E&OE TRANSCRIPT
DOORSTOP INTERVIEW
BRISBANE
MONDAY, 30 SEPTEMBER 2019
SUBJECTS: Interest Rate Decision; Australian economy floundering under the Liberals; Retirement Income Review; Drought Funding; Business Forums.
JIM CHALMERS, SHADOW TREASURER: The Reserve Bank will be meeting tomorrow to make a decision on interest rates. Clearly I won't be pre-empting that decision or predicting what they might do but obviously in the market there's a very strong expectation that rates will be cut further, if not once then maybe a couple of times in the next few months.
If interest rates are cut it will be because the Morrison Government doesn't have a plan to turn the economy around. Australians are struggling, we've got the slowest economic growth in a decade, and the lowest interest rates on record haven't been enough. This is a Government in its seventh year and into its third term and when interest rates are a third of what they were during the Global Financial Crisis, it's so out of touch that Morrison and Frydenberg want to pretend that everything is hunky dory in the economy.
The Government shouldn't be leaving all the heavy lifting to the Reserve Bank. The Reserve Bank is doing its bit cutting rates to record lows, a third of what they were during the Global Financial Crisis, yet we have a Government without a plan, just sitting on its hands, hoping things will get better. Interest rates are at record lows because the Government has a political strategy but not an economic policy.
For as long as Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg don't have a plan for the economy then Australia will be dangerously and unnecessarily exposed to some of this turbulence in the global economy. The Australian economy will remain weak for as long as this out of touch Morrison Government sits on its hands and refuses to come up with a plan to turn around an economy which is floundering on its watch.
On the Retirement Income Review: it's becoming clearer with every passing day that this Retirement Income Review is a stalking horse for more cuts to super and more cuts to the pension by a Government which has form on both. If the Government wanted this to be a serious, forward-looking, bipartisan opportunity to get the retirement incomes system right they wouldn't be playing partisan games with appointments to the panel. It is deeply disappointing that the Government has compromised this Retirement Income Review already by appointing a well-known critic and a well-known campaigner against Labor, and Labor policies. The Government's claims that this Retirement Income Review isn't about attacking superannuation will ring hollow for as long as this well-known opponent of Labor and its policies sits on the panel.
The Liberal Party has never believed in superannuation. They've never believed in giving workers the opportunity to save for their own retirement and to have a dignified and secure income stream after a lifetime of work.
We call on the Government to leave the Superannuation Guarantee alone. Stop pretending that you care about retirement incomes for workers at the same time as you plan to thieve their super. Stop using this Retirement Income Review as an opportunity for more and harsher cuts to superannuation and the pension. Stop crying these crocodile tears for workers on low incomes. Stop trying to take the compulsory out of compulsory super and give workers in this country the retirement incomes that they need and deserve and have earned.
JOURNALIST: Just on your last point. And do you agree with Greg Combet that the Government should reconsider the appointment of Dr Ralston to their Retirement Income Review?
CHALMERS: Clearly the review has been compromised by the appointment of a well-known critic of Labor and a campaigner against former Labor policies. This person shouldn't have been appointed to the panel in the first place. It's the Government's review and we don't have a say in who they put on the panel but it's very clear that the Government intends to play partisan games. As always they play politics with important issues in the economy to distract from the fact that they have no plan and they've failed on the economy and that's what we're seeing again today.
JOURNALIST: Do you think that her continued appointment will mean it's difficult for the review's findings to be accepted in a bipartisan way?
CHALMERS: The Government's obviously not interested in bipartisanship. They're not interested in having a proper and forward-thinking look at the retirement incomes system. They knew when they appointed Professor Ralston that it would be hard for Labor to sign up to conclusions reached by the panel when she has been such a prominent, well-known and dedicated campaigner against the Labor Party. The Government knew that when they appointed her. The Government's got form not just in cutting super and cutting pensions but also in playing partisan games with important parts of our economy and they do that for one reason: that is to distract from the fact that they have failed on the economy. They do it as well to distract from the fact that they have now for more than six years and into their third term got a shameful record of attacking superannuation and cutting pensions. They don't want Australians focussed on that. They want this review to be conducted in a partisan way and not in a way that gives people the retirement incomes that they need deserve and have earned.
JOURNALIST: Would a Labor Government consider making super payments voluntary for low paid workers, which is one of Dr Ralston's more interesting policy suggestions?
CHALMERS: Labor doesn't intend to take the compulsory out of compulsory super. The genius of the system is that every Australian worker who earns a certain amount, the $450 threshold which we intended to deal with, but every Australian worker has the opportunity to save for their retirement. That's the genius of the system that Paul Keating instituted almost 30 years ago. We don't intend to change the system which has amassed trillions of dollars of capital for Australian workers to rely on in their retirement. The only party who wants to mess with superannuation and take the compulsory out of compulsory super is the Liberal Party and they pretend that they don't want to do that but then they appoint a panel of this nature which shows their hand and shows their true colours. They don't believe in superannuation, they don't believe in compulsory super but Labor does and we will fight tooth and nail to get the Superannuation Guarantee to 12 per cent because we think, and we know, and we understand what the Australian people understand; you don't boost retirement incomes by attacking super.
JOURNALIST: [INAUDIBLE]
CHALMERS: We're talking here about Deborah Ralston, who is one third of the panel appointed by the Treasurer on Friday, on the eve of Grand Final weekend. Professor Ralston has a record of campaigning against Labor and Labor policies. She has a record of campaigning against compulsory superannuation. I'm not going to get into Professor Ralston in personal terms, I just think clearly the views that she's espoused for some time now are contrary to a Government which would like to see some sort of bipartisan forward-looking proper look at the retirement incomes system. I think if the Government was serious about getting to the bottom of these really important issues in retirement incomes then they wouldn't be playing partisan games with the appointment of the panel.
JOURNALIST: Can we move to some drought funding questions now. What do you make of the Government giving a million dollars to a Victorian council and the shire saying they don't need it?
CHALMERS: I haven't seen the detail of those reports. I heard it in a bulletin on the way here just a moment ago, so I'd rather get to the bottom of what's happened there before I comment on detail. But I think more broadly on drought funding when the Prime Minister was in regional Australia on the weekend and I think the Treasurer's headed there later in the week, I think a lot of regional people are wondering where this guy's been for the last six years? This is a Government in its third term and entering its seventh year and they seem to always want to play politics with drought funding and drought funding should be above that. Drought funding should be more important than that.
Instead you've got the Government playing politics and making these, you know, doing these picture opportunities as a substitute for six years of inaction. I think that's problematic. I also heard on the radio this morning the Minister talking about how important it is to rely on the science. This is the same Minister who said he didn't know if climate change was human-induced despite the fact that the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence says that it is. So I don't think people are taking the Government that seriously when it comes to drought funding or when it comes to climate change.
JOURNALIST: The Drought Minister also said he was going have an audit based on the figures that [INAUDIBLE] - do you think that's appropriate?
CHALMERS: Clearly you want to make sure that these decisions are based on the best available information. I don't know if the proposal that the Minister has put to you and put publicly will do the trick. Clearly you want to make sure that these decisions are based on a good scientific basis. That's the whole point of what we're saying about taking serious action on climate change. It’s our whole point about making sure that drought affected communities in regional Australia get the funding that they need. We want these decisions to be well-founded.
JOURNALIST: So does Labor support those thirteen Victorian councils receiving that money?
CHALMERS: Well again I don't know the ins-and-outs of all thirteen funding bids or funding allocations. I'd need to have a proper look at that before commenting with any authority.
JOURNALIST: Can I ask, were you at the Labor State Conference last month?
CHALMERS: The Queensland one?
JOURNALIST: Yes.
CHALMERS: I was.
JOURNALIST: Did you participate in the business observers program?
CHALMERS: I did.
JOURNALIST: Who did you meet with?
CHALMERS: I met with a series of business people from around Queensland and around Australia. I participated in and spoke at the lunch. I do what I always do, which is I take as much time as I can to consult broadly widely with business to understand how businesses are run, what their concerns are, what their issues are in national politics and national policy.
JOURNALIST: Can you name some of these companies in the interests of transparency?
CHALMERS: Well I don't recall the specific businesses I met with. I've met with literally hundreds of businesses this year in all kinds of forums including forums like that, but largely forums outside of the Queensland State Conference. I think it's entirely appropriate that I consult with as many businesses as I can as we go about refreshing our policies for the next election.
JOURNALIST: Would you be happy to go back and consult your notes and then make public who you met with business observers?
CHALMERS: Well it's not standard practice for Shadow Ministers or Ministers to release their diary about every meeting that they've had. I was a participant in that program. I have been before. All sides of politics have programs like that. They are appropriately declared according to the guidelines and I think that’s sufficient.
ENDS
