Matt Canavan 'disappointed' by Barnaby Joyce's departure from the Nationals | 7.30

Key Concepts

• Barnaby Joyce's Departure: The central theme revolves around Barnaby Joyce's decision to leave the Nationals party room, its implications for the party, and the reasons behind it.
• Net Zero Agenda: A significant point of contention is the "net zero chain" or agenda, which the speaker believes is an obsession negatively impacting the Australian economy, manufacturing, and small businesses.
• Economic Concerns: The transcript highlights concerns about the Australian economy, including declining manufacturing, stagnant real wages, and the potential for rising interest rates.
• One Nation's Appeal: The discussion touches upon the rising popularity of One Nation, its appeal in outer suburbs and regional cities, and the reasons behind this discontent.
• Environmental Laws and Farmers' Rights: The recent environmental laws, a deal struck between the government and the Greens, and their impact on farmers' ability to clear land are discussed.
• Coalition's Strategy: The speaker critiques the coalition's approach to environmental laws and their focus on issues like Barnaby Joyce and net zero, suggesting a miscalculation in negotiation.
• Focus on Australian People: A recurring argument is the need for politicians to focus on the needs and well-being of the Australian people, particularly regarding economic stability and affordability.

Barnaby Joyce's Departure and its Impact on the Nationals

Matt Canavan expresses disappointment regarding Barnaby Joyce's decision to leave the Nationals party room. He views such departures as a betrayal of voters who elected them as National Party members. Canavan highlights that the Nationals have not lost a seat in a general election since 2007, but have seen three members leave the party room in the last three years, which he finds concerning for a party with a small team and the difficulty of winning parliamentary seats. Despite his disappointment, Canavan states he remains friends with Barnaby Joyce and acknowledges that being on different sides of politics would be "a bit weird," but not a barrier to maintaining relationships, citing his friendships with members of the Labour party.

Canavan believes his arguments to persuade Barnaby Joyce were not effective, attributing it to his own failure to do a "good enough job." He suggests Barnaby Joyce would be "much more effective in the Nationals Party" and that his own focus is on achieving better outcomes for Australians, particularly concerning the "destroyed" energy grid, loss of manufacturing jobs, and the "obsession" with the "net zero chain." He argues that this obsession is causing pain for small businesses and leading to manufacturing decline, advocating for a better balance.

When asked to compare the value of David Littleproud versus Barnaby Joyce to the Nationals, Canavan likens it to choosing a favorite child, stating all members are "very very special" and that each vote in Parliament is crucial for taking action and making changes for the country's betterment. He emphasizes the need for 76 votes in the House and 39 in the Senate to achieve these goals.

One Nation's Appeal and Discontent in Australia

Canavan discusses the potential threat Barnaby Joyce joining One Nation could pose to coalition seats. He notes that while One Nation is often perceived as a rural phenomenon, its support is not always high in the "real bush." Instead, he observes that the discontent is "very much concentrated in our outer suburbs" and "larger regional cities." The reasons for this discontent are attributed to people feeling that "things are not as good as they used to be," with real wages returning to 2011 levels. He uses a Charles Dickens-esque analogy of expenses exceeding income, leading to "big trouble," which he believes many people in outer suburbs and regions are currently experiencing due to the current government and its "radical net zero agenda."

Canavan draws a comparison between the rising popularity of One Nation and the Reform Party under Nigel Farage in the UK, suggesting that many people in Western countries feel their governments are not acting in their best interests and are pursuing agendas that gain more international acclaim than domestic support.

He posits that One Nation is succeeding in making its appeal because the Liberal and National Parties "signed up to the net zero agenda," which he now believes was a mistake that has been corrected. He acknowledges that the coalition "made mistakes" and "lost focus" after being "thrashed by the biggest amount since World War II," and that his priority is to "look after the Australian people."

Economic Priorities and the Net Zero Agenda

Canavan expresses uncertainty about whether the recent changes will stem the tide of votes going to One Nation but asserts that the "only way" is to "listen to people and act on their behalf." He identifies a "real problem" with people struggling to afford basic necessities and worrying about their homes. He is concerned about the state of the economy, citing "productivity is in the floor" and the likelihood of interest rates rising again.

He argues that by "dumping net zero," the Nationals have adopted a plan to "put lower power prices first." Their "number one focus" will be running the energy system to deliver the "lowest possible prices for Australians." He criticulates the current government for not running the system for this purpose, but rather to meet "global goals" that garner international applause but offer little to those struggling to survive.

Environmental Laws and Farmers' Rights

Canavan describes the recent environmental laws, a deal struck between the government and the Greens, as "bad bad laws" that will add "red tape" and not improve matters. He characterizes the government's approach as acting like a "terrorist," threatening farmers with negative consequences if they didn't agree to the deal. He states that farmers have "coped it" because the government has removed their ability to clear regrowth on land they have always cleared, effectively taking away their property rights. He clarifies that the government is blaming the coalition for this outcome because they "didn't agree with us." Specifically, he notes that it is "no longer free to clear regrowth for forest if it's 15 years or more old."

Canavan refutes the idea that the debate over these laws got away from the coalition due to their focus on Barnaby Joyce and net zero. He reiterates that the most important thing is their vote and that he did not want his name on legislation that would "add green tape" and "slow down our economy" based on the government's threat to harm farmers. He frames the upcoming election as a choice for Australians between supporting a side that champions Australian farming and food production, or a side that has aligned with the "radical greens party" and restricts farmers' ability to develop their land. He uses an analogy of being told you can't build a shed in your backyard to illustrate the severity of the government's actions.