27 August 2024

Interview with Sabra Lane, AM, ABC Radio

Note

Subjects: Peter Dutton’s divisive strategy, Liberal cuts, cost‑of‑living relief, CFMEU protests

SABRA LANE:

The federal Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has delivered a speech overnight on Australia’s economic prosperity and resilience through times of financial shock, and he’s used part of it to launch a scathing critique of Liberal leader Peter Dutton’s leadership style and motives.

Dr Chalmers has accused Mr Dutton of deliberately embracing division, saying he is the most divisive leader of a major Australian political party ever, and dangerous.

Jim Chalmers joined me a short time ago.

Treasurer, thanks for talking to AM. You have given a significant speech overnight in honour of John Curtin. In part of it you say that Peter Dutton is the most divisive leader of a major party in Australia’s modern history. That’s a significant charge. What’s your evidence?

JIM CHALMERS:

You’re right to say that the speech was overwhelmingly about Curtin’s example, but it was also cost‑of‑living relief and the economy that we want to build for Australians into the future. But I think some of these things about Peter Dutton’s strategy need to be pointed out.

He is the most divisive political leader that I’ve seen in my lifetime, and this is a deliberate choice by him, it’s not some accident. He divides deliberately, almost pathologically. And that sort of division in our leadership, in our society right now is worse than disappointing, it’s dangerous, and in my view it should be disqualifying when it comes to leading a great country like ours.

LANE:

You say it’s dangerous and disqualifying. Voters have routinely returned Mr Dutton to his seat. You’re making this charge that he’s dangerous. How?

CHALMERS:

I think any objective observer of Peter Dutton’s strategy and his behaviour in recent weeks, but indeed over the couple of decades that he’s been in office, would see he is the kind of person that when he sees division in our society, instead of trying to heal that division, he tries to pick at it and prey on it, and I think that’s especially concerning at a time like this. Most people look around the world and they see political divisiveness as playing out in other democracies around the world, and they want to reject that, but he seems to want to embrace it.

I think this is an important issue for people to consider as we get closer to an election next year. Every government has its differences with its political opponents, and we’re obviously no different in that regard, but I think Peter Dutton is different because this kind of divisiveness that he deliberately chooses as a political strategy is very dangerous at a time like this, where there is this divisiveness around the world that we want to reject, and he seems to want to embrace it.

LANE:

Social cohesion is at risk here too, isn’t it? Inflation is remaining sticky and stubbornly high. Families are feeling very much under pressure, and a migration debate is playing out here with questions over the government’s handling of visas from Gaza. That’s on the Albanese government, isn’t it?

CHALMERS:

I think you’re right to say that there’s no shortage of challenges in our economy and in our society, and we’re very focused on that. Inflation is sticky and stubborn, but we’ve made a lot of progress since we came to office. We’re rolling out this cost‑of‑living relief, because we know that people are doing it tough; we’ve got a plan for the future of the economy powered by cleaner and cheaper energy and technology, and these are the things I was talking about last night.

But I think the point I’d make specifically about your question, Sabra, is with all of these challenges in our economy and in our society, we have absolutely no chance of addressing them if we are divided. That’s again what makes it so disappointing, I’d argue dangerous, that Peter Dutton wants to set Australians against each other when we need unity of purpose to get through a difficult patch in our economy and to set ourselves up for the future.

LANE:

At a time when the Prime Minister is struggling to cut through, some people will see your intervention through that prism; you’re a Treasurer who also harbours leadership ambitions.

CHALMERS:

No, my ambition is to be a good Treasurer in a great Labor government led by Anthony Albanese, and I’ve made that clear on numerous occasions.

My job here is to roll out this cost‑of‑living relief to set out our vision for the future of our economy and to do that as part of a team that I’m really proud to be part of, and sometimes, not all of the time, that requires all of us to bell the cat on this divisive and dangerous strategy that we’re seeing from Peter Dutton.

And we all know why he’s doing it. He likes to pick fights on national security, because he has absolutely no idea about economics. He’s completely vacated the field on the cost of living, inflation and the economy more broadly, and that’s why he picks these needless and unnecessary fights on national security because he hopes nobody will notice that he’s hopeless on economics.

LANE:

Well, the Coalition today will outline $100 billion in cuts, mainly I think to Labor initiatives, if it wins the next election. They’re outlining an alternative that might just appeal to the electorate.

CHALMERS:

Let’s see the detail of these hundreds of billions of dollars in indiscriminate cuts. What we know from what’s in the newspapers today is that they plan billions of dollars to cuts in housing at a time when we’ve got a very severe housing shortage, and this goes to the absolute economic insanity of the Liberals and Nationals. During an extreme housing shortage, they want to swing the axe on billions of dollars in housing funding.

Also, this is $100 billion, they reckon, let’s see the details. They’ve flagged more than 3 times that amount when it comes to cuts. So let’s hear them come clean on the other cuts, let’s hear what it means for Medicare and pensions and for the economy more broadly.

LANE:

The most immediate threat to construction right now is the rogue elements of the CFMEU. They’re going to be holding protests today. How worried are you that this defiance will continue to damage the construction industry and ultimately the economy?

CHALMERS:

Well, we are worried about the construction industry. The pipeline is not what we need it to be in order to build more homes for more Australians, which is a central part of our economic plan.

Obviously when you appoint an administrator to a union and you move on a couple of hundred officials, there’s going to be blow‑back. We expect that. We want these protests to be peaceful today, but they’re not surprising when you take on the leaders of a union with the sorts of behaviour that has been alleged in recent times.

Our goal here is to clean up the CFMEU, to get it back to representing its members and workers in a really important part of our economy. Of course there will be blow‑back as we go about that.

The other point that I want to make, Sabra, is in my experience, the unions and leaders of unions are overwhelmingly a force for good in our economy and in our society. You can’t say that about the leaders and recent activities of the CFMEU, and that’s why we have to clean it up; that’s why we are cleaning it up.

LANE:

Treasurer, thanks for your time this morning.

CHALMERS:

Much appreciated, Sabra.