THE HON ANDREW HASTIE MP
SHADOW MINISTER FOR INDUSTRY AND SOVEREIGN CAPABILITY
FEDERAL MEMBER FOR CANNING

TRANSCRIPT
INTERVIEW WITH SARA TOMEVSKA, AFTERNOON BRIEFING

Monday 21 September 2026

Topics: Intergenerational Report; immigration; artificial intelligence; the Coalition’s Fuel Price Shield.

E&OE……………………………………

SARA TOMEVSKA: Andrew Hastie, welcome to the program.

ANDREW HASTIE: Thanks, Sara.

SARA TOMEVSKA: The Treasurer says every page of the Intergenerational Report vindicates the tax changes the government made in the Budget this year. The report does show the housing market needed reform, right?

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, the dream of home ownership for many young Australians is now out of reach, and so the question is: how do we get more young Australians into homes? We have a different view. We believe that we need to cut immigration and we need to build more homes. We're about 400,000 homes short at the moment. So, cutting immigration and bringing on supply are the two levers that we want to pull. We don't think that taxing housing is going to bring on supply and make home ownership more realistic for young Australians.

SARA TOMEVSKA: On Insiders, though, earlier this year you did advocate for potential changes to both negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount. You said the system needs an overhaul, "we either fix the system, or it's torn down by people like Pauline Hanson". Why have your views changed?

ANDREW HASTIE: I was talking more about the economic system, and I was trying to indicate to the public that we are listening to people's concerns. There's a reason why people are so angry with the two-party system, why they're so angry with the deal they've got economically, and they want change. So, we need to be open-minded about these things. But certainly, taxing homes more is not going to create more homes and what we need is more homes built – we have a 400,000 home shortage under the Labor government. I think one of the main levers that we can pull is cutting migration and making migration more manageable, so that we have less pressure on the housing market, less pressure on infrastructure, and less pressure on our essential services like hospitals and doctors.

SARA TOMEVSKA: But don't we need more skilled migrants to build those very homes you're talking about?

ANDREW HASTIE: We absolutely do, but we need to get the numbers right. And too many people have been coming to this country not value adding in the areas that we need them to – construction is a critical area. So, as we work through our immigration policy, which we're doing at the moment, we're going to make sure that the changes we make are targeted and they deliver for the Australian people. It's all about working in the national interest. And yes, I take the point absolutely – we do need people who can build homes, and that's something that we'll be looking at closely.

SARA TOMEVSKA: But the Intergenerational Report says migration will play a pivotal role. The Coalition says it won't touch working holiday maker visas, so the cuts are going to have to come from the skilled program. Does that not risk critical shortages in key industries like aged care and construction?

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, sure, but we're going to work through this carefully. We're not like One Nation – we're not just going to announce our policy on social media. We will do the hard work. It'll be costed. It'll be modelled. We'll look at the budgetary, the economic, and the human impacts, and we'll make sure that it stands up to scrutiny. The real problem is, though, of course, that family formation is being delayed because people can't get into homes soon enough, and families are having less children over time. I think it's of real concern that our fertility replacement rate is projected to drop even further – it's at a historic low at the moment of about 1.39. We want Australians to have a better chance of getting into a home, forming a family, and having children of their own. That's how populations normally grow.

SARA TOMEVSKA: Would you support a Costello-style baby bonus?

ANDREW HASTIE: Look, I think I would support anything that allows young Australians to form families sooner. I have three kids myself – they're a great blessing. I love children. I'd love other Australians to be able to have kids as well. And part of the challenge is getting them into homes sooner and making the economy work for them. That's what I was signalling back on insiders in March.

SARA TOMEVSKA: But does that include financial incentives for families to actually have more children?

ANDREW HASTIE: Sure. I'm pretty open-minded about it. Peter Costello's baby bonus of 20-odd years ago seemed to work at the time, although economists and people who know are mixed about their views on whether that actually worked. I do think, though, that I want to see Australians keeping more of their own money, which is why we're going to cut taxes. We've got to get their energy bills lower, and we need to build more homes so that they have a chance of owning their own property and starting a family.

SARA TOMEVSKA: I want to talk about AI. The role of AI really is the biggest change in the Intergenerational Report from the 2023 report. It says that from 2030 onwards, AI could improve our GDP enormously and help reduce debt by half a trillion dollars. Is AI, in your view, the key to fixing Australia's economy?

ANDREW HASTIE: I don't think it's the only lever. I think the AI revolution is happening, whether we like it or not, and so, the question I have is: how do we make it work for Australians? And I think what we need to do is build our own sovereign AI capability here in Australia. I think the fastest way to do that is to partner with one of the two frontier labs in OpenAI or Anthropic. But certainly, there are other levers that we need to pull to get productivity going. Labor's tax changes, particularly its change to the capital gains tax regime, is going to stifle startups, it's going to stifle young entrepreneurs, and we risk losing a whole generation of talent overseas, where people will go and invest in other countries because they don't think they'll get a return on investment here in this country.

SARA TOMEVSKA: So, are you optimistic or cautious about what AI means for the future of work here in Australia?

ANDREW HASTIE: I'm cautious, but I recognise that AI is coming at us, whether we like it or not, and we need to have an economic and political settlement that works for all Australians,. From businesses to kids in school to government – it's got to work for everyone, and it's got to be always governed by people. We don't want to be run by machines. In the end, it's humans who make moral decisions, and that's why my concern is that we make AI work for us, that we don't work for AI.

SARA TOMEVSKA: Well, on that note, the Prime Minister is at the United Nations this week, as you know, talking about a potential global approach to regulating artificial intelligence. He's launched Australia's bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council. Do you support that and if Australia does win a spot, what should we do with it?

ANDREW HASTIE: I'm always ambitious for Australia, and whilst the Prime Minister and I disagree very strongly on a number of issues, I'll always back a Prime Minister abroad acting in the best interests of our country. So, I want to see Australia have more influence, particularly with America and China in the development of AI, and in developing safeguards that will protect our interests. So yes, let's see what happens.

SARA TOMEVSKA: Does that include a globally coordinated plan or set of rules to regulate AI?

ANDREW HASTIE: The two key players here are the United States and China. We have a voice, particularly with the Americans. I think our future, in so far as artificial intelligence is concerned, is with the United States. We have a lot more in common with the United States and the way they are building AI than we do with, say, China. And so, I think we should be using every opportunity to shape leaders in Silicon Valley and shaping leaders in the United States. Whether it's in the Congress or the White House, we should be pulling every lever to make AI work for Australia.

SARA TOMEVSKA: Well, we know Donald Trump and Xi Jinping are meeting this week to discuss, among other things, AI. What would be the ideal outcome of those talks, in your view?

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, international safeguards would be great. I think that's unlikely – both leaders have expressed clearly that they are seeking to be the dominant AI power in global affairs. We're a close ally with the United States. I hope that the United States continues its development and that we have a share of some of the technology, but always under Australian sovereign law and working in Australia's sovereign interests. That's our key objective, and that's what I'm pursuing in the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence.

SARA TOMEVSKA: Look, to news over the weekend: the Coalition is vowing to halve the fuel excise every time the price of brent crude oil exceeds $100 US a barrel for more than a fortnight. Why won't that be inflationary?

ANDREW HASTIE: We've costed it. We have committed to cutting the tobacco excise by 80 per cent – the Parliamentary Budgetary Office modelled that – and we would recover $8 billion of additional revenue over the forwards, $20 billion of revenue over a decade, and we will –

SARA TOMEVSKA: But that's a big if, isn't it? Even with an 80 per cent cut to the excise, legal cigarettes will still be more expensive than illegal ones. So, what makes you so sure Australians will return to the legal market?

ANDREW HASTIE: Well, we'll cut about $24 off the cost of legal cigarettes, and we'll bring them closely in line with illegal cigarettes –

SARA TOMEVSKA: But they will still be $6 on average more expensive per packet.

ANDREW HASTIE: Sure, but we're always going to have smokers in this country. There's no utopia where smoking doesn't exist, and the vast majority of tobacco users – we want them under the rule of law. We want to smash these criminal gangs. We want to attack the model that they're running, which means we have to cut the excise by 80 per cent and then go after them with the full force of the law. And if we cut that tobacco excise, we can afford to shield the Australian people when the global price of oil goes above $100 per barrel, which is what our fuel price shield is all about. It's fully costed, it's fully funded, and we have a plan for the Australian people.

SARA TOMEVSKA: Alright, Andrew Hastie, we'll have to leave it there. Thank you very much for your time.

ANDREW HASTIE: Thanks, Sara. Pleasure.

[ENDS]