STEVE AUSTIN:
So let’s go to Australia’s Treasurer, Jim Chalmers. Jim, I’m grateful you’re coming on when you’re probably sleep deprived and pretty busy, so thank you.
JIM CHALMERS:
I’m grateful for the opportunity, Steve, it’s nice to talk to you again.
AUSTIN:
How much sleep have you had last night?
CHALMERS:
Ah, probably a nudge under 4 hours I reckon last night but that’s because there’s a lot to do even after the Budget’s released out into the wild and then an early start this morning.
AUSTIN:
All right. Chris Richardson’s worried you’re risking inflation. Are you nudging the inflation bear, as he called it?
CHALMERS:
We’re not and the pretty clear advice from our Treasury advisers is the way we’ve designed our cost‑of‑living package will put downward pressure on inflation and it won’t add to broader inflationary pressures in our economy.
I like and respect Chris but there are a lot of opinions at this time of year, not all of them are right. He’s right to be focused on inflation – the government is focused on inflation as well.
We made a heap of progress. When we came to office, inflation had a 6 in front of it, it’s now got a 3 in front of it but we know that people are still under the pump which is why we’ve got this cost‑of‑living package and a big focus on continuing to put downward pressure on inflation which is what the Budget does.
AUSTIN:
I want to ask you some specific portfolio areas because our Treasurer in Queensland, Cameron Dick, is preparing his Budget portfolio for Budget release for June 12.
Health funding. It looks like health funding will be reduced $52 million, less than what was budgeted last year. Why is that?
CHALMERS:
No, health funding will go up and one of the reasons why it will go up is because we’re negotiating a health and hospitals agreement with the states and territories – big new investments from a Commonwealth point of view. We put that in the Budget but it doesn’t have its own line item yet because those negotiations haven’t finished but there’s a huge investment in health. There will be a big agreement signed with the states and territories in addition to almost $3 billion to strengthen Medicare. We’re building 29 more urgent care clinics in communities that need them. Health and the care economy is a big focus of the economy – billions and billions of dollars more investment.
AUSTIN:
Transport and infrastructure. This coming financial year – 24–25 – the State Opposition here says $638 million less in the Budget than what was budgeted for in last year’s Budget. Why would that be?
CHALMERS:
No, there’s new investment in the Budget, there’s an increase in investment in Queensland infrastructure – Sunshine Coast Rail, Coomera Connector, I think about half a billion dollars in memory on the Bruce Highway and if you think about Queensland’s share of the infrastructure pipeline, it actually goes up in the Budget. It goes up from about 24 and a half per cent to about 25 per cent. We’re big, enthusiastic investors in infrastructure in Queensland – there are those big ticket projects and a bunch of other projects as well and that’s because we recognise how central Queensland is to our prospects as a national economy and that’s why we’re backing it in.
AUSTIN:
Can you clarify for me a bit more as to what transport projects will be funded for Queensland in your Budget? Can you put a bit more meat on the bone for us? So you’ve mentioned the Coomera Connector and the Sunshine Coast Rail Project. Is there anything else you can articulate?
CHALMERS:
Well, those are the big ones and I think from memory, there’s also of course the Rocky Ring Road, I think I mentioned Coomera Connector, there are investments in Gold Coast Rail. I’m happy to send you a list of all of the things. There’s a long list of investments we’re making in Queensland but the big ticket items are Sunshine Coast Rail, Coomera Connector and a big investment in the Bruce.
AUSTIN:
There doesn’t appear to be any money for the pioneer Burdekin Pumped Hydro Project which is part of the state government’s renewable energy transition and their Energy and Jobs Plan but I couldn’t see any money in the Budget for that. Can you confirm that?
CHALMERS:
That’s because we’ve got a renewables plan which is all about this kind of energy infrastructure and as part of that, we get projects to bid for it. So there’s a national auction which opens I think in the next month, from memory, and these kinds of renewable projects apply for funding via that national auction and then the bids are assessed at arm’s length across a number of measures – reliability, affordability and the like, and so projects like that one will be bidding for that kind of support.
AUSTIN:
My guest is federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers. This is 612 ABC Brisbane. Jim, are you happy to take a call from a listener?
CHALMERS:
Yeah, let’s do it.
AUSTIN:
Sam from Springfield, you have a question for the federal Treasurer, Jim Chalmers. Sam.
SPEAKER:
Yes, Dr Chalmers, it’s a pleasure to speak to you.
CHALMERS:
Thank you, Sam.
SPEAKER:
You’ve had a lot of innovative solutions to the problems that we’re having. I’m involved in a lot of community groups and one issue that keeps coming up that I think I bring to your attention because it may help you solve some of the problems involving the housing shortage, the labour shortage and what you realise about inflation and that is a situation where pensioners are not allowed to work, not even one day extra, without paying 80 per cent in effect of a margin or penalty rate, which means they can’t work.
If you want more teachers, nurses, childcare people, aged care people, they are sitting there dying to work, and they’re interested in working; in fact they even work [INAUDIBLE] office spaces. And what you need to do, and there’s [INAUDIBLE] the penalty of them working, and they end up paying the same tax as everybody else, which is 30 plus per cent, but not losing their 50 per cent pension.
AUSTIN:
Okay, Sam. I’ll leave it there. So Jim, basically this has come up quite frequently, hasn’t it? We’re allowing pensioners to work more without being penalised financially in their pension.
CHALMERS:
Yes, I’m grateful to Sam for the question. Springfield’s a great part of the world, just out the west of where I live and well represented by Shayne Neumann and Milton Dick out there, big shout out to Springfield.
Yes, this does come up quite a bit. What we’ve done in the past is we have changed the arrangements so that people can keep more of what they earn, particularly older Australians who want to pitch in and help. So we have tried a bunch of different ways to do that but the reason I’m grateful for Sam’s question is we are always in the market for more and better ideas to try and make sure that we can find the workers that we need and so that people who work hard can earn more and keep more of what they earn – that’s the motivation behind so much of what we’re doing as a government with the tax cuts and with some of the other changes that we’re proposing too. So I’m grateful to Sam for the question.
AUSTIN:
Sam, thanks very much. Let me take another question, if you’ve got time. Charles from Dicky Beach. You have a question for the federal Treasurer as well, Charles.
SPEAKER:
Yes, good morning Treasurer. My question is that with a $300 electricity rebate, why would somebody on the 6‑figure salary, somebody like yourself, of course, and somebody that’s really struggling to make ends meet – you both get the same amount, $300 per annum. It just doesn’t make – doesn’t make sense.
AUSTIN:
It’s not targeted essentially. Jim Chalmers.
CHALMERS:
Charles and you, Steve, are right to say that every household gets that energy bill relief, so every taxpayer gets a tax cut, every household gets energy bill relief, and then there’s some targeted measures for rent assistance and the like as part of our cost‑of‑living package. This is us recognising that people are doing it tough in middle Australia, and so we’ve extended this energy bill relief beyond people on pensions and payments and once you do that, I think you’d understand this Steve, the energy retailers that we work with in order to provide this help, they don’t have people’s income information, and so we would have to design and fund a whole new system of data sharing and the like so that the energy retailers would know how much you earn. They don’t currently know that.
We think the simplest, most efficient way to provide this help to middle Australia is to apply it broadly. People on highest incomes are not our focus here and not especially our concern. What we’re really worried about here are the people who are under the pump on middle incomes and on low incomes, and that’s why we’re providing this support more broadly than we have before.
AUSTIN:
Thanks for your call, Charles. My guest is federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers. Jim, the Quantum Computer Project that’s half‑funded by the people of Queensland, half‑funded by federal government, I didn’t see any money in the federal Budget for that allocated, or did I miss it?
CHALMERS:
Yes, it’s in there. There are a bunch of commercial‑in‑confidence considerations there which is not unusual for those kinds of investments, but the 470‑odd of Commonwealth investment which combines with the same amount from the state government is factored into our Budget, it’s just listed a bit differently when it’s got commercial‑in‑confidence considerations.
AUSTIN:
So is all of the federal funding allocated in this Budget for the quantum computer here in Brisbane?
CHALMERS:
Yes, it’s in there but there are parts of the Budget which are about the commercial‑in‑confidence arrangements, that’s not new or unusual and it’s all accounted for in the Budget.
AUSTIN:
Maurice sent in a message via text saying, ‘why’ – it’s not directly related to the Budget, but it’s related to government money – ‘why has the federal government given contracts to PwC after what the company did to Australian taxpayers?’ asks Maurice.
CHALMERS:
Well, we are dramatically cutting back the use of contractors and consultants like PwC and what I’ve done since that scandal came to light is we have quite substantially changed the arrangements. We’ve got a whole process of cracking down on the sort of inexcusable behaviour that we saw at PwC under a previous government. We don’t want to see that happen again and that’s why we’ve tightened it up.
AUSTIN:
Okay. Housing funding. Over the forward estimates, it looks like housing funding will be reduced $498 million less than the forward estimates of last year’s Budget, says the State Opposition. Why is that, Jim Chalmers?
CHALMERS:
Well, you’ve got to stop getting your numbers from the State Opposition, Steve. There’s a huge new investment in housing in the Budget. Overall, we’re investing $32 billion over 10 years but there’s $6 billion of that which is completely new in the Budget and that’s because we think one of the biggest challenges we have in our economy and in our local communities is we don’t have enough housing and that’s why rents are too high. So we’ve got this ambitious but achievable target to build 1.2 million homes over the 5 years from July. You can’t just flick a switch and make that happen, it requires a lot of Commonwealth investment which is there in the Budget, it requires the states and territories to do their bit and they will, and it also requires us to train more builders and construction workers and that’s why there were incentives and fee‑free TAFE in the Budget to help train those workers that we will need as well.
AUSTIN:
Universities have – look like – well, they are going to have caps on student numbers. This has already been decided. What are the financial implications for higher education? I know you’ve given some money for VET students, for nursing and for teaching, but for the university sector more broadly, what are the implications of the caps on student numbers. That would look like it’s going to put real pressure on the universities here in Queensland, like Queensland Uni, QUT, Griffith, James Cook, USQ and others.
CHALMERS:
A couple of important things about that. First of all, there’s new funding, extra funding for universities in the Budget. As we respond to the Universities Accord, we are reforming the universities so that we can get more kids and more young people and more people who want to study from suburbs and regions into universities so that we can increase the number of people with a university degree if that’s what they want to do. So there’s a big new investment in universities in the Budget. You’re right that we think we should manage the amount of foreign students in the system. We think international education is a huge opportunity for Australia, we are big enthusiastic supporters of it, but we need to make sure that we can manage the growth and so my colleagues will negotiate with universities about the numbers of students that they can bring in. One of the important parts of last night’s Budget was part of that negotiation. Whether it’s a formula or a ratio or some other way, we need to make sure that universities are building more student accommodation too because one of the reasons why we’ve got pressure on our housing market is because we have had a number of students come back, that’s a good thing, but we need to make sure that we can house everybody.
AUSTIN:
So you’re basically saying to universities, if you want to get international students in, fine, but you have to house them.
CHALMERS:
Yes, and – in the briefest version – that is the case. We think we need to get universities to build more homes and where this has come from, Steve, if you’ve got 30 seconds for the context, is there was a lot of pressure and a lot of people who were saying we should tax – we should put a fee or a tax on international students and then use that money to build more student accommodation.
A much more efficient, effective way to do that is to compel the universities to build more accommodation if they want to bring in more students. It’s a good thing for our community, it’s a good thing for our economy and our universities to have foreign students in our universities but we need to make sure that we can manage the pressures.
AUSTIN:
All right. Final question, and I’ll let you go. You say that inflation will be defeated essentially by the end of this year, is that right?
CHALMERS:
I have not used that language, Steve.
AUSTIN:
What language are you using?
CHALMERS:
Well, the language I use is that the Budget is putting downward pressure on inflation and what that means in the Treasury forecasts is that they expect us to get back into the Reserve Bank’s target range for inflation a bit sooner, perhaps even by the end of the year, which would be a good outcome.
My job here is to make sure I’m putting downward pressure on inflation, that’s what the Budget does, providing cost‑of‑living relief for people to take some of the sting out of these bills, whether it be energy or rent and providing a tax cut for every taxpayer.
AUSTIN:
How does handing out $9 billion – how does handing out nearly $9 billion in cost‑of‑living relief put downward pressure on inflation? That’s going to free up – that’s putting more money into the system, that would create inflation.
CHALMERS:
All right. A couple of things about that. First of all, we’re talking about making bills a little bit smaller and when you put downward pressure on bills, you put downward pressure on inflation and the reason why the Treasury doesn’t expect there to be broader inflationary pressures in our economy is because we’re talking here about a few billion dollars of cost‑of‑living help in the context of a $2.6 trillion economy. And so I know there’s a view out there, it’s not a view that I share, and it’s not the view that the Treasury shares.
AUSTIN:
Appreciate your time. I’ll let you go. Thanks very much.
CHALMERS:
Good on you, Steve. All the best. Thanks.