Tuesday 19 August 2025

Topics: Productivity roundtable, visa cancellations, voter concerns

‍

E&OE.......................

‍

PATRICIA KARVELAS: For the opposition's view, I want to bring in Dave Sharma, the Shadow Assistant Minister for Treasury Competition and Charities. Welcome to the programme.

DAVE SHARMA: Thanks so much, Patricia.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: I want to start where I ended there. Was Israel wrong to cancel the visas of the Australian diplomats?

DAVE SHARMA: Look, I will answer that, but let me just say I heard your previous guest, Katy Gallagher, saying the Albanese government's values, dialogue and diplomacy and open channels. And yet they have gone and cancelled the visa of a Member of Parliament of Israel who sits within the governing coalition. So how can you say you're committed to dialogue and diplomacy and open channels when you're preventing any interaction from occurring? I just think those two statements are fundamentally at odds with one another.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Was it wrong for Israel to cancel the visas of Australian diplomats?

DAVE SHARMA: Well, I don't agree with their decision. I would prefer it it didn't happen. But I can also, you know, given the new depths to which this relationship has been plumbed under the Albanese government, it doesn't surprise me that this has happened. I mean, I think we have delivered insult after insult to this bilateral relationship and at times completely unnecessarily. You can have a different position, but you can express those views respectfully. I don't think we've done that. And I think, you know, the bilateral relationship is wearing the consequences of that.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Isn't it Israel that's isolating itself?

DAVE SHARMA: I think Australia is isolating itself on this issue. I haven't heard of Israel rejecting, uh, or kicking out any other diplomats of any other foreign countries. I haven't heard it happening to France or the United Kingdom or Canada, for instance. It seems to be happening to Australia. Now I don't agree with everything Israel does. I'm not here as a spokesperson for Israel, but I do believe in the importance of a constructive and productive bilateral relationship with Israel. Which means you work through areas where you disagree and you keep the channels open.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: So why, why is it happening, in your view, that we're being targeted as you explain it? Although Katy Gallagher explained that there is a precedent.

DAVE SHARMA: I think Katy Gallagher's precedence from several years ago. But perhaps I'm wrong there. Look, I think it's clear it's just a tit for tat. It's terrible when relationships get in this state, when, you know, one country does something, the other country expels diplomats. You know, there's something happens in reciprocal way. It's very hard to recover relationships once you reach that dynamic and, you know, like any relationship, the breakdown in relations, you know, there's two parties to a breakdown in relations. But the Albanese government cannot absolve themselves of any blame here.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay, so, you say both governments are responsible, but there is only one government that has, uh, essentially been accused by so many NGOs of deliberately starving a population so they're not on the same playing field. Australia is not behaving the way Israel is.

DAVE SHARMA: I mean, I make this point, Patricia. We have diplomatic relations with countries like Russia, with countries like China, with which we have fundamental disagreements not only over their foreign policies, but over their domestic policies. I mean, diplomacy is not about having relations with countries with whom you agree entirely, or with whom you share objectives and worldviews, but it is about a means and method of communication. So, you know, whether we agree or disagree with elements of Israel's conduct in this war, I don't think that obviates our obligation to seek to have a relationship with them.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: And what would the benefit be of having allowed this MP to Australia?

DAVE SHARMA: Well, look, I'm not going to argue in favour of whether he should have been accepted or not.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, let me drill down on this because I think it's important. You've been critical of the government's decision. So if you're critical, presumably you, if you had power, would have let him in.

DAVE SHARMA: Well, I've been critical of the government's handling of the relationship. Now, I don't know on what basis Tony Burke made this decision, but I would say that, prima facie in the first instance, I don't think we should be, you know, if we've granted a visa to the visiting elected member of Parliament from a fellow liberal democracy, I don't think we should be lightly going around and cancelling their visas. And if the basis of that cancellation is simply that this visiting parliamentarian disagrees with the policy position of the other.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: That's not what they say. I just want to clarify. They made it clear that it's about. So social cohesion. Given the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that this man has used, do you accept that social cohesion does need to be protected at this very sensitive time?

DAVE SHARMA: I support social cohesion being protected, but it doesn't mean the imposition of a uniformity of views or the stifling of any debate or disagreement. Now, just because they assert that someone is likely to undermine social cohesion. As I said, I'm yet to see the evidence of that that's an assertion. I'd like to know what is it that this person has said that they think would cause social cohesion to fray in Australia? I've seen it quoted in the Guardian that he has called for the elimination of Hamas. I didn't think that was a controversial position. I think the Albanese government also believes that Hamas, a listed terrorist organisation, has to be eliminated.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Ok, let's move on to another issue if we can, which is, of course, the Economic Reform Roundtable. Let's talk about your metrics for success. Is there any proof this isn't a talk fest yet? What's the metric of success that you're setting for this?

DAVE SHARMA: Well, look, I think the metrics of success are, firstly, a commitment to government spending restraint. Now that has been largely absent from the conversation, but you've got to remember that government spending is growing at four times the rate of the economy. We've got public sector and public sector funded jobs growing at four times the rate of private sector job creation. And we've got government spending at a level we haven't seen in four decades. Now, that is creating huge distortions in the economy and it's basically crowding out the private sector. So that needs addressing. I think we need a genuine commitment to embrace and adopt new technologies, including artificial intelligence, without giving trade unions a veto power, which they have been seeking to assert on their own behalf. And the last thing I'd like to see is that there are at least no new taxes. I mean, I would be happy to see a commitment to some sort of tax reform. But again, today we've seen talk from the unions of about a possible new levy or tax on employers to fund training. I don't think we get our way to higher productivity through higher taxes.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: How about the proposal that seems like it's very much advancing? Katy Gallagher was pretty clear I thought about that, about a road user charge, people with electric vehicles. Do you welcome that?

DAVE SHARMA: I'm certainly open to that. But I'd also make the point in addition. I think if the government's looking at this whole vehicle fleet issue at large, they also need to look at the FBT exemption for electric vehicles, because the modelling of that now shows that it's going to cost us about $23 billion over 10 years. The cost of abatement, if you like, you know, eliminating one tonne of CO2 emissions is orders of magnitude higher than any other programme. I think they should also be looking at reining in that programme.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Treasurer Jim Chalmers is hoping to draw up a statement of intent to capture the agreed outcomes of today's economic reform roundtable. I'm assuming we're going to get that soon. At the end of each day, we'll get some progress in. It's all going to be about recognising skills and training, occupations across the country, prior learning, international standards as well. That's all really positive, isn't it?

DAVE SHARMA: Well, having not seen the statement, I'd say yes, But I think bromides or statements that no one can disagree with and that aren't actually going to move the needle in terms of getting our economy growing, getting private sector investment up, getting productivity moving, I don't think they're sufficient. I mean, you've got to remember the situation we're in here is that the economy is going backwards, productivity is going backwards, living standards are going backwards, government spending is increasing. Something's got to give here. And it's going to have to be that we tackle, you know, the fundamental handbrakes that are being imposed on our economy right now.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, it's all going to be tested this week, that's for sure. Only on day one. Thank you so much for joining us.

DAVE SHARMA: Thanks so much PK.