TOM CONNELL, HOST: Joining me now is the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, Patrick Gorman, thank you for your time. Question Time yesterday, most noteworthy for the Prime Minister. So, is he getting a bit of a reputation for off jokes? Tourette's was the barb last night. In June he was asking if Peter Dutton was a they/them.
PATRICK GORMAN, ASSISTANT MINISTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER: I think in terms of what happened yesterday, what we saw from the Prime Minister both during Question Time was that he withdrew and apologised, and then later in the day he came into the parliament and apologised quite sincerely and quite fully. I think if you look at what we see in this place a lot, and you watch a lot of Question Time, Tom, and there's a lot of different behaviour on there. I think the Prime Minister set a good example that none of us are mistake-free. None of us speak perfectly every single time, and when you make a mistake, you do the right thing and you apologise. And I actually think we can all learn something from that and follow the Prime Minister's lead.
CONNELL: The other big thing that happened, of course, still being spoken about today. The Coalition wanting this motion to, they say, just recognise what happened on October 7, which were horrific terror attacks. You know, staggering what happened, the barbarism of it. Wasn't it reasonable to just focus on that? How did this turn into something where there had to be these additions from Labor, and the two sides couldn't agree?
GORMAN: We also went in, in good faith, to seek to get a bipartisan position. I think that was possible yesterday, and I don't know why the Coalition didn't find a way to get that to happen. Now, what we did see on October 7 was the Prime Minister in Melbourne speaking at a vigil recognising the horrific loss of life. What we saw in the motion yesterday from the parliament was acknowledgement of that. And acknowledgement of many of the positions that Australia has taken, indeed, many of them with international partners, when it comes to how we get to, what I think most of your viewers want, which is a peaceful region and de-escalation. One of the things that struck me was that while there was quite a bit of division yesterday in the parliament - not something that I wanted, and I don't think something the Australian people wanted to see either - but while there was a lot of division, we also see in those moments the very best of the Parliament. And I saw that in the speech that Josh Burns gave. Speaking - no notes - just speaking from the heart, about how he feels, about family and friends who are in Israel, and knowing that people who have family and friends across that region feel the same.
CONNELL: A lot of those people just wanted a recognition. And even once you include this ceasefire element, that becomes complicated, because just saying 'ceasefire,' for people who are saying, 'well, hang on Israel has a right to defend itself, if there's just a ceasefire with nothing else, Hezbollah and Hamas re-arm.' So couldn't Labor have just dropped that for this motion? Have a separate motion around what you want the Middle East to look like. That's what Jewish people are calling for.
GORMAN: We think that it was important the parliament make a statement. I don't know why Mr. Dutton or any of his members couldn't support the motion that was there. I genuinely don't. I think it was a reasonable proposition. It was acknowledging all of the horrors of October 7, and it had a very -
CONNELL: But adding that on, and 'ceasefire' has complications. Anyway, we're in the morning slot, I've got to move on quicker so we're going to the next topic. Jewish groups actually want Labor to preference the Liberal Party over the Greens, mainly over this issue. They say Greens have been sowing, well, they've been undermining social cohesion. And we've heard Labor MPs speak out strongly about this. What's your reaction to that? Is Labor considering whether they should preference the Greens last, directing their preferences?
GORMAN: The preferences, as your viewers know, are decided by the party organisation. But I agree that we have seen a real change in the nature of the Greens. We have seen a change in how they engage in a range of matters, including foreign policy matters. We've seen a change in how they engage in social cohesion issues. I think it's reasonable that people are starting to look at: what is this Greens Party of 2024? And is this Greens Party of 2024 the same as it was in the Bob Brown -
CONNELL: So, Labor should at least weigh that up? Because your preferences helped decide three seats the Greens got, that massively boosted their representation.
GORMAN: If we want to go through the history of preferences, I think we should remember those Liberal preferences that helped elect Adam Bandt, we've seen -
CONNELL: If this is where it is right now, you just said the Greens have changed. So -
GORMAN: Well, they have. That's just a statement of fact. They have changed. They've changed their approach -
CONNELL: And so that would mean, you want voters to remember that, but should the Labor Party also go, 'okay, they've changed, let's evaluate whether they should still effectively get our support to get seats.'
GORMAN: Preferences are decided by the party. But also, today - I think this is for the nerds that I know love watching your program, and they flick to make sure they're watching you Tom, whether it's morning or afternoon, whatever time Question Time is on - today is the 20 year anniversary of the 2004 Federal Election. Now who preferenced the Greens in the 2004 Federal Election? John Howard. We have also seen the Liberal Party do preference deals with One Nation in Western Australia, a big signed, sealed, delivered preference deal with One Nation. What I'd remind all of your viewers is actually, and those who are advocating today, is actually preferences are decided by voters. Any voter -
CONNELL: We have a lot of viewers, not just the nerds, but they are always welcome as well. Just finally and briefly, NBN say Labor's not going to, or wants to lock in that it won't be privatised. It will drain the taxpayer then, 2.5 billion over the past two years of losses here. So are you happy for the taxpayer to prop up NBN, basically?
GORMAN: Taxpayers own the National Broadband Network. We want to make sure that taxpayers always own the National Broadband Network. We know that's how you keep prices low and quality of service high. It's essential for making sure we can service our regional communities. And I think we've seen privatisation failures over decades. Getting NBN started was harder because of the privatisation of Telstra. This is the right call. Because of Government ownership of the NBN, more of my community have fibre connections than they did two years ago. East Perth, Morley, Embleton, now getting fibre to the home. That's what you can do when government invests in essential infrastructure like the NBN.
CONNELL: Albeit it is losing money, but again, time doesn't permit me to go beyond that. Patrick Gorman, thank you. Talk soon.
GORMAN: Thanks Tom.