah, it’s, except you’re forgetting the fine print, which is the Federal Government – i.e. us, the taxpayer – pays for it at about $400 per person, to help effectively give the West more money. It’s not magic pudding. Jason, I’ll get onto you about this. Do you want to stand next to Chris Minns on a unity ticket on this? I mean, he’s kind of simplifying it a little bit. He’s, he’s having a slightly different complaint. But what was your take on the New South Wales Premier trying to start the debate again?

JASON FALINSKI: Well, I think Daniel Mookhey is trying to excuse the fact that he’s massively overspent and he’s now in deficit. But I’m not standing on a unity ticket with Chris Minns. Chris Minns is standing on a unity ticket with me. This is an absurd policy. It literally, it literally subsidises the most, the richest state in Australia that can look after itself. The whole point of horizontal fiscal equity is that – or equalisation, sorry – is that the Western Australian Government can afford to pay for schools, hospitals and roads that other states can’t, because it is reaping so much money from iron ore royalties. You know, and if a floor is a reasonable thing to have, then maybe Patrick would agree to a ceiling on how much money the Western Australian Government receives. It’s not right. It’s just not right. And it’s been bad policy that was done in good faith. But this, you know, what we have now seen with iron ore prices where they are, is this is out of control.

CONNELL: I’m going to ask, do that dangerous thing and ask a question to which I have no idea the answer. Hold on a sec, Patrick. Jason, did you ever speak out about this while you were a member of the Coalition Government did the deal?

FALINSKI: Yes, Tom on this programme. You used to ask me about this on this programme –

CONNELL: – You did it with me? –

FALINSKI: – while I was a member of parliament, sitting in the Parliament –

CONNELL: – I thought you did –

FALINSKI: No, I’ve been pretty, pretty consistent on this.

CONNELL: Is this why you never went anywhere under Scott Morrison? You were too honest on my programme?

FALINSKI: Tom, it’s true to say that you haven’t been good for my career. That’s true.

GORMAN: Tom, I’m going to verify what Jason has said. He indeed did share his views consistently, just as I’ve shared my views consistently with your viewers. But I think the person who has actually been the most shifty on this –

CONNELL: Ah but you, you see, you get the Assistant Minister title and we get the straight bat from you, Patrick.

GORMAN: No, no, no –

CONNELL: So, I mean, I guess you saw what Jason’s done – great, honest, comments; goes nowhere. So you’ve said ‘I am sticking to the party line.’ So what else are the party lines today, Patrick? Shall we get them all out of the way? What else are we saying about – ?

GORMAN: Someone who maybe wasn’t as thorough and honest throughout that process in 2018, when that arrangement was being put in place with the WA Labor Government here in the West was Peter Dutton. He spoke against it in Cabinet. We know that because Malcolm Turnbull wrote in his book. Peter Dutton opposed the WA GST deal He didn’t actually say that publicly, he said it quietly in Cabinet. And now we’ve got his Shadow Finance Minister Jane Hume, out there this week, refusing to back the deal. So, they can’t walk both sides of the street on this. Either you back WA getting a fair share, or Mr. Dutton and his shadow finance minister should fly over here to WA and say that they’re going to tear it up.

CONNELL: Alright, yeah. Well, anyway, they won’t because both sides are desperate for these three or four seats. And that’s the way the political system works. You can take that as some commentary on my behalf. TikTok! Let’s talk about TikTok. Jason, it seems as though the Coalition is sort of saying ‘maybe if the US does this, we should ban it too.’ What do you think?

FALINSKI: Yeah, look, I think it’s absolutely something that we should look at. And I mean, on a broader subject, Tom, not just talking about TikTok, but eminent scholars like Jonathan Haidt and a whole bunch of people behind him, are linking the use of social media by teens and preteens to the decline in mental health among those age cohorts. I think there’s a broader discussion we need to have –

CONNELL: I don’t think that would surprise people. That goes beyond TikTok, doesn’t it? I mean, what do we do?

FALINSKI: – Yeah, absolutely –

CONNELL: – Ban it? Isn’t that – that becomes sort of a parental responsibility and school responsibility. But beyond that, what do you do?

FALINSKI: Well, I think, and I know that, that Pat and I – and I suspect you would be too, Tom – and who knows, we might even get Chris Minns on this unity ticket, if we’re not careful – would say that we’ve really got to empower parents, somehow through legislation to give them more power over use of social media by children. And it’s – and I’m not just saying this, because I’m being you know, because I’m old, and it was much better in my day – I’m saying this because, you know, the the, the research on this is incredibly compelling around mental health problems that teens are suffering right now as we speak.

CONNELL: But how do you legislate that? I mean, you know, TV came along, people said it would probably be bad for children’s brains – probably still is – a lot of stuff on screen time. But how do you any legislate for that?

FALINSKI: Well, I mean, going to the book – I forgot who wrote it, – but ‘Bowling Alone.’ Pat will know who wrote that. You know, they made that point, also that television had a negative impact on socialisation in communities. And we know that it has. And social media was kind of meant to reverse that. Instead, what it did was it allowed people to be – and, and it might even be little things like you can’t go on social media and be anonymous. So we do know that on Facebook, where people are anonymous that’s the trouble –

CONNELL: Yeah, okay, yeah, I get what you mean around legislation. We’re nearly out of time, slash already over and I’m in trouble. Pat, your thoughts briefly on this?

GORMAN: Well, firstly, look, I do agree with Jason, that we need to be really vigilant about the impacts on all members of society when it comes to social media. You know, once you dive down the Internet tube, there’s a lot of wild, unregulated content. People asserting that they are experts in areas that they indeed are not. I do share those concerns about the impacts on what it means for young people and their mental health. I back parents to make those decisions. And I’d encourage parents to always be having a conversation with their children about what they’re seeing on social media. And when it comes to your broader question Tom, which is what you want me to get to, which is around the existence of TikTok here in Australia – we’ll continue to take advice from our security agencies. We’ll monitor what’s happening in the United States. If the security agencies give us advice that we need to act upon, we will do that.

CONNELL: I imagine you probably like those sort of small, trendy videos. You’ve got your memes going and so on, Patrick Gorman –

FALINSKI: – It’s very good! –

CONNELL: – Your office would be devastated if Tiktok –

GORMAN: – Only when I post this programme, Tom, only when I post this programme.

FALINSKI: He’s very good, Tom, you and I could learn a lot.

CONNELL: There’s a challenge for your team – make us look good.

FALINSKI: – He does, he does!

CONNELL: I learn something different every week on this programme, including what you told me about two years ago. Jason, Patrick – talk next week. Thank you