Topics: Return to Parliament, Hate speech laws, Coalition latest polling

PETE STEFANOVIC: Let's return to Canberra now, and as we've reported, Canberra returns today two weeks earlier than usual with a special sitting before debate kicks off in earnest tomorrow over hate speech and gun reform. We heard from the government last hour, now let's bring in the opposition. Joining us live is Liberal Senator Dave Sharma. Dave, good to see you this morning. Thank you. So, your party walked away from you initially demanded. Is that not hypocritical?

‍

DAVE SHARMA: No, what's hypocritical, I think, is, is the prime minister in the days after Bondi firstly saying there was no need for a royal commission, and then capitulating, secondly saying there was no need for parliament to be recalled, and then capitulating. I think we have tried since the Bondi terrorist massacre to work constructively with the government on laws that have broad community and public support to combat anti-Semitism and protect the community, and the government has instead chosen to resist, obstruct, or wedge us at every turn. And I think hasn't been in our national interest, hasn't been in Australia's interest, and I don't think it's, it's a government behaving as an adult like you would like them to, to be behaving.

‍

PETE STEFANOVIC: So with the watered-down version on hate speech now, Dave, what is your position on it? will you support it as is?

‍

DAVE SHARMA: Well, I still this has been a moving feast. Initially, we were presented with the legislation without being consulted and told it was on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. now the prime minister has said that he's prepared to split the legislation into their separate schedules and consult with us, and I think that is a welcome offer and one we intend to pursue. I'll just need to see where we get to with those negotiations. But, we have said since the days after the Bondi massacre through our own coalition task force on this that we were prepared to support measures that criminalize hate speech directed at the Jewish community, that tighten our migration and visa laws, that look at any number of other measures to combat anti-Semitism. That offer remains on the table.

‍

PETE STEFANOVIC: Do you think, and I put this question to Richard Marles a little earlier, do you think this current push to toughen up laws around hate speech helps protect the Jewish community in Australia? will, will this guarantee that there'll be no more Bondis?

‍

DAVE SHARMA: I don't think any single step can guarantee that there will be no more Bondis, Pete. we need to be honest with ourselves and with the public about that. But it was clear, I think, in the months leading up to Bondi, and this is from the warnings from our own security agencies, that the climate of anti-Semitism was leading to an increased risk of violent attacks directed at the Jewish community, and, that's why we need to be looking at all measures that will disable that sort of environment or make it harder to create an environment like that. Now, part of that is speech, but part of it is also radical preachers, and part of it is also, hate organizations or hateful organizations. That whole panoply, I think, of measures needs to be looked at here. What we're trying to address is the climate that enabled this.

‍

PETE STEFANOVIC: Here's, yeah, yeah, and, and the difficulty with crashing, with cracking down on hate speech though is it impinges on freedom of speech, right, which, which is always hard to get over the line.

‍

DAVE SHARMA: Well, I think, look, any measure that we take, Peter, needs to be directly targeted at the problem, and remember, this has been a problem that's been menace and malice towards the Jewish community, not other segments of Australia. So it needs to be narrowly focused on that problem, and it needs to have the least possible impact on Australians' civil liberties across the board. And I think that's why it's important that any measure be, widely supported and narrowly drawn, so it addresses the intended problem without having a whole lot of unintended consequences. I mean, we heard last week in that very truncated hearing how much of a difficulty many groups, lawyers, civil society, and the Greens had with the government's proposed laws, and I think that reflects that they were too widely drawn.

‍

PETE STEFANOVIC: Okay, so let's get to your house. I mean, Andrew Hastie, he doesn't support things as, as is, wants to wait until after a royal commission. Julian Leeser said on the weekend he was worried about giving Labor the moral high ground. Are the Liberals together on this? Because it doesn't sound like you are.

‍

DAVE SHARMA: Well, look, this is all part of the normal internal debate you'd have within a political party, and our party will be meeting as a party room either later today or tomorrow, and we will be discussing, where has this legislation landed, what measures can we support, and what measures do we think are problematic? And that's democracy in action. People are entitled to their view, but as a party, we will reach a settled view on this and it will reflect the principles we announced in the aftermath of the Bondi massacre. It will address anti-Semitism, but it will not seek or not intend to have a whole lot of unintended consequences against Australians whose rights should not be impinged.

‍

PETE STEFANOVIC: How concerned, Dave, are you about bleeding more votes to One Nation?

‍

DAVE SHARMA: Look, I'm always concerned, Pete, about being, remaining politically, competitive here, but ultimately, as an opposition, as a parliamentarian myself and I'm concerned about what's doing, doing what is in the national interest and standing up for Australia, and Australian rights and Australian safety and security. And ultimately, the public will need to make up their mind about which party or which political movement in their mind best protects Australia's national interests, and I think we need to focus on the product here, which is being a responsible alternative government, holding the government to account, and presenting a credible alternative to that government.

‍

PETE STEFANOVIC: Dave Sharma, we're out of time, but good to see you. Thank you, as always. We'll chat to you soon.

‍

DAVE SHARMA: Thanks for having me.

‍

[ENDS]