Sunday, 10 May 2026

Transcript

Interview with David Speers, ABC News, Insiders

Topics: Farrer by-election, Federal Budget

E&OE ....

David Speers: Tim Wilson, welcome to the program.

Tim Wilson: Thanks David, and Happy Mother’s Day to all the mothers out there.

David Speers: Indeed, indeed. Look, the Liberal vote in Farrer, as you know, has gone from 43% just 12 months ago to 12% yesterday. Who and what is responsible for that?

Tim Wilson: Well, I think we need to caveat we also had the national vote last election, the Nationals didn’t contest the result. So we’ve seen about a halving of our vote which is not to downplay it, it is a serious situation. Um, but what it reflects is the need for us uh to be bigger, better, bolder, confident Liberals defining the future of the country. There’s a lot of messages out of this by-election, David, um, there’s absolutely some for us, uh as some of your panellists have just outlined, I think there’d be some nervous Labor MPs because what people want to see uh is change. And I was on the Moama booth yesterday, chatting to voters and raising issues uh with them, or they were raising issues with me. And one of the most consistent messages is people want somebody who’s going to fight for them and their for their future. And um, this a lot of the decisions were clearly made before um the past couple of weeks and people are going to be very antagonistic towards the government breaking its promises on tax issues in the lead-up to the budget. So if they keep behaving like this, I expect it’s going to come for them too.

David Speers: We’ll come to the budget, just on uh what this means now for the Liberal Party. How do you think this result reflects on Angus Taylor?

Tim Wilson: Well, it shows that there’s a lot of work we’ve got to do. And Angus has been very upfront about that yesterday uh in his commentary uh and that the work needs to keep going on. We’re obviously coming up to the budget, but we need to outline very clearly a bold and confident vision for the country about where we want to take it. The idea that the pendulum just politically swings between Liberal and Labor is simply no longer right. There are different axes, there’s uh and it goes in all sorts of directions including up and down and we’ve got to be the party focused on building the future of the country and projecting out that vision and that sense of confidence so people feel confident going to vote for us.

David Speers: Bigger, bolder and that confident vision of the future. I want to take you to what Angus Taylor said last night after this result. He was immediately talking about stopping mass migration and ditching net zero. Is the solution for the Liberal Party here to keep chasing those issues on the right from One Nation?

Tim Wilson: Well, we have to obviously outline what we’re opposed to, but most importantly we have to define what we’re for. And we have to be for…

David Speers: And is that clear?

Tim Wilson: Sorry, well I can assure you in the coming weeks we’re going to make it very clear what we’re for because Australians need to know that we’re in favour of families, communities, and small business and self-starters because they’re the foundations of our economic success, of our social success and building out a future that’s brighter and more confident for everybody and we don’t just need to do it in words, we need to do it in deeds, in how we fight for it, and most importantly in the policies we put forward so Australians fight for us because their future will be brighter under a Liberal-led government.

David Speers: You’ve previously said mass migration is not a term that you use. Are you honestly comfortable with the use of this, the direction that Angus Taylor’s talking about here?

Tim Wilson: Well, my focus on migration is always on how we make sure that we get uh new Australians integrated successfully. That’s not just around um around uh social integration and cultural integration though they’re very, very important. We want people to love Australia, to be committed to Australia, uh and most importantly to have economic pathways to be part of contributing to our success as a nation and then going on and building the future success of the nation. Because one of the reasons Australians have become very nervous about migration is they feel that uh people are coming to our country and getting the benefits without making the contribution. And I want the best, boldest, most confident new Australians we can have.

David Speers: But do you also think net overseas migration should be tied somehow to housing completion rates, that it should be limited in that way?

Tim Wilson: Well, that’s why I use the word integration. It’s not just about economic or social and cultural integration though it is. It’s also about making sure they’re able to integrate successfully to get jobs, to get housing. And of course that that doesn’t come at the expense of Australians as well. So uh I absolutely believe we need to tie uh our migration program to better outcomes for our nation because that’s also the basis we have social license from Australians to continue to have new Australians arrive.

David Speers: Your tone on migration is quite different to some of your colleagues in the Liberal Party. Uh you are one of the few urban Liberals left, and only six months ago you fought against the decision to drop the net zero target. You said at the time you didn’t want the Liberals to turn into National Party-lite. Do you ever contemplate whether this is still the right party for you?

Tim Wilson: No, absolutely not. I spend uh every day fighting for the future of the country and because I actually believe in a bold, confident Liberal vision for the country uh where Australia doesn’t just look at itself with a sense of positivity and optimism but also looking uh to the world and saying we can do this. I’ve said this in a speech recently uh that you know the Labor vision of our country is one currently of managing decline. I want the spirit of the boxing kangaroo to define uh who we are and that we look to the rest of the world and say we can take that on.

David Speers: When it comes to preferences, you have shifted your position over the years on this. You said in 2019 your long-standing view was that One Nation and their despicable acolytes should be put last. Any association with the party you said was toxic. At last year’s election, you didn’t put them last. What’s your view now? Did the Liberal Party make the right call in Farrer on preferences?

Tim Wilson: Well, the challenge these days is that there’s so many different people for competing for the last position on the ballot paper uh in Goldstein uh and so it’s not just One Nation anymore. I wish it were that simple, but it’s not. Uh so you know we’ll make these decisions based on what obviously puts us in the best position to defeat the government, to be in a position to win seats because politics is zero-sum. Somebody wins, somebody loses, and I want to make sure that Liberal candidates are elected, uh but we do that by being our best, not by providing pathways to anyone else including the Teals, including Labor, including the Greens, and of course that includes One Nation too.

David Speers: But do you think this decision in Farrer, which helped One Nation win, adds to their credibility and legitimacy?

Tim Wilson: Well, there’s no point pretending otherwise. When you win seats, it obviously gives them an opportunity and a platform. That comes also with risks uh and so they’re there now and of course the performance of One Nation will be hinged on David Farley and of course the defector Barnaby Joyce uh and how they perform now will obviously go on to inform how Australians see them.

David Speers: But was this Liberal Party decision on preferences the right call or the wrong call?

Tim Wilson: Well, it was a call that was made and it’s obviously one that uh you know has delivered a result.

David Speers: What do you think though, the right call or the wrong call?

Tim Wilson: Well, I think the brutal truth is I think it’s the wrong question. I don’t think it would have made any difference. Uh I’ve seen polling data from Albury booths where we preferenced them and people still went off and preferenced Milthorpe, and I think if you go to rural and regional seats you’ll see exactly the same thing in the other direction had we taken our preferences in the other direction. I think the clear message from this is voters wanted to send a really clear message. Our job is to listen to that message, to hear it, and to understand how we have to be better if we want to regain their trust.

David Speers: And for the record, are you open to forming any sort of minority government with One Nation MPs?

Tim Wilson: Well, it all comes down to what the Australians put up. I want to stop the Albanese government from continuing to wreck Australia, continuing to go to elections saying one thing, then within 12 months despite 50 times saying uh taking certain policy positions on things like tax, then overturning them at the first budget that comes along.

David Speers: So that’s interesting though, you’re open to, even if that involves forming minority government with One Nation, a party you’ve described as despicable and toxic and so on, you you’d be willing to do that.

Tim Wilson: My objective is to make sure that the Liberal Party is in a position to govern as strongly as possible. Of course we traditionally form a coalition with the National Party, but it’s up to the Australian people to decide who they want to vote for. But I can tell you quite clearly my objective is to make sure that Liberals beat One Nation candidates.

David Speers: All right, let’s turn to the budget, Tim Wilson. You led the charge back in 2019 against Labor’s plans on franking credits in particular. You wanted to protect the status quo. Are you now going to fight to defend existing rules on capital gains tax and negative gearing?

Tim Wilson: Well, I’ll absolutely uh be looking at the what the government announces uh in the budget. So far their budget seems to be in complete disarray where the narrative the Treasurer was putting forward was we’re doing all of this for intergenerational equity. If you believe the leaks that have come out of the budget bunker in the past 12 hours, they’re now saying well Boomers will be protected but young Australians won’t be able to get their first foot on the ladder of opportunity. Um my position is this is clear, which is we need to be having a tax system that’s orientated towards encouraging wealth creation, jobs, and growth for the next generation of Australians. Labor’s plan is to feed resentment and redistribution. We have wildly different views about how to build the future of the country.

David Speers: So does that mean you’ll vote against any changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax?

Tim Wilson: Well, I’ll have to wait and see the details of course. Uh they haven’t been announced. We’ve had conflicting budget leaks whether malicious because the Prime Minister’s trying to humiliate the Treasurer or whether-

David Speers: Sure, but right now you either think the current rules are working or they’re not.

Tim Wilson: Well, again I’ll come and have a look at the uh what the government’s going to put forward before declaring my position.

David Speers: But right now, do you think the tax breaks are working, are good, are equitable?

Tim Wilson: Well, I think you’re misframing them in saying they’re just tax breaks. A lot of them are saying don’t if you lose money you don’t get taxes applied to them. You know, through our website www.notthetax.com.au we’re already getting stories from young Australians who are saving for a deposit, they’re putting their money in the markets of course to grow it and to invest so they can get their home ownership brought forward and they’re telling us stories about how they’re now going to get double the tax rate applied because of what Labor uh is seeking to do and it’s actually pushing them further behind rather than further ahead.

David Speers: But you accept there’s far more, there’s no doubt some young Australians in that camp, but do you accept there’s far more who aren’t holding an investment property, can’t get into the market, who do look at some of these rules and think they’re just not fair.

Tim Wilson: Well, the question then is will these rules and changing these rules lead to more houses being built? People are arguing very clearly no. The Commonwealth Bank Chief Economist has come out and been scathing saying it’ll raise a whole bunch of revenue but not lead to building new homes. And uh we’ve had research this week which has uh suggested that rents could go up by up to $160 a week in Sydney, about $130 in Melbourne. So the government is just taking from young Australians and from older Australians and not giving them anything in return. It’s very hard to see how you could back that.

David Speers: Nonetheless, you’re open to looking at whatever they do here.

Tim Wilson: Well, I’m an open-minded person, David, but I would just stress this is on the principle of what we’re seeing so far, it would be very hard to support.

David Speers: On trusts. Uh look they are legitimately used of course by farmers, small business and so on, but as the economist Chris Richardson points out, they also create options to lower taxes in ways that are simply not open to the vast bulk of Australians. He describes the way trusts are used by high-wealth individuals as long-standing unfairness in the system. Are you saying there should be no change on trusts?

Tim Wilson: Well, again I’ll come down to the detail of what the government’s putting forward. They seem to have a blanket ban approach rather than looking at targeted measures. Uh and so on this basis, small businesses are going to get smashed in particular. Um and for so many small businesses, their small business isn’t just you know how they manage their day-to-day finances and uh it’s the base in which the first kid gets a job employed in a community and it’s also the basis of their retirement savings so they’re coming after that as well.

David Speers: Look, I want to talk about spending here as well, the other side of the budget. Would you oppose any more cost-of-living handouts in this budget?

Tim Wilson: Well, again we’ve said previously with um uh the cut in the fuel excise, it should be accompanied with inflation re-offsets because when you don’t have inflationary re-offsets, you’re giving with one hand, you’re taking with the other and you’re actually increasing the pressure on Australian households. We don’t have the detail on what the government is putting forward, but if they don’t provide inflationary offsets, they’re going to perpetuate the cycle because at the end of the day Labor’s economic model is what it is. Stoke the inflation, tax the inflation, then spend the inflation and repeat the cycle and that’s why Australians are doing it so tough right now.

David Speers: If there are net savings as the Treasurer says there will be, and that includes cost-of-living support, some additional cost-of-living uh relief, would you support that?

Tim Wilson: Well, I’ll have a look at it when he provides that because previously uh the Treasurer has said that he’s saved $114 billion dollars and then in the next breath he’s gone on and spent an additional $223 billion dollars and stoked the inflation cycle again. So um the difference between what he says and what he does can be radically different.

David Speers: If there are net savings and again that’s what he’s saying there will be, we’ll find out the quantum on Tuesday night. Um can you give us a sense of whether you think we need drastic uh savings, drastic spending cuts or just tweaking here at the moment?

Tim Wilson: Well, my view has always been that we need to reduce spending quite considerably to and the first place to target is the fraud and corruption that exists uh within the system whether it’s the $15 billion dollars that’s been provided to organized crime through the CFMEU-Labor cartel, the um somewhere between 10% and 20% of the NDIS budget that continues to explode out that’s finding its way to fraud and corruption. We have nearly half a billion dollars of uh measures where uh phantom children were being enrolled in childcare services. I think all of that fraud and corruption absolutely needs to be cut out.

David Speers: What about your own spending plans? Um Matt Canavan, the Nationals leader, is talking about resurrecting the Inland Rail project all the way through to Queensland. Is that the Coalition’s policy or just the Nats?

Tim Wilson: Well, we’ll ultimately make a decision collectively as a party, but our focus is on how we make sure there’s investment to build out the future economic growth of the country. The problem is Labor seems to be saying no to Inland Rail which is no to farmers and no to jobs in the regions, but we’re going to hand it to the suburban rail loop, a program which is known for its connection to corruption and organized crime uh and to prop up the failing Allan Labor government in Victoria.

David Speers: Okay, but on Inland Rail you’re still to be convinced by Matt Canavan on that.

Tim Wilson: Well, no decision’s been made, David, but I can tell you the one thing no one I’ve spoken to in the Coalition, Liberal or National, uh has thought taking money out of projects designed to grow the future of the Australian economy and give it to organized crime through Victorian Labor government projects is a way forward.

David Speers: Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson, thanks very much for joining us this morning.

Tim Wilson: Thank you.

[ENDS]