ASHLEIGH GILLON:
Welcome back. Joining me on our panel of politicians this morning from Brisbane, David Bradbury the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer and from Melbourne today, Shadow Small Business Minister Bruce Billson, good morning to you both. I know that you both know that population growth is a big issue, we were talking about it a lot before the last election, now the Anglican Church of all organisations is today calling on the Government to cut the growth rate, the birth rate in Australia, cut migration levels. The way it wants to cut the birth rate is rule out incentives like the baby bonus for families, David Bradbury do you think that the Government will look at that seriously? I know of course that the Government has already means-tested the bonus, is it looking at tightening it up even further or perhaps scrapping it all together?
DAVID BRADBURY:
Good morning Ashleigh. Look, we've got no plans to scrap the baby bonus and as you rightly point out, we have made some changes to the baby bonus over the last couple of years, in particular it is means-tested to ensure that it is targeted at providing assistance to those families that need it most. We take the view that the baby bonus, along with the range of other measures that we have in place to support families are a package of measures and they are important in providing assistance. We all know, we saw inflation figures yesterday, we saw the cost of living, we know that it's not getting any cheaper to bring up kids and we think that it is important for Governments to provide support to families who are out there trying to do the best they can to bring up their kids so their children become great contributors to society. I haven't seen the submission that the advisory body to the Anglican Church has made but I think that when we do have a discussion about sustainable population, we do need to acknowledge the challenges of an ageing population and that is something that has come through very strongly in each of the intergenerational reports. With an ageing population, you need a population coming through, whether that be through natural birth rates or migration, in order to ensure that the ageing population has the goods and services being produced through an active and participating labour force. These are big challenges, but this submission will no doubt be taken into account with the range of other submissions that will be made.
GILLON:
Bruce Billson, this position from the Church is a far cry from Peter Costello's. He urged families to have one child for each parent then one for the country. Do you think we need to look at tackling the birth rate in this country?
BRUCE BILLSON:
I was surprised with the recommendation that it was somehow thought that the baby bonus was an issue when in the submission itself it talks about the impact of a growing population on people's quality of life. I would have thought at a time when we're not even replacing Australians that are passing away by new-born Australians that attacking the baby bonus would have been the last thing you would do. The cost pressures on new families that chose to have children are immense. The assistance should be available at that time, and if there are genuine concerns as I believe there are about what is happening with our cities, it goes to the question of how you sustainably settle the population. Having coherent strategies in place, the Coalition took a sustainable population and settlement strategy to the last election, which might be better reading for the Anglican Church to have a look at how you would go about making sure that a properly managed sustainable population is settled successfully so as to preserve our environment to maintain living standards and to make sure we are not undermining the quality of life of people. That would be a far smarter and coordinated way to go.
GILLON:
Also a strange way to start this program, bipartisan support on this issue but let's move on to another issue where I don't think you're going to be on the same page. David Bradbury today the Canberra Times has got some new figures about how much the Government is spending helping asylum seekers get access to legal and visa advice. Apparently, it's costing us more than $11 million a year, that is five times more than the Government was spending on it in John Howard's last year in Government and that is only a tiny proportion of costs, isn't it? It doesn't take into account all of the costs involved in setting up new detention centres on the mainland. This report shows that the influx of asylum seekers is costing Australia a fortune.
BRADBURY:
It's an interesting comparison because the years of comparison clearly show the lower levels of years as far as the Howard Government is concerned. I think if you go back and have a look at some of those peak years, in particular the late 1990's and the early 2000's, you'll see very clearly that the figures are much more comparable. We take the view, and I think that this is bipartisan, that when it comes to those people who are seeking to navigate their way through the system of visa application processes that there should be some assistance in place. That's not just a view that we've come up with, it's a view that was in place and a part of the overall set of arrangements under the Howard Government. I don't think that is in contention. Clearly on the broader issue of the number of arrivals, we continue to work very hard and Minister Bowen, apart from the discussion and activity that has occurred in recent times in relation to specific matters in regards to detention centres and broader policy reform, Minister Bowen has been working very hard to try to achieve the regional solution that we are advocating. This is something that we've always said would take some time and I know that there is a lot of frustration out there with people that this is taking a long time, but we said that it would take some time. In the end, we've taken the view that it is important that we try to build a sustainable and durable long term regional solution to what is a regional problem. I think that that's where the Government is at, we continue to work hard and I know Minister Bowen has had further success in relation to the most recent Bali meetings. He is just as determined today as the day that he was given this very difficult job to progress our plans for a regional settlement solution.
GILLON:
Well time of course is something that asylum seekers in detention centres around this country do have a lot of at the moment. We've seen the protest at Villawood going on for more than a week now. Bruce, yesterday Tony Abbott seemed to be calling for police to move in and sort it out and get people off the roof. Those left there seem to be engaging in a peaceful protest, is there anything wrong with that? It's not like they can take to the streets to make this protest.
BILLSON:
What we need to focus on is what a shambolic situation we face now with the Government's mishandling of this whole issue. The numbers are increasing, the effort to accommodate them is all over the place, we're seeing rioting and damaging and destruction of taxpayer funded properties. Then, you see a Minister with powers available to him to deal with people who commit criminal acts while they're here, notwithstanding unlawful arrival that begins the process, he's got no ticker. He won't exercise the tools that are already available to him to bring back in control a very difficult situation that is of his own making. There is no light at the end of the tunnel, the regional solution David talked about and we talked about it last time we were on your program Ashleigh, is nowhere in sight. The East Timorese have told the Government over and over again that they don't want a detention centre in East Timor. The standard of living for the detainees within that centre would exceed the standard of living of many East Timorese, they just don't want it. The Government keeps stalking them about an idea that nobody is committed to except for senior Government figures to make it sound like they've got some kind of plan. What the Government needs to do is ring the President of Nauru and re-open the Nauru centre and make it very clear to people who chose to fund organised crime syndicates to get themselves unlawfully to Australia that that is not the direct way of exercising the Australian 'big heart' of offering humanitarian places. That is not orderly, and all of this rioting and destruction of property that you're seeing now is just another sign of how the Government is mishandling this whole issue of unlawful arrivals with no plan on the table and no end to this shambolic arrangement in sight.
GILLON:
David Bradbury on another front the Government is battling is the carbon tax. We've seen on the front page of The Australian today that Marius Kloppers has been a big fan in the past of putting a price on carbon and that he does want the Government to be taking action on climate change but now he is saying he wants the Government to take a sector specific approach, in particular he is concerned that exporters could lose out. There still isn't any guarantees is there that no jobs will be lost under the carbon tax?
BRADBURY:
Mr Kloppers has expressed his views and he is entitled to do that and I know that previously he has also expressed a very strong view that it is in our national interest and the interests of the resources sector amongst other sectors in the Australian economy that we do put a price tag on pollution. That is what this Government is intent on doing. In terms of the specific views he might have in terms of representing the specific views of his business, he will express those views and he is entitled to do that as are the other stakeholders that will have something to say in this debate. But for the Government's part, what we have said is that we will consult very widely and we are doing that and that's why Mr Kloppers and others within his organisation are represented in various roundtables that the Government is a part of and has created. But we have said, and we've been very consistent about this, we want to ensure that we put a price tag on pollution so that we can drive the signals and the investment in a clean energy future. In doing that, we are very mindful of trying to ensure that we put in place a scheme that does not allow for jobs to be exported. This is why there will be particular attention paid to those emissions intensive trade exposed industries in the same way...
GILLON:
David, let me just pick you up on that point. You mentioned that you are meeting with this business roundtable, Bruce Billson it is a fair point that there are a lot of business leaders that have agreed with Marius Kloppers and are saying that businesses want certainty, they do want to see a price on carbon although to listen to your side of politics you'd think that every business leader thinks that it is a crazy idea.
BILLSON:
No, what you're hearing from those people who have been invited to participate in these so-called roundtables is they are going along to these meetings to offer their contribution and basically being told that we're not that fussed about your view on whether this should happen or not, we can muck around with the details but thanks very much, nobody is listening. That's what they are complaining about. Marius Kloppers' contribution is going to the heart of the debate where he was previously of a view that if there was going to be a co-ordinated global action, that Australia should be a part of that, and that is a reasonable point. But now what he describes as the 'go it alone' strategy...
BRADBURY:
Don't go putting words in to his mouth.
BILLSON:
It's something that he's not that keen on knowing that it will disadvantage his businesses and all the people employed in it. Even the AWU, the sponsor of Wayne Swan's political career is going out there and raising similar concerns. The AWU, that's not a big company it's the AWU the sponsors of Wayne Swan's political career telling the Treasurer that he's got it wrong when he thinks the steel industry is going to be just fine. The Government is talking about assisting industry, they're also saying that 50% of the revenue raised from their new tax will go to assisting households. There is also some talk about money going in to new technologies and it's all based on the CPRS compensation model that relied on the budget surplus that the Government inherited off the Coalition to fund that package. Now, that surplus isn't there. How on earth are they going to maintain that CPRS compensation model that even industry is saying is inadequate and incomplete and do what the Government claims it's going to do for households without some reneging on whether the carbon tax impact on fuel is going to be offset. This is a mess that is going to export jobs and damage our future.
GILLON:
Well these are all questions that this business roundtable is looking at at the moment. Bruce Billson and David Bradbury we are out of time. I think the point David Bradbury was probably going to make is that Marius Kloppers does still agree that we still need a carbon price even though there is not a global deal on the table right now. We do appreciate your insights, thank you for that.
BRADBURY:
Thanks very much.
BILLSON:
Thank you.