Emma Rebellato:
More on this morning top stories, we’re joined by federal Assistant Treasurer, Daniel Mulino. Daniel, thanks for joining us this morning.
Daniel Mulino:
Thanks very much for having me on, Emma.
Rebellato:
I’ve got a few things I’d like to ask you about. I want to start with a story that’s on ABC News online this morning. It’s about an invitation‑only grants program.
Now the Centre for Public Integrity says it appears it had been used by Labor to pork‑barrel seats that it wanted to win. How do you defend that?
Mulino:
So, Emma, with election commitments, it’s standard practice and long‑standing practice for governments to set up these kinds of grants programs in order to deliver those election commitments. They’re different to the kinds of grants programs which are run in the ordinary course of government, and this program, as Catherine King has explained, is part of long‑standing practice, and there are checks and balances in there. Ministers won’t approve programs in their own electorate, and it’s an important way for governments to be able to deliver the commitments.
Rebellato:
But $493 million out of the $560 million went to safe or marginal Labor seats. That doesn’t sound right, does it?
Mulino:
So this is a mechanism that is really there to deliver commitments that were very transparent in the election, and it’s important that government have mechanisms to deliver those in a timely way, and as I said, this is a long‑standing way by which governments can deliver commitments after an election. It’s a really critical way in which there are protections in place, but governments can be upfront with the Australian people that if they’ve made commitments, that they’ll deliver them.
Rebellato:
So you think there’s nothing to answer here?
Mulino:
Well, look, this is something that is basically about commitments that were made. So the Australian public would expect governments to follow through on their commitments. These were promises made –
Rebellato:
But they’re all in Labor seats pretty much, either Labor or Labor marginal seats.
Mulino:
So, look, the commitments that were made would have been across a range of electorates, and those commitments were very transparent and public, and I think the public expect that governments, once they get in, deliver those commitments in a timely way.
So this is different to a grants program that might be set up in the ordinary course of business where you might have a set of criteria and then a competitive process where you let the process, itself, determine who gets the grant. This is about delivering mechanisms where during the course of an election the government has made commitments and then wants to deliver those specific commitments.
Rebellato:
On another story on ABC at the moment, why is Australia promising $980 million to Solomon Islands?
Mulino:
Well, Australia is building strong relations right across the Pacific Islands. We saw the Prime Minister attend the Pacific Islands Forum recently. We’ve engaged with a number of our partners across the Pacific Islands. When we came into government, relations with a number of our Pacific Island nations were weak. We inherited power from a government that had almost denied climate change was occurring, and this is something obviously that is a first order issue across the Pacific Islands.
So across a number of our countries that we have strong, long‑standing relationships with we have entered into discussions that involve long‑standing partnerships and partnerships across a range of policy dimensions.
So this is something which I think is very constructive, it shows a real commitment to engage between the 2 nations, and as we saw last week at the PIF, Australia is undertaking a very, very serious set of engagements with our Pacific Island partners.
Rebellato:
The issue of superannuation obviously has been kicking around for the last day or so given One Nation’s policy to allow people to pay rent or a mortgage, to allow them to access a portion of their super as salary for up to 3 years. Why shouldn’t Australians be trusted to be able to do this?
Mulino:
So superannuation is one of the best retirement income systems in the world, and Australians should rightly be proud of it. When I talk to my counterparts in other countries, other countries are looking at our superannuation system.
It took us decades to get to 12 per cent superannuation guarantee, and that’s a level that is going to provide people with a high level of dignity and security in retirement. To unwind that is dangerous and undermines the whole superannuation system.
What we’ve suggested over recent years is that the far better approach is to support people getting pay rises. We’ve supported increases in award wages, in the minimum wage. The minimum wage has gone up $12,000 under this government, and One Nation and the Opposition routinely vote against those pay rises. We’ve also given 5 tax cuts in 3 different ways. That’s the best way to provide people with support for cost of living.
So do what the One Nation party is suggesting will see somebody who’s 30 years old $25,000 worse off at retirement and a couple around $50,000 worse off. It’s really saying to people that they should steal from their future to pay for the current. We would rather do that through sustained wage increases and tax cuts.
Rebellato:
We’re very quickly running out of time. But I just want to ask you about the issue of the financially troubled property developer Bathla Group. Does the government have to cop is same blame here over its budget changes for creating uncertainty in the market and a drop in investor demand, because the founders think so?
Mulino:
Well, there are a wide range of factors affecting house prices. So what we’ve seen since the budget is that house prices nationally have moderated about 3 per cent. We always expected that over the first couple of years that house prices would moderate slightly as a result of our policies, but that our policies would see many tens of thousands of people, 75,000 people moving to owning their own home.
But there are many other factors, including global uncertainty, interest rates and other factors. So house prices can’t be reduced to just one thing.
Rebellato:
Daniel Mulino, thanks for your time.
Mulino:
Thank you.