Colleen Harkin on The Rita Panahi Show Sky News Australia – 5 August 2025

In this interview, Colleen Harkin appeared on The Rita Panahi Show – Sky News Australia and discussed the IPA’s research on Australia’s taxation system.

All media appearances posted onto the IPA website are directly related to the promotion and dissemination of IPA research.

Below is a transcript of the interview.

Rita Panahi:

Joining me now for more on this is News Corp senior writer, Patrick Carlyon and research fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs, Colleen Harkin. And Colleen, I don’t want to call this man a hypocrite in any way, but he did admit to feeling deep conflict over this private jet, but he also explained at the time that it was actually helping the environment, so there’s some logic at play there, but the emissions, it could power a small town for a year.

Colleen Harkin:

But let’s just call it for what it is, Rita. It is climate hypocrisy at large. The idea that he had some kind of internal problem dealing with how he should do this or not, boo-hoo. We can stop him from doing it. And the comment that he made about this was going to help him be a better father, I thought was particularly objectionable because the average dad tried to do his job and put food on the table for his kids is dealing with this cost of living crisis as a result of energy cost going up and all of this the elites telling us how we should live. It is really annoying to say the least.

Rita Panahi:

Well, it’s one thing, Patrick, for them to tell us how to live, even if they’re not going to live it themselves, they can talk the talk, they don’t want to walk it, but their advocacy, their activism is having an impact because we have seen the big end of town get behind renewables. We’ve seen prices skyrocket and we are in a cost of living crisis. It is all connected loosely or sometimes quite directly.

Patrick Carlyon:

Look, I think billionaires are worldwide probably, but we see it here in Australia confuse their vested interests with the national interests and we see that again and again. Look the way, the nature of this sacking, it was a pre-recorded video message, I think that says as much about the way these people think as does the preaching and the evangelical, well, the world must do this and the world must do that. It is a very easy one to call out hypocrisy very readily, isn’t it?

Rita Panahi:

It is, and they make it all too easy for us. Just try to be a little bit more artful with the hypocrisy. Now, peak business bodies in New South Wales and South Australia have reacted to the Alan Labour Government’s plan to make working from home a legal right in Victoria, the CEO of Business New South Wales, Daniel Hunter has said the proposed blanket rule on working from home would make it harder and less appealing to do business in Victoria and that New South Wales may well be the beneficiary of that. While the South Australian business Chamber CEO, Andrew Kay, said that Victorian businesses already burdened by an excessive tax regime and low productivity may struggle with the idea that this is a priority for their ailing economy and look to grow elsewhere. Colleen, that is the key word there, elsewhere, because businesses have options and why would you invest in Victoria when already the tax regime is more difficult, we’ve got so much red tape, green tape, black tape and now this imposition on allowing your workers to work from home for at least two days a week?

Colleen Harkin:

Victoria is already a difficult place to do business. It already has the highest taxes as you’ve just said, and it is the most indebted of all states and what we need is less regulation, not more. This sort of scenario about legally enshrining your right to work in your pyjamas is really problematic because be careful what we wish for. If you can really do your job at home in your pyjamas, you’re not adding any other value to your workplace.

Rita Panahi:

Exactly this.

Colleen Harkin:

Don’t be surprised when your job goes overseas or given to AI. We also have an obligation to the younger members of our workforce, that sort of incidental mentoring that happens when you’re in the office that you don’t get when you’re working at home. This sort of scenario about the government controlling business and what business can do and thinking that it can control it by more regulation is just wrong-headed at every level.

Rita Panahi:

It is wrong-headed and it will be a two-step process. First you can work from home and then someone else can do your job from home. But Patrick, some have pointed out the big end of town, big businesses who are now railing against this proposal. Well, they were very happy to jump on the lockdown bandwagon, allow their workers to work from home. They really have created the environment for this to happen because at that time it was the small businesses that were hurting and shutting down and big businesses were able to carry on.

Patrick Carlyon:

That’s right. Look, I don’t think there’s any need for this. There’s no groundswell demanding that Victoria must enshrine two days of work from home a week. I think Tim Wilson, the MP called it a stunt and it is a stunt and there are winners and losers here. The winners are going to be, as you said in the intro, South Australia and New South Wales, given Victoria is such a difficult place to do business as it is. And the losers are going to be Victoria because it’s going to hurt investment, it’s going to hurt all sorts of things. We do have these taxes. We are not an easy place at the moment. We’re not a happy place and this actually just makes it harder.

Rita Panahi:

But Colleen, despite all of those objections, despite the fact that there’s even legal advice that this is going to be very difficult to implement because we’re moving into employment laws that the federal government would normally handle, I think this policy is going to be hugely popular and I think that’s why they’re doing it. They’re not completely economically illiterate, they just know people would like the idea to be at home for two days because we know you can do a lot of other things whilst you’re at home that you can’t do, whether it’s staying in your pyjamas, doing some washing, going seeing a movie throughout the day, you could do a lot. What do you think? Do you think that is essentially why they’re going with it despite businesses, industry groups, legal experts, all saying this is a bad idea?

Colleen Harkin:

I think it’s a political distraction of all the other issues that are in play, all the other taxes that they’ve raised in the time that they’ve been in government, the fire safety taxes on our farmers, the renewable programme that’s going on down in the regional areas. I do think that people initially will think it’s a fun idea because it is appealing to the average person not having to travel to work, but short-term visionary is very problematic. The long-term scenario of this, the result is that it won’t increase productivity.

Rita Panahi:

Of course not.

Colleen Harkin:

You can’t really have a thriving workplace when half your workplace isn’t there. What are the industrial relations components of this? Who’s allowed to work at home when? Can I do it any two days that I want to? Do we have to do the same two days together? What if my two days-

Rita Panahi:

Everyone’s going to take Monday, Friday off.

Colleen Harkin:

Quite right, and so how does a business manage this logistically? That’s just going to create another layer of complexity for anyone trying to run a business in Victoria. The ultimate scenario there is in, then why would you? There are other places to do business that are easier than here?

Rita Panahi:

Patrick, let’s be honest, Victorian voters and perhaps voters across the country are all about short-term gratification. They don’t seem to care overly much about the enormous debt that’s been accumulated. They don’t seem to care that a policy like this is going to further decimate the CBD. Melbourne’s never fully recovered from the lockdowns, our CBD hasn’t. And I think how do the Libs combat that because short-term gratification is a powerful force?

Patrick Carlyon:

Look, I noticed Brad Battin wasn’t quick to condemn this when it came out on Sunday. He’s weighing up his bets, which way should I go on this? It will be popular to begin with certainly. And I think we saw that at the federal election with the liberal policy and it wasn’t just about lifestyle or indulging work, it was about saving money going to and from work as well. And that is a big factor in a cost-of-living crisis.

Rita Panahi:

And they make it so difficult, particularly in the city for people to drive in, the cost is exorbitant. Now, let’s move along to superannuance, looking to change their investment and retirement fund strategies before Labour introduces their new super tax, putting the Treasury’s forecast that it will bring in as much as 43 billion over the next decade in doubt. Transport moguls Kim Lindsay and Neil Mansell have revealed that they are considering liquidating part of their self-managed super funds in protest of this new tax with billionaire Lindsay Fox declaring that, “It is a bad policy. I don’t know why they would do it. It won’t work. Everything the government does backfires. I just don’t believe they will end up doing it.” Patrick, that sounds like wishful thinking there from Lindsay. He’s a bit of a Labour man, maybe he thinks they’re going to come through for him, but they’re doing it.

Patrick Carlyon:

Look, I agree with Lindsay, it won’t work. It won’t raise the money. Look, I know people on a personal level who are wealthier than I am who are facing having to pay this tax and they’re changing their super as we speak. They’re making arrangements. People with $3 million or more of super are generally very financially savvy. They’re not going to give up money for free to the government. It’s not going to raise $43 billion. It is across the board unpopular. It is unfair. It doesn’t mean it won’t happen, but it is not going to raise the revenue that is being claimed.

Rita Panahi:

It is grossly unfair, Colleen. And I think again, the Liberals were scared to properly fight this battle because it was seen as we’re defending the Uber rich when the policy in principle is just grotesquely unfair.

Colleen Harkin:

I’m with Kerry Packer on this one. Remember when he said something like, “If anyone’s not trying to minimise their tax, they’re an idiot because the government’s not spending it very well.” We are forced to put money into superannuation and now that people have accrued an amount of money they want to cannibalise that and punish them for having done for years what they were told was the right thing to be doing. This is not about fairness or equity or anything. This is actually about total control because it’s like a person having a house and then having to pay tax on what that house might be sold for in a few decades to come. You don’t have the cash to pay that tax and so you have to sell it, so it’s just about controlling the economic environment, forcing you to put money into something that they then want to forcibly take from you.

Rita Panahi:

That’s exactly the plan. Now before you two go, I’m interested in your thoughts on this story. Freshly unearthed documents have revealed that back in 2023, the Melbourne City Council considered shutting down the Captain Cook Cottage in Fitzroy Gardens amid concerns that keeping it open did not align with the Council’s indigenous reconciliation plan. Patrick, are we kidding ourselves? This is a beautiful part of history. It is a tourist attraction and it has been vandalised by the Federal Left and it seems the council considered, oh yeah, let’s give into the Federal left and shut this place down.

Patrick Carlyon:

Absolutely. Look, as a school kid, like most school kids, I went to Captain Cook’s Cottage to see it. More recently I’ve read Geoffrey Blainey’s book on Captain Cook’s voyage. I recommend that to everyone. It’s a pivotal part of our modern history of Australia. It doesn’t offend, it is just what happened and how it played out. We are here because Captain Cook discovered some land a long time ago. It is part of it. It’s the fabric of our history and it doesn’t come at the expense of other parts of our history.

Rita Panahi:

And Colleen, I know you are running the IPA’s schools programme. There is so much ignorance about Captain Cook. Particularly around Australia Day, it really comes to the fore of how ignorant people are about the man who are protesting an invasion day.

Colleen Harkin:

I’ll take the opportunity to give the schools programme a plug. We’ve done a unit on Captain Cook and whether he was an intrepid navigator or a destructive coloniser, and it’s a fabulous unit for schools to just work it through yourself. Once you know the facts and once you know the information, then I think people will make up their mind in the positive. As you say, Patrick, he’s done an enormous amount of feats worldwide.

Rita Panahi:

He should be a hero.

Colleen Harkin:

He should be a hero.

Rita Panahi:

… and elsewhere in the world. Colleen, Patrick, thank you so much for your time tonight.

Colleen Harkin:

Thank you.

This transcript of Colleen Harkin appearing on The Rita Panahi Show – Sky News Australia from 5 August 2025 has been edited for clarity.