Ross Solly:
Dr Andrew Leigh, the Member for Fenner joins us this morning. Dr Leigh, good morning to you.
Andrew Leigh:
Good morning Ross. Great to be with you on this exciting new experiment.
Solly:
Isn’t it? It is an exciting new experiment, and it will be interesting to see whether people want to take up the opportunity to throw questions at you. I have got some great questions…
Leigh:
It might just be me and you if not.
Solly:
Well, it might be. But, well, I’ve already great some great questions, and not all of them are political. Some people actually wanting to know a little bit about the private life of Andrew Leigh. And I might throw a couple of those at you in just a sec. Could I just ask you though, and I don’t know whether you’ve had time to think about it, but how we recognise Ben Roberts‑Smith and his shortcomings and what he’s done on the battlefield? Do you have a view on that Andrew Leigh?
Leigh:
The War Memorial makes an independent decision as to how they’re going to handle the display for Ben Roberts‑Smith. Following the defamation case, they made a decision to put a plaque next to Ben Roberts‑Smith’s display outlining what had happened in the defamation case. I still feel somewhat uncomfortable with that. Given the findings out of the defamation case I would feel more comfortable if that display were removed.
Solly:
Removed altogether?
Leigh:
That’s my view. That’s a personal view and recognising the independence of the War Memorial, I’ve certainly shared that view with them. They’re aware of that view. But the findings that came out of the defamation case I thought were of a nature that suggests that there are many others that would be more appropriately recognised by the War Memorial.
Solly:
All right. Those views have been supported by quite a few listeners this morning, but a lot of others are saying keep the display on there but then give an explanation. As you’ve just said, it’s already there but a more detailed explanation of what went on and what he got up to on the battlefield.
But anyway, we are hoping to get a response from the Australian War Memorial. They’ve obviously now have got a decision they need to make. All right, let’s go to some questions. Matt asks on the text line, ‘Andrew Leigh, what is the thinking behind the $90 million cut to the CSIRO in the federal budget?’
Leigh:
So, the CSIRO is always maintaining its operational profile. I know that Tim Ayres has met with the CSIRO Staff Association to talk that through. They’d received some additional funding which had now come to an end, and I understand that they’re managing that. They’re still doing huge amounts of important work and of course, research and development is very much at the heart of the government’s productivity agenda. So, we’re working through with them how they’re going to manage that profile.
Solly:
What sort of message do you think it sends to the scientific community? We know that they’re under attack around the world. I mean, there’s been some fascinating hearings overnight involving Robert F Kennedy in the United States. What does it say to the scientific community when, you know, the CSIRO – one of the premier bodies here in Australia, gets a funding cut like that?
Leigh:
Well look, we’ve strongly supported scientific funding. Labor’s been backers of science. We’ve done that in the area of climate change. We’ve done it in many other areas of policy. They have received additional funding which, as I understand it, had come to an end. So, this is a matter of them working out how they’re going to sort out their programs. But they’re an activist, well‑funded science agency beloved by the government, and we’re strong supporters of science‑based policy.
Solly:
19 to 8 on ABC Canberra Breakfast. If you have a question for Dr Andrew Leigh, if you want it – because we’re getting a lot on the text line, but if you want to jump the queue if you really feel strongly about something, I suggest you give us a call on 1300 681 666. This text says, ‘Andrew Leigh, there are a lot of people in the community who are really worried about the aged care changes. I wonder what you can say to reassure them?’
Leigh:
We’re rolling out a whole lot more home care packages. The number of home care packages over the last 5 years has gone from about 155,000 to about 300,000, and we’ve announced more of those home care packages to roll out this week.
We’re reducing the amount of time taken to do the home care assessments. Katy Gallagher yesterday reported a whole range of statistics across government where the wait times for getting government payments have come down. We’re working on that as well with home care packages. So more of them going out the door and working to shorten those assessment times.
Solly:
I mean, obviously there’s a lot here. These are quite vulnerable members of the community, Andrew Leigh. Does it worry you that if people are feeling now that they’re under threat or that their lifestyle is going to change or they might not get the support they need?
Leigh:
For the people who are on the high‑priority packages, they’re obviously getting assessed more speedily and getting more assistance. And then of course, we’re just talking about the home care packages here, Ross.
Solly:
Yeah.
Leigh:
There’s all the work we’ve been doing within aged care centres, getting nurses into nursing homes 24/7, improving the amount of care time that people get, ensuring that meal quality is better following the Royal Commission’s report into aged care. It’s been a huge priority for the government. The draft report was titled ‘Neglect’, which really spoke to how aged care homes had fared under the previous government.
Solly:
All right. The fact you had to bring it forward – the home care packages assistance – is that signalling that maybe you misread it first time round?
Leigh:
We were pleased to find an opportunity to bring that forward. I think that’s a good announcement. The intention had been to start these reforms on the first of November. That was a strong view out of the sector, that they needed some time to make the adjustments. But we found the ability to roll out more home care packages for more older Australians. That’s just a great outcome.
Solly:
All right. Let’s go to a caller. Good morning, Jill.
Listener:
Hi. Good morning Ross, how are you?
Solly:
I’m well, thank you. And Andrew Leigh is listening in.
Listener:
Yes, hi. Good morning Andrew. My question is, the taxpayer‑funded Royal Commission into robodebt that made absolutely scathing findings, the taxpayer also funded the legal defence for a couple of class actions, and the taxpayer will now fund a massive compensation bill flowing from those class actions.
The taxpayer also fund the National Anti‑Corruption Commission, and my question is when do you think NACC will do its job and hold those to account for the appalling cost they have had not only to the victims but to the taxpayer more generally?
Leigh:
Jill, you’re spot on about the costs of Robodebt. It’s now cost over a billion dollars. My understanding is that the cost of the payouts are now exceeding what the Morrison government forecast that they would get from savings from the robodebt scheme. It was an illegal and immoral scheme which hounded people. In some cases, people ended up taking their own lives. And we’ve been working to clean up the mess since we came to government.
The National Anti‑Corruption Commission is a proud establishment of the Albanese government. It operates entirely independently from government. It is just not at all appropriate for politicians to be directing them as to what to do or criticising them. Of course, we can make referrals as can anyone. They’ll make their own independent decisions, and that’s exactly the way any anti‑corruption body should operate.
Solly:
Are you okay with that, Jill?
Listener:
Well, my question would be a supplementary question. Are you happy with the person running the National Anti‑Corruption Commission? Yes, you established it in the first year of your first term, so that’s what, 4 years ago? And they have done nothing about Robodebt. The Royal Commissioner for the Robodebt inquiry withheld her report for a week so that she could make – purposely make – referrals to the NACC, and they have done nothing. So, my question is aren’t you disappointed with – like, independent or not, you must be disappointed with the leadership of that organisation?
Leigh:
Jill, I was a High Court associate to Michael Kirby at a time when the Howard government was attacking judges in the High Court. I saw the damage that did to the separation of powers. I strongly believe as a member of parliament that my role is to do my job and to leave the judiciary to do theirs. And nothing is to be gained from politicians attacking the judiciary. You do see that in other countries and it is a really worrying trend, which I don’t want to play any part of.
Solly:
Jill, thank you very much for your question. 14 minutes to 8 on ABC Canberra Breakfast. 1300 681 666 is our phone number. We’ve got a lot of callers coming in Andrew Leigh. Good morning Waz.
Listener:
Good morning Ross, how are you?
Solly:
Yeah, good thanks Waz. You’ve got a question for Andrew Leigh?
Listener:
Yes I have. Good morning, Andrew, how are you?
Leigh:
G’day Waz. Good!
Listener:
My question is, just going back to what you were talking to about the CSIRO and the Albanese government having a lot of faith in the scientific community. And I just wondered why Labor continues to approve new coal mines when the recommendations across a broad part of the scientific community are that we should have no further expansion of new coal mines.
Leigh:
Well Waz, the environmental laws provide in most cases fairly narrow grounds for the Environment Minister to make a decision. Certainly when she was Environment Minister, Tanya Plibersek made a decision not to allow a mine. I think it was a Clive Palmer mine in the Bowen Basin to go ahead because of the damage that that would do.
But the grounds that she is focused on are not about the overall carbon emissions. In that case it was about the impact on the Great Barrier Reef. One of the reasons we’re looking at reforming environmental laws is to bring them into the 21st century. Environmental groups and industry want those laws reformed.
But our focus has been on reducing Australia’s emissions. We’re aiming to move the electricity grid from a third renewables to four‑fifths renewables in just a decade. That’s one of the biggest industrial transformations Australia has ever seen, and it will massively reduce our carbon emissions. Global demand for thermal coal is falling. There’s still demand for coking coal, the kind of coal you use to make the steel used in windmills…
Solly:
I guess that comes to Waz’s question, isn’t it? Why are you approving them or still approving them?
Leigh:
Well, my understanding is that there have been a couple of extensions made and mostly they have been made to steelmaking coal. So, if you believe that we need to be making lots of windmills, then at the moment with current technology that requires steelmaking coal. And I think it’s been pretty disingenuous of some of the activists to be conflating thermal coal and steelmaking coal, given that they know full well the need for steelmaking coal as part of the renewables transition.
Solly:
Good on you Waz. Thanks for your question. Good morning, Judith.
Listener:
Good morning. I want to support them on their question. I want to challenge the current government on saying its policies are science‑based. I had an answering email from one I wrote very recently listing all this money that was being spent on what I understand to be repairing former big mistakes in our ecosystems and environment. And money we need to be concentrating on prevention.
Apparently, we’re spending $500 million to Chevron to repair and decommission one of their operations. I was shocked at the surprise of your government about what’s happening down in South Australia. We have been warned about such happenings, ignoring all the fires and floods and what have you?...
Solly:
So, Judith, are you – I think in a nutshell you’re saying that this government has got its priorities wrong with the environment? Can I say that as a – yeah?
Listener:
Yes.
Solly:
Okay. Let’s…
Listener:
We are continuing. I mean, the Woodside shelf extension is gut wrenching, so…
Solly:
All right. Let’s hear Andrew Leigh’s response, Judith.
Listener:
Thank you.
Solly:
Good question this morning. Thank you. Andrew Leigh?
Leigh:
Judith, my understanding is that the decommissioning cost is mostly being borne by Chevron. There is some conversation over the share that the Western Australian Government will pay. I haven’t been privy to the details of that. But the focus of the government has been on a renewables future.
If you had been sitting in the parliament this week you would have seen the week start off with Barnaby Joyce moving his bill to get rid of Australia’s net zero target – a target that was brought in by the Morrison government and legislated by the Albanese government. So, the real split in Australian politics is between a Labor government strongly committed towards the science and towards a renewables future and net zero economy and a Coalition which is many of them now thinking that they should just turn their backs on the science and return to the head‑in‑the‑sand approach of the Abbott government.
Solly:
9 to 8. Thank you Judith for your question. Let’s go to Michael, who I think has got a question very close to your area of expertise in the parliament. Good morning Michael.
Michael:
Good morning. Good morning Assistant Minister Leigh. I’ve got a question with your charities hat on if I may? Yeah, I have a problem because I’ve stopped donating to charities simply because their default position is they like to share my contact details with, as they say, like‑minded organisations.
Now, this came up again recently when I tried to donate to a charity. I won’t name them, and as soon as I donated I got an email saying, ‘We need your help.’ And I went back to them and I said, ‘Listen, this is just going to trick your elderly supporters thinking they haven’t donated and they’ll donate multiple times with very meagre means.’ Now, under the Privacy Act and I looked at the Charities Commission site, there’s nothing – the charities seem to have a loophole.
Is there something you can do or can look at to stop this practice of sharing contact details? Because I remember earlier on you actually made a comment in the papers about some elderly person that was harassed by lots of letters coming because they were being bombarded by these charities?
Solly:
That’s a good question. Andrew Leigh?
Leigh:
It’s worrying to hear that, Michael. Most charities are doing the right thing, but if some aren’t, then please do share that information with me and the charities commission. There’s the Fundraising Institute of Australia, which is the industry body which sets up a code and talks about how the information is dealt with.
Charities shouldn’t be sharing your information with other charities without your consent. It is something where I think the standing of the charity sector really matters. There was a scandal in the UK about a decade ago; a woman by the name of Olive Cooke took her own life after being harassed by a number of charities, and that led to a huge drop off in the donations to charity in the UK. So, the industry itself needs to make sure that it’s holding itself to high standards. I think by and large it does. But every time I speak to the Fundraising Institute, I’m reminding them of the importance of maintaining the trust and confidence of the Australian people.
Solly:
Good question Michael, thank you. I’m not sure if you’re satisfied with that answer, but it seems that Andrew Leigh is on to it, so appreciate that Michael. Let’s go to Maria. Good morning, Maria.
Listener:
Good morning Ross and Andrew. I’ve got – I guess it’s not exactly a question, it’s more like a plea. I would like the federal government to stop funding silly projects the ACT Government wants to do when they’re so broke. Things like the pool in Commonwealth Park, the Convention Centre, extra stages of the light rail and so on. We’re absolutely struggling to provide basic services, and the government keeps coming up with new things ignoring things like Phillip Pool and the ovals that haven’t been watered since the drought and so on.
Leigh:
I’m a strong supporter of the ACT getting fair share of infrastructure funding. We saw in the last Budget of the Morrison government, we got a fifth of our fair share of infrastructure funding. That hasn’t been the case since we’ve come to office. Having the Finance Minister in Katy Gallagher from the ACT makes a big difference. And focusing on projects that the ACT Government judges to be best is the way in which we look to fund as a federal government.
The new city pool re‑development, the work on the National Convention Centre, all of that I think is going to be important for our city, to grow and to continue to attract those international and national conventions. And the work on the light rail has been a key infrastructure priority for the ACT Government. So, we do work closely with the ACT Government, absolutely. We look to fund their priorities rather than to make up our own list because we understand that the people of Canberra are best served by governments that co‑operate and row in the same direction.
Solly:
Thank you so much Maria, for that. On the text line, Andrew Leigh, ‘How are we going to pay for the carers for child‑aged and NDIS? When did Australia get a working poor and food insecurity? When will we get rid of negative gearing?’ says Jay. A lot of questions there, Andrew Leigh.
Leigh:
Certainly income support payments have been something that’s been a priority for us in each of our budgets. We’ve made significant increases to income support payments, Commonwealth Rent Assistance is up by around 40 per cent since we came to office. That’s a payment which goes to many low‑income Australians. And we’re always looking to how we can increase that.
On the National Disability Insurance Scheme, we’ve understood that with the scheme growing fast – it’s now about a billion dollars a week – it will soon be bigger than the aged pension. We have 1 in 6 young boys on the scheme. We do need to ensure that we’ve got the right supports in place, particularly for children on the autism spectrum who don’t always need the National Disability Insurance Scheme in many cases but need early intervention.
And in terms of tax settings, obviously there was a big discussion at the Economic Reform Roundtable. We haven’t announced any changes to our tax settings, but the message out of the Economic Reform Roundtable was one of intergenerational inequity, and the Treasurer and others have taken that forward.
Solly:
Andrew Leigh, it’s been great. I think this has been a great success. We need to do this again I think. A couple of very personal questions to finish off.
Leigh:
Any time Ross.
Solly:
This is from Kieran, a local muso from Harrison, ‘Andrew Leigh, what is your favourite band and music? And what was the last concert you went to?’, asks Kieran who is a local musician.
Leigh:
Gosh. So, my wife and I headed out to see the Canberra Symphony. I think they were doing a Mozart concert last year. But that’s the last one we made our way out to. I’m a bit of a Billy Bragg tragic, so I’ve been listening to Billy Bragg lately.
Solly:
Yeah, a fellow communist? Nah just joking!
Leigh:
I just love that mix of love and politics. I think it’s a beautiful combination.
Solly:
And one other question here, Andrew Leigh. Surely the most – what is your favourite run and your best run in Canberra?
Leigh:
So the favourite run that I did was the Comrades Ultramarathon in South Africa. It’s the world’s oldest and biggest ultramarathon: 87 kilometres from Pietermaritzburg to Durban.
Solly:
Excellent.
Leigh:
And you’re just standing in the starting pens with a whole group of South Africans singing traditional songs around you. It is just one of those moments of transcendence and just feeling you’re in a different environment and the shared joy of running together. And then in Canberra, I did 14 kilometres around Mt Majura and Mt Ainslie this morning.
Solly:
This morning?
Leigh:
Yes. We are so blessed to have these sorts of trails to run in. A couple of kangaroos, plenty of kookaburras. Being out in nature, it’s fantastic.
Solly:
Oh my. Let me tell you, if I ran 14 kilometres this morning I would not be on the wireless right now. Thank you Dr Andrew Leigh, it’s been great – appreciate it. Thank you for taking those questions this morning. And thank you to all the listeners who called in