IAN HANSEN:
Covalent is a joint venture between Wesfarmers and SQM, a company based in Chile involved in the lithium market. And we’ve been developing the Mount Holland mine and concentrator to produce spodumene concentrate which ultimately will feed this refinery, which is reaching completion of construction and will be commissioned in the first half of next year.
It’s great to have the Treasurer here and hear about the policy that he’s launched to support critical minerals in Australia. It’s a fantastic initiative. We certainly are looking at further expansion opportunities for our mine concentrator and ultimately refinery. The current refinery we’re building will produce 50,000 tonnes of lithium hydroxide which goes straight into battery packs for electric vehicles. And that’s enough for 1 million electric vehicles each year. So it’s really exciting for us, the project, and certainly we’re very excited that the Treasurer has announced this policy which will assist the whole industry.
VARUN GHOSH:
Good morning. It’s wonderful to be here at Covalent Lithium in Kwinana. We’re here to welcome the Treasurer and to show him around on the back of a Budget that invests in Australia’s clean energy future and a clean energy future that’s made in large part right here in Western Australia.
JIM CHALMERS:
Western Australia is a central part of our national economy and it’s an important feature and focus of the Budget that we handed down last week. WA is front and centre when it comes to a Future Made in Australia. And it’s a really honour to be here again with Ian and his colleagues and counterparts and Senator Ghosh, who has already made a terrific impact as a WA senator in our Albanese Labor government. So I thank him for welcoming us here to Kwinana as well.
A Future Made in Australia is all about grabbing the vast industrial and economic opportunities which flow from the big global shift to net zero. And nothing could be more important to that than refining the lithium which will be such an important part of battery power and battery storage into the future. So looking at this place here, this is what a Future Made in Australia looks like. And that’s why we are so supportive, whether it is refining and processing critical minerals, whether it’s incentivising more investment in renewable hydrogen, WA has an absolutely central role to play. And that’s why WA was such a big focus and feature in the Budget.
Here in WA every single one of the 1.5 million taxpayers will get a tax cut. Every single one of the 1.1 million households will get energy bill relief. There’ll be big investments in Medicare and the care economy, in housing, in skills and universities to make sure that we are recognising and rewarding the hard work of the workers and employers and industries here in WA.
Now, unfortunately not everybody shares this vision that we share with the industries of WA, and we’ve heard some very disappointing commentary from Peter Dutton and from Angus Taylor as well, especially when it comes to the production tax credits which will be such an important part of incentivising the private capital and the private investment that we want to see, whether it’s refining lithium or other critical minerals or in renewable hydrogen and all of these other opportunities which are presenting themselves in the global net zero transformation.
Peter Dutton’s position is a slap in the face for the workers and employers and industries of WA. Peter Dutton thinks that supporting the job‑creating investment that we can see in WA, he describes that as welfare. He doesn’t understand WA. He doesn’t understand the economy, and he doesn’t understand the future. And if you don’t get WA, and you don’t get the economy and you don’t get the future, then you’ve got absolutely no business putting yourself forward as the alternative prime minister of this country.
He gave a Budget reply last week which is falling down all around him. We had that tailor‑made disaster yesterday at the National Press Club when it comes to migration. And today we had Sussan Ley as well. Their position on migration is a smoking ruin. They can’t explain the most basic details of what they’ve been saying about migration. And contrast that with Labor’s responsible economic management, the methodical and considered way that we manage the migration program and build more housing and build more infrastructure and invest in the industries and jobs of the future which will power the Australian economy in the context of the global net zero transformation.
JOURNALIST:
New data shows that people in their 20s have cut back more this year on essential items like health insurance and groceries compared to last. I mean, does this show that your government isn’t doing enough?
CHALMERS:
It shows that people are under pressure. And we more than recognise that, we’re doing something about it. Every single Australian taxpayer will get a tax cut. A lot of young people would have missed out under the old stage 3 tax cuts, and so we changed that. Every Australian household will get energy bill relief because we know that energy bills are a big part of the pressure on people. We’re building homes in every community around Australia, every state and territory because we know that rents are too high. And that’s why we’re providing more rent assistance and building more homes. We’re making medicines cheaper. We’re engaged in this fight against inflation which has seen inflation moderate from something with a 6 in front of it when we came to office and now it’s got a 3 in front of it. We know it’s not mission accomplished on inflation or the cost of living, but the Budget’s central feature is easing these cost‑of‑living pressures in addition to investing in the future. And that’s because we do more than acknowledge the pressures that people are under; we’re doing something about it.
JOURNALIST:
Doesn’t the Opposition have a point on migration, though – it’s a supply and demand issue when it comes to housing. We’ve had record migration last year.
CHALMERS:
There are 2 ways to manage the migration program. We are seeing on our watch net overseas migration next year will be half what it was last year. And we are winding down the permanent migration program so that it is lower than when Peter Dutton was the immigration minister. And so that is the responsible and methodical and considered way to manage the pressures on the migration system at the same time as we build more homes and invest billions of dollars more in infrastructure.
Peter Dutton’s approach to migration is an absolute shambles. We know that because Angus Taylor can’t describe it or explain it; Sussan Ley can’t describe it or explain it. It is a shambles from beginning to end. And that’s because he had nothing to say in his Budget reply and so pulled some numbers out of the air. He can’t explain the most basic features of his approach to it.
The last thing I’d say about that is this: you don’t solve a housing shortage by making the skills shortage worse. You don’t solve the issues in our hospitals with a shortage of nurses by making the skills shortage even worse. And that’s what his shambolic, ham‑fisted approach to migration will do.
JOURNALIST:
Under your program around migration and student visas, are you concerned that the value of international education could drop below that $50 billion mark that it’s currently valued at?
CHALMERS:
We’re big believers in international education. We know how important it is to our prosperity now and into the future. If you combine the opportunities in the care economy, in heavy industry particularly at sites like this one, and also international education, this is where a lot of the prosperity is going to come from in years ahead. We understand that, we recognise that and we want to manage it responsibly. So our efforts to put downward pressure on net overseas migration is about tightening up some of the rorts we’ve seen in international education without getting in the way of the really important economic opportunities that sit within international education.
JOURNALIST:
So you’ll guarantee that that market will remain at sort of the $50 billion value to the national economy?
CHALMERS:
I guarantee that international education will continue to be a wealth‑generating, job‑creating part of the Australian economic mix. We’re investing $1.1 billion in university reform, another $500 million in skills. And that’s because we recognise that education is a really important sector to our economy and this is the most important way that we can fill some of the skills shortages which are so concerning on this side of the country.
JOURNALIST:
Treasurer, on the production tax credits, the Minerals Council says it’s welcomed that, but they’re firmly against new taxes on the back of any future developments. Can you rule out future tax agreements with the Greens, for example, on the minerals sector?
CHALMERS:
We passed our tax changes as a result – related to resources with our sensible changes to the taxation of offshore gas. We worked with the industry to land that and we worked with the Senate to land that as well. We’re not contemplating or considering additional taxes on top of that. Our focus in the Budget is on tax cuts to incentivise private capital in the areas which will be such important earners and job creators into the future. That’s what today is all about.
The reason why we are here with Ian and his colleagues, here in Kwinana, is because we alone amongst the big parties understand just how important these wealth‑creating, job‑creating industries will be when it comes to powering our future. There are tax breaks in the Budget which Peter Dutton might like to dismiss as welfare. We see it very differently. Angus Taylor at the Press Club said the problem with our production tax credits is that if you don’t produce anything, you don’t get any tax breaks. That’s not the problem with it – that’s the point of it. We want to incentivise more private capital and more production. We want to reward scale and success, and that’s what this is about.
JOURNALIST:
Premier Roger has said that battery manufacturing would only be a niche industry in WA. He said that yesterday because the state can’t compete with the likes of China and India. Is there a future for Australia in manufacturing batteries?
CHALMERS:
There is, and we’ll be releasing our battery strategy later today, the Prime Minister and Minister Husic, not because that we think we can replace all of the scale out of China but because we need these supply chains to be more resilient. We need to address where we can the economic vulnerabilities that we have where some of these supply chains are dominated by one supplier. And so the very robust and rigorous national interest framework that we’ve worked up with Treasury recognises that there are opportunities in the net zero transformation. There are also opportunities in making our economy and our supply chains more resilient, and I think batteries have a really important role to play there.
JOURNALIST:
Has the CSIRO ended the nuclear debate?
CHALMERS:
Ideally but I don’t think the Liberals and Nationals have the capacity to see sense when it comes to nuclear. They are going for the type of energy which takes longer and costs more and would turn our back on the remarkable opportunities that we have as Australians in the net zero transformation. Australia’s opportunities lie at the intersection of our industry, our resources base, our energy base, our skills base and our attractiveness as an investment destination. And Peter Dutton with this ideological and pig‑headed approach to nuclear would cost Australians more, would take longer and would deny us the vast economic and industrial opportunities of net zero which forward‑looking companies and far‑sighted companies like this one are recognising and working with us on.
JOURNALIST:
Peter Dutton says the changes you’ve made to the PRRT, you know, the deal with the Greens, has undermined future gas strategy. Can I get your response to that?
CHALMERS:
We worked closely with the industry to land this important tax change. What this tax change means is that offshore gas companies will pay more tax sooner to help us fund strengthening Medicare or cost‑of‑living relief or investments in the future of our industrial base. And I wanted to say how much I appreciated the way that the consultation has happened. There are billions of dollars of tax revenue flowing sooner into the Commonwealth coffers to support the Australian people because of the work that we did, recognising the reliability of our exports and our domestic supply as well at the same time as we got a fairer return for Australians on these resources.
JOURNALIST:
When you’ve been in WA have you heard the same backlash to Peter Dutton’s opposition on the production tax credits that the government’s announced as you’re communicating now – the sort of anger about the welfare comments?
CHALMERS:
No, I think when it comes to WA and production tax credits Peter Dutton is pretty isolated here in the West. I think West Australians understand as well as anyone, if not better than anyone, just how important it is that we support the wealth‑generating, job‑creating industries of the future. And this is one of them. What could be more relevant to the future of our industrial base and our net zero transformation than refining the lithium which is a central component of batteries and battery storage. And I say again and I say it more in sorrow than anger: Peter Dutton doesn’t know the first thing about WA. He doesn’t know the first thing about the economy, and he doesn’t know the first thing about the future. And his position on production tax credits makes that clear. Thanks very much.
JOURNALIST:
Just on the GST – you’re in WA; I can’t let you go without a question on the –
CHALMERS:
I wondered why it took you so long.
JOURNALIST:
There are a couple of allegedly respected economists who are trying to campaign to end the deal that’s now costing $52 billion. Are you at all swayed by their claims that it’s costing the Budget too much money?
CHALMERS:
I’m not swayed by their claims. This is an important change that we are committed to which ensures that the good people of WA get a fairer return on the GST revenue that is generated here. And we recognise how important WA is to the national economy. We need to see that recognised and rewarded in the GST distribution as well, and that’s why we’re committed to it. It does mean that the Budget carries the cost of topping up the other states – $50 billion over 10 years is the right figure for that. But that’s worth it because we want to recognise and reward the contribution that you make to our national prosperity on this side of the country. We want to recognise and reward that in a number of ways, and the GST is an important way that we do that. Thanks very much.