SARAH FERGUSON:
Treasurer, welcome to 730.
JIM CHALMERS:
Thanks very much, Sarah.
FERGUSON:
How significant was it for you to have had this meeting with your Chinese opposite number after a four‑year gap?
CHALMERS:
I think it's really important that we've been able to re‑establish this dialogue between an Australian treasurer and my counterpart in China, Minister Liu Kun, who is the finance minister participating here in the G20 meetings. As you rightly point out, this dialogue hasn't existed for more than four years now and in the Albanese Government we've made it very clear that whilst we don't need to pretend away the differences we have with China and with our ministerial counterparts, we are much more likely to stabilise this key relationship with engagement and with dialogue, and that's what this meeting was about.
FERGUSON:
Did you discuss the concessions that you expect from China on trade if there's to be a visit to China by you and the Prime Minister?
CHALMERS:
The message that I was able to convey to Minister Liu was we would like to see these trade restrictions lifted and we'd like to make progress on that in advance of a prime ministerial visit to China ideally later in the year. I also raised of course the consular issues that we have when it comes to Cheng Lei and Yang Jun, raised our concerns with the pace of those cases and indicated again, as other ministers have, that we would like to see those cases resolved so that those two Australians can be with their loved ones again.
FERGUSON:
I'll come back to briefly to the issue of Cheng Lei in a moment. I just want to be clear about the issue of tariffs. Do the tariffs on barley in particular have to be lifted before a visit would be undertaken?
CHALMERS:
I didn't put it to them in the conditional way that you've described it but I did say that we'd like to see these restrictions lifted ‑ barley, wine, live lobster, and some of these other commodities which have been held up. And we've been very clear publicly and privately in Australia and in these bilateral conversations that we consider it to be in the interests of both countries for those trade restrictions to be lifted and we'd like to see some progress there in advance of a prime ministerial visit.
FERGUSON:
We know a little about what you said. I now want to know what Liu Kun said to you. Did he give you any reason to believe China would lift the tariffs?
CHALMERS:
Certainly he was aware of our of our concerns there and obviously, he works with other colleagues in his political system. This is largely a matter for the Minister for Commerce, as I understand it, but he has an interest in it. He's obviously aware of our concerns and I was able to put them to him directly. I don't want to put words in his mouth. Obviously, there was a relatively long private discussion between two ministers but I'm certainly happy to share that I relayed our very firm interests here. He was aware of it, and he undertook to speak with his ministerial colleagues about it.
FERGUSON:
Let me just ask you a simple question. We said before it had been four years. Does he speak English by the way? Is this a conversation taking place in English or through translators?
CHALMERS:
Today's conversation was via interpreters. He participated in Mandarin, and me in English. But it was, by the standards of these sorts of conversations, it was quite a free flowing conversation. It was certainly a friendly conversation. And I think one piece of evidence of that is we talked about our role in making sure that this relationship is managed in a pragmatic way. Pragmatism was part of the conversation. And what I mean by that is recognising that we have differences, understanding that there's a good way and a bad way to advance our interests when it comes to those differences. But overwhelmingly, this is a relationship, a trading relationship and an economic relationship that serves Australia very well. I believe it serves both countries very well. And so the overwhelming tenor of the conversation was a friendly, constructive conversation between two countries who are very important to each other.
FERGUSON:
China's latest growth figures are down to 0.8 per cent. What will the consequences be for Australia if this decline in our biggest trading partner continues?
CHALMERS:
Well, certainly the last few pieces of data out of China have been relatively soft by their standards. And we did take the opportunity to discuss the macro economy in China and in Australia and the US and around the world, and give each our assessment of the risks to the global outlook and what that means for both of our countries. The Chinese have obviously got a different set of circumstances, a different set of challenges, and we were able to engage on that. From a personal point of view, from an Australian point of view, this is something we're monitoring very closely in the Chinese economy ‑ there's no use pretending otherwise. If the Chinese indicators are weak, if they're soft, if they're softer than we anticipate, obviously that has implications and consequences for us, and so we're monitoring that very closely.
FERGUSON:
I just want to go back to the issue of Cheng Lei just for a moment, is it a threshold issue? Will you or the Prime Minister go to China if there is no movement? She was expecting, I think, a verdict to be delivered around this time, I think it's been postponed. Will you or the Prime Minister go to China if there's no movement on her case?
CHALMERS:
Well, I want to be careful here, Sarah, not to speak for the Prime Minister. Obviously, the Prime Minister himself, conferring closely with his colleagues including Penny Wong and others, will determine the circumstances around a visit to China. From my point of view ‑ and my job today, and I did that job today ‑ was to indicate to my Chinese counterpart as other ministers have indicated to theirs, that this is very important to us. We are very concerned about the welfare of both of these Australians, we do want to see these cases resolved as soon as possible so they can be back with their loved ones. I was able to convey that concern. I don't want to pre‑empt considerations that the Prime Minister on the advice of other ministers may take in the future. But certainly, I was able to relay our concern, I was able to deliver that message and I think that's important.
FERGUSON:
You're travelling with the outgoing Reserve Bank Governor, Phil Lowe. He's delivered a strong critique of successive governments over failures to lift productivity in Australia. Are you in danger of failing on productivity in the same way that previous governments did?
CHALMERS:
Well, unfortunately, our economy has been failing on productivity for a long time now. The decade to 2020 was the weakest for productivity growth in 60 years and that should be a concern to all of us. And the remarks that Governor Lowe made are consistent with remarks that he's made in the past. And they were consistent with some of the contribution that I made immediately before him. What we need to be able to do is to recognise, our primary near term fight is this fight against inflation but at the same time, we need to be doing what we can to make our economy more productive. And the economies of the world need to turn around this productivity malaise that we've seen for too long.
FERGUSON:
But after a year in government, isn't he issuing a rebuke to you, as well as previous governments?
CHALMERS:
I didn't take it that way and I mean that very genuinely. We coordinate our contribution to these global forums, we represent Australian interests in a coordinated way and we make a contribution to the global conversation about how we take our economies forward. I spoke immediately before Governor Lowe, about the same issues, and I talked about how Australia is a world leader when it comes to doing two things at once. We are providing cost‑of‑living relief without adding to inflation at the same time as we're repairing our budget. We're a world leader on that front. And in the same spirit, we need to be able to deal with inflation at the same time as we invest in productivity. There's no quick fix when it comes to productivity, we have an entrenched challenge and we are very attuned to that, very focused on that. You can see that in our economic plan which isn't just about helping people through a difficult period as important as that is. It's all about laying the foundations for future growth. You don't do that without making your economy more productive.
FERGUSON:
Jim Chalmers, thank you very much indeed for joining us after this meeting, and I hope you've learnt the Mandarin word for pragmatism. Thank you very much.
CHALMERS:
Appreciate it, Sarah. Thanks so much.