5 February 2024

Doorstop interview, Canberra

Note

Subjects: Grattan Institute report on impact of government’s tax relief package on bracket creep, legislation to give bigger tax cuts to more Australians, legislation to expand paid parental leave, new fuel efficiency standards

JIM CHALMERS:

The Coalition has the legislation, they have the detail, they have no more excuses. I say to the Coalition – don't stand in the way of a bigger tax cut for more people to help with the cost of living.

Labor's cost‑of‑living tax cuts for middle Australia provide a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer right up and down the income scale, but with a bigger emphasis on middle Australia.

The Grattan Institute has put out a report overnight which absolutely torpedoes the shoddy claims that the Coalition has been making about bracket creep. What the Grattan Institute makes clear and what our own analysis makes clear is Australians do better over 10 years than under the stage three tax cuts that they replace. People on average incomes, people on middle incomes in this country will benefit substantially from 1 July and over the 10‑year period at the same time as we provide tax relief right up and down the income scale.

This is about more tax relief for more people, for every Australian taxpayer, and the Coalition and the Greens in the Parliament should support it.

JOURNALIST:

The latest Newspoll shows most people support it – two thirds; are you relieved?

CHALMERS:

It's been very clear to us moving around the country over the course of the last week and a half that there is a lot of support for our efforts to provide a bigger tax cut to more people to help with the cost of living. We don't need polls to tell us that people will welcome extra assistance with the cost‑of‑living pressures that we know that they confront.

At the end of the day this has never been about the politics of polls or punditry, this is about real people and the pressure that they are under. I spent last week speaking with steel workers and health workers and plumbers and sprinkler fitters and early childhood educators and what is clear is that this is a cost‑of‑living tax cut right up and down the income scale which means that all of those professions that I just mentioned will be beneficiaries of our plan.

So this is not about the polls, this is not about the pundits, this is about real people. What we've done here is put people before politics and I think people are recognising that.

JOURNALIST:

Thank you. Positive polling, but does it pave the way for more breaking promises?

CHALMERS:

I don't see it that way. This is about a meaningful change to those stage three tax cuts. We've found a way to deliver more relief for more people without pushing up inflation, and having done that and announced that, we've explained why we've taken this different position.

I think people understand that when the economic conditions evolve and when you find a better way to deliver tax relief to more people, you've got a responsibility to do that. We fronted up, we explained why we came to a different position, we were upfront about that. I think Australians put tangible outcomes above the politics of the polls and the pundits.

JOURNALIST:

Treasurer, you've never been happy with the stage three tax cuts as they're currently legislated. You must personally be pretty happy with the results in the Newspoll today?

CHALMERS:

I don't see it in personal terms, and I don't see it in political terms. This is about delivering for people in real communities right around Australia. This is about delivering more relief to the workers and families and communities of this country.

We know that people are doing it tough, but more than acknowledge that, we're trying to actually do something about it, and that's why I say to the Coalition and to the Greens – don't stand in the way of a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer and a bigger tax cut for more people to deal with these cost‑of‑living pressures.

JOURNALIST:

There's a lot of reports of tension and fighting between yourself and the Prime Minister. What is your relationship with him?

CHALMERS:

There aren't a lot of reports about that, and that's because it's rubbish.

JOURNALIST:

Is there any room for compromise, Treasurer, if the – like is there any wiggle room in your legislation?

CHALMERS:

We want to see the tax changes that we've proposed legislated by the Parliament. I'll be introducing the legislation tomorrow at the earliest opportunity. We have provided all of the detail, we've provided all of the legislation. The Liberals and Nationals have no more excuses to keep stumbling around and stuffing around and trying to come up with some kind of excuse to oppose more tax cuts for more people. Now whatever the Coalition party room decides, they've already shown that they are diabolically out of touch with middle Australia and the communities that they are supposed to represent, and we already know because Sussan Ley said so that no matter what happens in the Parliament that it is the Liberals' and Nationals' intention to unwind the changes that we are seeking passage for in the Parliament. So they will keep stumbling around and stuffing around trying to come up with all kinds of excuses to oppose us on political grounds and that's because their position on the actual tangible benefits for people is indefensible and unsustainable.

JOURNALIST:

Is there a timeline [INAUDIBLE] before the Budget?

CHALMERS:

We'll be looking to pass this as soon as we can. We want to get it in place so that people can plan for the tax relief that they'll be receiving from 1 July and we've made it really clear in providing all of the detail on the day we announced it, on providing the legislation over the weekend, engaging with members of parliament and senators across the political spectrum. We've made it clear that we want to see this passed.

People shouldn't be standing in the way of bigger tax cuts for more people to help with the cost of living. This is an important test, I think, for the other members of parliament. Will they put tangible benefits for the workers and families and communities of this country before their own political self‑interest? That's the test and I say to the Greens that voting against Labor's cost‑of‑living tax cut means voting for Scott Morrison's stage three tax cuts from five years ago.

JOURNALIST:

Treasurer, do you see eye‑to‑eye with the Prime Minister on the tax cuts though?

CHALMERS:

Absolutely, completely. We have a very close and effective working relationship. We are good mates, we work together very closely, we speak on an almost daily basis, and we've worked very hard together with Katy Gallagher and other colleagues to make sure that we can deliver a tax cut for every taxpayer and a bigger tax cut for more taxpayers to deal with these cost‑of‑living pressures. We work together very closely. I know that you're responding to something that has been written in the paper – that report was wrong, and I've said so on a number of occasions.

JOURNALIST:

Would you be willing to adjust JobSeeker at all if the Greens are not willing to budge?

CHALMERS:

Well, our intention is to pass the package through the Parliament, and I remind the Greens that in the last Budget I funded a permanent increase to JobSeeker, I funded a permanent increase to Commonwealth Rent Assistance, we funded electricity bill relief targeted at people who needed it the most, we had a policy for cheaper medicines which is getting the price down substantially for people doing it tough. So we understand and we listen respectfully when, whether it's parliamentarians or others in the community, make suggestions about the next Budget and call for various things to be in the next Budget, we listen respectfully to that, but the cost‑of‑living relief which is already flowing is targeted to people who are doing it the toughest already.

This is about the tax system. This is about more relief for more people to deal with the cost‑of‑living pressures that we know that they're under, and voting against what we are proposing means we go back to what Scott Morrison was proposing which is that people under 45 grand get absolutely nothing.

JOURNALIST:

The Coalition has indicated this week that it will be attacking Labor over integrity and [INAUDIBLE]. You've said you see eye‑to‑eye with the Prime Minister, but do you think Labor should have come to these changes sooner?

CHALMERS:

I think we came to these changes when it became increasingly clear that we could provide more relief for more people, we could do cost‑of‑living help in a bigger and broader way without putting additional pressure on inflation. So I think this is the right decision for the right reasons and at the right time, and it's an important test for the Parliament.

Now you mentioned the Coalition in your question. The Coalition wants to talk about anything except for the actual tangible benefits that people will get from our tax changes, and that's because their position is indefensible and unsustainable. The Coalition want to speak about other tax matters, they want to speak about other issues and that's because they are standing in the way – they are standing between the workers and families and communities of this country and a bigger tax cut to help people with the cost of living. Whatever they decide today and tomorrow, whatever position they cobble together, whatever politics they play, we already know that they are horrendously out of touch with middle Australia and we already know because Sussan Ley said so that if given the opportunity they will unwind the changes that we are proposing. Now that's a recipe for higher taxes on middle Australia to fund an even bigger tax cut for people on the highest income.

JOURNALIST:

You say the changes aren't political, but cost‑of‑living pressures were a problem at the last election as well. Why not make one of your election promises to make changes to stage three? Why promise at the last election to not make changes when cost‑of‑living pressures were a problem then as well?

CHALMERS:

As I said in response I think to Liv's question a moment ago, it became increasingly clear to us over the course of summer that we could provide bigger cost‑of‑living help, more broadly, and in a way that didn't add additional pressure to inflation and in the time between the period that you're talking about and the last few weeks, we focused on providing substantial cost‑of‑living relief in other ways – electricity bill relief, income support payments, rent assistance, cheaper medicines, all of the other ways that we're providing cost‑of‑living relief. It became increasing clear over the course of summer that we could deliver these stage three tax cuts in a better way, a way that delivers more relief and more reform, more relief and better reform, and that's what we're proposing.

JOURNALIST:

Just on the paid parental leave that's meant to go through Parliament this week, crossbench MPs like the Teals and various NGOs have been saying that it needs to be 52 weeks eventually by 2030, and it's 26 weeks that you're amending to. Would this be something that you would consider in the short to medium term?

CHALMERS:

Let's pass the important changes to paid parental leave that are before the Parliament before we contemplate any further changes down the track.

This is really important legislation. We are very proud to have funded an expansion of paid parental leave in this country. We introduced it in the first place as a former Labor government and we've expanded it in this way in a responsible way.

What we want to do is we want to make it easier for parents, and especially mums, to make decisions about their own balance of work and family. Paid parental leave's got an important role to play here; cheaper early childhood education as well, because we want people to have the freedom to make choices about their families and also about their work arrangements in a way that supports them financially as well, and these PPL changes are really important. Let's see them pass through the Parliament. We'll always try and do what we can for the working families of this country, and the PPL changes, I think, represent that.

JOURNALIST:

It's been said that utes will be priced out of the market under new fuel efficiency standards. What assurances can you give to tradies and other people who are worried they won't be able to afford an electric vehicle?

CHALMERS:

This is about getting running costs down, not up. This is not about telling people what cars or what utes to buy. This is about giving people more choices. By giving people more choices, they can make decisions about more fuel‑efficient vehicles that get their running costs down.

As Chris Bowen and Catherine King made clear yesterday, this is about making sure that the manufacturers supply the Australian market with more options, so that whether you're a tradie or you're a family and you want to get your running costs down, you can.

The Americans have had fuel efficiency standards for something like 50 years and they love their pick‑up trucks, and we love our utes here in Australia as well, and this is about giving people more choices so that they can get their running costs down.

This is good for cost‑of‑living pressures, not bad for cost‑of‑living pressures. It doesn't tell anyone what car to buy, it just provides more options, so if they want to get their running costs down, they want to use less fuel, they want to spend less money on petrol and diesel, they can do that.

Thanks very much.