Peter Stefanovic:
Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson has launched a broadside at his opponent, Jim Chalmers, this morning. He sent a letter to him saying ‘I write regarding the Treasury Laws amendment bill and its impending introduction and debate in the House of Reps’. Goes on to say ‘neither the Opposition nor the parliament has seen the legislation you intend to introduce tomorrow’, that being today. Joining us live this morning, the Assistant Treasurer, Dan Mulino, Shadow Home Affairs Minister Jonno Duniam. Good morning to you both. So, Dan, what’s the legislation that Tim doesn’t know about?
Daniel Mulino:
Well, thanks for having me on this morning and can I just say congratulations to Jonno on his last week of estimates. I’m sure he’s going to go out in a blaze of glory later on this week.
Jonathon Duniam:
You betcha.
Mulino:
But look, this is a really important bill. One of the – the first schedule of this bill will deal with a really important matter that was flagged in the Budget itself in relation to innovative businesses. And there’s also going to be important measures in the bill relating to the R&D Tax Incentive. So, look, it’ll be debated in the House in the normal way, but these are issues that have been consulted very widely on. These are issues that were flagged as needing attention a long time ago. So, it’s going to go through appropriate attention and debate, and Tim Wilson will get every chance to put his views.
Stefanovic:
Well, why didn’t you tell him beforehand?
Mulino:
No, well, he’s been very well aware that these issues are coming in the legislative pipeline. The need to have special arrangements for innovative businesses which have zero or near‑zero cost‑base issues, this was actually flagged in the Budget speech. And as I said, we’ve been consulting very widely on this with industry stakeholders. So, Tim Wilson is well aware of the issues that are being canvassed in this bill. So, it’s quite disingenuous of him –
Stefanovic:
That’s questionable, isn’t it? Constant consulting widely.
Mulino:
To flag this out of the blue.
Stefanovic:
Given your track record. That’s questionable, isn’t it, Dan?
Mulino:
No, no, this is again, we go back to the way that major tax reform has been implemented by previous governments, including John Howard, including the Hawke‑Keating years. It’s very normal to have major framework bills and then to put through bills on specific issues. This is exactly the normal way.
Stefanovic:
One more before we move on, Jonno, is this the proper way of doing things here?
Duniam:
No, far from and the devil is always in the detail with this mob. And so the fact that they haven’t provided a version of the bill for consultation prior to introduction today, passage today, that is not the normal way. This bill includes new taxes, and the Assistant Treasurer didn’t touch on those elements. And of course, as we know from the Budget, remember the widow’s tax that was buried away deep in the detail. This is what happens with this government when they don’t go through a proper process, and they don’t consult, when they don’t give us an advanced version of a piece of legislation, we end up the government having to come back and fix a bill because they’ve been caught out taxing people when they said they wouldn’t.
Stefanovic:
Alright, let’s get to savings. Yesterday, the Treasurer asked his opponents, actually, I think it was in a podcast, but he asked his opponents if they’re so angered by his spending, what spending should be cut? Well, business leaders overnight have suggested the bloated public service should be cut – should be targeted. So, I put that to the Nationals Leader, Matt Canavan, earlier in the program. He said, maybe the opposition will be looking at this. Just watch this.
[Excerpt]
Matt Canavan:
The Coalition did propose that we seek to get the public‑service numbers back down to the level they were before COVID. We’ll have our full costings before the election. Obviously, that will depend on what the level of the public service is, what our priorities are, which we’re going through in detail. We meet regularly as a shadow expenditure review committee, where we go through all of this spending line by line and making sure we take a sensible approach to government spending, which this government clearly has not done.
[End of excerpt]
Stefanovic:
So, Matt Canavan certainly didn’t close it off. Jonno, John Howard has spoken on this issue as well, ripping into the bloated public service in The Daily Telegraph today, calling it the quote, ‘lanyard class’. So, will the Libs go back to the well here following the last election and target public service reductions?
Duniam:
Well, that is something we have to work through. As Matt said. I mean, there is a very, very detailed body of work we are doing which will detail all of the savings measures. I mean, as you know, as Matt also mentioned on your program earlier, we have outlined $31 billion of savings, starting with their climate programs, the net‑zero programs, which will not do anything to grow, but yet hamper our economy. Their program to build houses, which is not building houses. And of course, our measures around tobacco excise, which will raise revenue for this government.
Stefanovic:
Sure. But should they go back to the public service? Now you’re leaving, Jonno, are you at more liberty to say?
Duniam:
Well, of course there will be all of those measures considered as part of what we put forward at the next election. I’m not going to speak on behalf of colleagues about where we might make changes, but I will say this. Every time we talk about savings, I hear the Finance Minister, the Treasurer and others say, oh, they’re going to cut the number of nurses and aged‑care workers. That is not what we’re talking about here.
This city we are in right now, Canberra, had a workforce swell beyond proportion, and the taxpayers are footing the bill. So, yes, there does need to be work done to bring the cost of the public service down. We’ve outlined measures I’ve just outlined to you, the $31 billion of savings. There will be proper work done to identify savings, where they come from and how much the taxpayer will be better off [inaudible].
Stefanovic:
Sounds like you’d be open to them targeting public service in the next election, at least, Jonno, with that answer.
Duniam:
Well, of course we have to make sure we cut our cloth to suit our times. This government, instead of reducing expenditure, tax more or borrow more, they are not working right now. They’re killing Australian households and businesses. So, we have to find ways to reduce expenditure.
Stefanovic:
So, Dan, the per capita, it’s the highest in the world, our public service. So, is that an answer for the Treasurer? Is there a cost‑saving measure there? Does it need to be trimmed in your view?
Mulino:
But, Pete, we hear this claim from Jonno just now, but also from Matt, that there’s very detailed work going on, but, you know, wait, we’ll bring it out very, very soon. We heard this at the last election. The Opposition said, look, don’t worry, we’ll pay for the Medicare promises we’re making through public service cuts. And I remember in interview after interview saying, where are these cuts going to be coming? You claim they’re not coming through frontline services, but are they going to be coming through processing vets’ benefits? Are they going to be coming through Centrelink offices, through the NDIS? Where are they going to be coming?
The answer was never forthcoming at the last election and this is the challenge. It’s all too lazy to say, at a rhetorical level, we’re going to slash the public service and then at the same time, claim ‘but don’t worry, it won’t affect anybody. No frontline cuts’. There’s never any detail forthcoming. It’s just the tired old rhetorical game the Opposition plays.
Stefanovic:
Okay, would you be making cuts or trims at all, Dan, in the years ahead, or does it just keep going?
Mulino:
So, what we’ve been doing, what we’ve been doing is very significant budget repair –
Jonathon Duniam
[Inaudible].
Mulino:
Budget after budget, including 2 surpluses. We’ve also cut around 180 billion over 4 Budgets and reprioritisations.
Jonathon Duniam
[Inaudible].
Stefanovic:
There’s that word again, reprioritisation.
Jonathon Duniam
[Inaudible].
Mulino:
We’re cutting the bill for consultants which blew up under the Opposition’s decade in parliament.
Stefanovic:
You must smile a little bit, don’t you, Dan? When you say reprioritisations, you know what that means?
Mulino:
Well, what it means is a bottom line where debt is just under $200 billion less than the trajectory we inherited –
Duniam:
It’s still high.
Mulino:
And that’s 70 billion. 70 billion less interest bill than those opposite left us.
Stefanovic:
Ok go on, Jonno.
Mulino:
Those opposite –
Duniam:
Well, look, I mean, honestly. So, one on detailed policy. I haven’t seen them land a blow on our very detailed migration policy while they preside over a broken system.
Mulino:
Well, other than recession.
Duniam:
Oh, recession. You’re thinking about One Nation’s policy, which of course is bunkum. Ours does not cause recession and you’ve not been able to identify one part of our policies which would cause those impacts you are now saying, but in terms of, it is business as usual for this government. There’s been not one reference in that answer as to how they would actually right size expenditure in this government to bring down public spending, to deal with inflation, to deal with interest rates that are affecting mortgage holders. Not one answer provided comfort to Australians just then.
Stefanovic:
Yeah, okay, gentlemen, we gotta go. Good to see you, though. Dan Mulino, Jonno Duniam, appreciate it. Talk to you soon.