SHAYNE NEUMANN:
Good morning, it's Shayne Neumann here, the Federal Member for Blair and I'm very pleased to be on the farm with Tim Beattie. I've known the Beattie family for a very long time. And of course, we've got the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, and Murray Watt the Agricultural Minister and Minister for Emergency Services in the Federal Labor Government. And I'm delighted to welcome you here to Glamorgan Vale in the Somerset region, a rural part of the electorate of Blair.
I was at Toolgoolawah Show doing a mobile office there on the weekend and talking to people about how the Budget's provided cost‑of‑living relief, particularly in cheaper medicine and cheaper to go to a doctor, cheaper child care and a whole range of other areas. But Murray Watt, I thank you also for the funding for the Disaster Ready Fund. I was meeting with the Somerset Regional Council, the mayor Graeme Lehmann, and the councillors about the Dingyarra Street funding that was provided. That will help a lot of people that emergency funding ‑ a million dollars from the Albanese Labor Government ‑ that will help people in the area who get flooded. And I'm pleased, Murray, that you provided that money in the recent round, the round one of the Disaster Ready Fund. But Tim, thanks very much also for showing us and talking about the issues that you're facing, the Beattie family and the other producers in the area, in terms of the dairy industry and the beef industry. They're important industries here in the Somerset region, and in my electorate of Blair. And I want to thank you very much for talking about the issues and the challenges that you have, as producers in the area. And I want to thank you for the work you do and for the jobs you create and the people you sustain, and the contribution that you and your family have made. I've been up the hill many times, mate, at the lights up there ‑ the Christmas lights ‑ I think you can see the Christmas lights that the Beattie family do from space every year. And it's great to be here and I must mention to Uncle Geoff to keep the plum puddings going. And I see he did very well at the Toogoolawah Show on the weekend in the various sections he was entering in the cookery as well. So thank you very much.
JIM CHALMERS:
Thanks very much, Shayne. Thanks, Murray. Most of all, thanks Tim for having us at your place with representatives of this really important industry. The dairy industry creates billions of dollars of value and employs tens of thousands of Australians. If we want to grow this national economy, then primary industries have got to be a big part of the story. Regional Australia is in so many ways the backbone of our economy and the lifeblood of our country. And we're here today speaking with Tim and friends from the dairy industry, because we understand the absolutely central role that primary industries will play ‑ not just in our economy right now but well into the future as well, and the Budget recognises that too. And that's why the Budget was all about investing in skills and energy and value adding, making sure we got the disaster recovery and mitigation arrangements right to make our farms and our communities more resilient, at the same time as we invest, as Shane said, in services in regional Australia, particularly when it comes to strengthening Medicare. But it's also why we want to get these trade arrangements right and these trade agreements right. And it's also why we need to get value for money for every dollar that we spend in infrastructure, because we know how important it is that we get what's produced at farms like this one to market in the safest, most efficient way possible. So I want to thank Tim and his colleagues but more than that, I want to thank the people of regional Australia, the producers right throughout our economy, they kept the wheels of the national economy turning in so many ways during COVID, but they're a big part of the future as well. The Albanese Labor Government understands and values the vast contribution made by primary industries and by regional Australia. That's why we're here today listening to make sure that the considerations on farms like this are also the considerations around the Cabinet table. And a big reason why that's the case is because we've got a terrific Agriculture Minister, Murray Watt, we'll hear from him now and then take your questions.
MURRAY WATT:
Thanks very much, Shayne, Jim, and thanks to Shayne for hosting us in your patch. And of course, thanks to Tim and everyone from ‘eastAUSmilk’ for meeting up with us today to have a good chat about some of the challenges and opportunities facing the dairy industry. As Jim was saying, the dairy industry is crucial to Australia's agriculture sector, but to regional Australia and the whole country. The dairy industry is actually the third largest agricultural industry in our country and continues to support so many regional economies and jobs across our country. I didn't mention this to you, Tim, but I've got a personal interest in this as well because my father grew up on a dairy farm on the Sarina Range just near Mackay. So just as the dairy industry is in my family's history, I know it's in yours and continues to this day. As Jim says, we recognise very much the importance of this sector for continuing to provide jobs and wealth, not just in regional Australia for but for the whole economy. And that's why in our recent Budget, we were so determined to put some serious funding into the agriculture sector. And I want to thank Jim in particular for his support at the Expenditure Review Committee to make sure that we were able to deliver for the very first time in Australia's history, sustainable biosecurity funding. We were having a chat with Tim and he gave us the warnings before we came in to the property, about the importance of maintaining strong biosecurity. And our government is now working in partnership with the agriculture sector to keep exotic plant and animal diseases out of this country so we can keep the dairy industry strong, as well as our agriculture sector more generally.
We do know as well, that we need to build the resilience of our agriculture sector for future changes to our climate. Shayne mentioned the $200 million in funding that we committed last week for disaster resilience around the country being backed up and matched by state and territory governments. And importantly, what we're seeing with the weather predictions is that we are moving from a very wet cycle with La Nina, into a much drier cycle in El Nino. And unfortunately, what that means is that that's likely to have an impact on farm production, with lower returns for our agriculture sector and that's why we need to be getting prepared now. So there was money in our October Budget around drought preparedness, and there were more activities funded in the most recent Budget as well. So being prepared, supporting our agriculture sector, making sure that we protect it and help it grow, including through those trade agreements. They are core focuses of the Albanese government and we'll continue to do that. But thanks again, Tim, we appreciate you having us here.
JOURNALIST:
Minister, I'll just ask you, last October, Australia and the Albanese government pledged to sign up to the international effort for methane reduction as part of the zero emissions target. Can you categorically rule out a methane tax in the interim, as a way to reduce those sort of emissions within the Australian dairy industry? Is that something you're prepared to commit to give farmers a reassurance that they're already doing a tough and you can rule out that tax?
WATT:
Sure Adam, we ruled that out at the time that we committed to join the Global Methane Pledge. And we continue to rule that out now. What the Albanese government is doing is actually working with our farm sector, providing incentives to people to help reduce their emissions, reduce their methane levels, including in the dairy sector. And we think that's a much better way to go than the sort of punitive arrangements that we've seen from other countries. We haven't had a chance to talk about it with Tim and others but I know there are many dairy farmers around the country who are starting to invest in feed supplements, other things that can help reduce the methane emissions from their cattle. And that's the way that we want to go, we're funding research and development of Asparagopsis, a form of seaweed, which can be used in those feed supplements to help bring down methane emissions. That's the direction we want to go down rather than what other countries have been doing.
JOURNALIST:
And how does this fit into the recent encouraging news about the potential historic free trade agreement with Europe, along the lines of what's been done with the UK? Is this piece very much a part of that puzzle?
WATT:
Yeah, as Jim mentioned, continuing to expand our markets through trade agreements is a core pillar of the Albanese government's approach to protecting and growing our agriculture sector. We've been very pleased since coming to office to be able to ratify the legislation necessary to bring into effect the UK Free Trade Agreement. We've got a trade agreement with India, which is now operating as well. And both of those trade free trade agreements have good market access for our dairy sector to enter those new markets. You would have seen, we've obviously been putting a lot of effort into stabilising our relationship with China, which continues to be our major trading partner. And we're seeing some encouraging news there, on the agriculture front. And that, of course, brings us to the EU Free Trade Agreement, which is a really important agreement and we're working hard to reach. You would have seen the commentary last week but that has reached a difficult stage. There's a reason the former government didn't finish a Free Trade Agreement with the EU, it's because it's probably the hardest one to reach. A very heavily protected market, very subsidised farming, in contrast to the highly efficient, non‑subsidised farming we have here in Australia. But we're determined to do everything we possibly can to reach that agreement with the EU, because it is a valuable market for our farmers. But as I said last week, and Don Farrell, the Trade Minister, we're not going to do a deal just for the sake of it. We want to say good market access for our producers so that they can get more value and more exports and more wealth for our country.
JOURNALIST:
The knock on effects of the upheaval in Eastern Europe, will it go well for an expedited FTA or do you think it may slow things down?
WATT:
It was interesting, I spoke to Don Farrell while he was still overseas last week about some of the difficulties with this EU free trade negotiation, and even with that trade negotiation, the effects of Ukraine are being seen. One of the issues is that Ukraine, I think most people know is a massive grain producer and agricultural producer generally, traditionally, what they've done is export products through the Black Sea. But that hasn't been an option through this war, so what they've had to do is get their exports out through neighbouring countries and that has depressed some of the produce prices that those neighbouring countries are experiencing. That's putting their farms under pressure, their farmers under pressure, and that's making them a bit more reluctant to do a deal with us. But we're hopeful that we can find a way through this. Don has been able to secure some further negotiations with the EU. And we're hopeful that common sense will prevail, and we'll be able to come up with an agreement that's good for both parties.
JOURNALIST:
And for farmers, what do you think is a realistic scenario in terms of balancing the export‑import relationship we have with Europe? Is there produce that sort of carries promise for that?
WATT:
For sure. Obviously, in a trade agreement, it's got to work for both parties. And there are things that the EU wants to be able to sell to Australia. And there are absolutely things that Australia wants to sell more of to the EU, particularly in agriculture. So we've put an offer to the EU, which we think is a reasonable offer, seeking to be able to export more beef, more sheep, more dairy, more wines, more grains, more sugar, all sorts of agricultural products. We're not asking for anything terribly much more than other countries have been able to negotiate with the EU. So we're hopeful that they will accept that Australia's good quality clean, green produce, can find a way to European plates.
JOURNALIST:
Treasurer, just in terms of the overall picture for the Australian economy. We've seen what's happened to manufacturing over the years, it's moved offshore, China in particular. So how significant are our primary industries now in the context of what's happened in recent years?
CHALMERS:
Well, for Australia to succeed in the future, we need a broader and deeper industrial base, and agricultural industries are absolutely core to that aspiration. We want to make sure that communities like this one in parts of Australia like the Somerset region, that farms are productive and profitable, communities are prosperous. And that's central to our economic plan. That's why we want to invest really across right across our industrial base, but particularly in agriculture. There will be big shifts in our national economy and in the global economy in the years ahead. And Australia is really well placed to capitalise on them. The world wants our food and fibre. We've got, as Murray said, these remarkable opportunities in communities like this one to supply the kinds of produce that the world wants. And so we see that as a massive opportunity. And in the here and now when the economy is slowing and Australians are under the pump, industries like this one are more important than ever.
JOURNALIST:
Just a couple from Canberra, Treasurer, the Greens say they're willing to make concessions in negotiations over the Housing Future Fund, is the government willing to budge at all on its position?
CHALMERS:
Look, we have been negotiating and cooperating and consulting with the crossbench for some time now. The time has come to end the ambit claims and the political games and vote for more social and affordable housing. If the Greens genuinely want more social and affordable housing in our communities, then it's time for them to vote for it. It's time to put an end to the political games which have held this up for too long. My worry here is the Greens aren't looking for a good outcome, they're looking for a political outcome. The Greens are looking for product differentiation rather than tens of thousands of social and affordable homes for the most vulnerable people in our country. So I say respectfully to the Greens ‑ it's time now to put the product differentiation and the political games behind us. We've got an opportunity here to build tens of thousands of social and affordable homes, including for women and kids fleeing domestic violence, we should get on with it. We have been very accommodating over a period of time now, I pay tribute to Julie Collins and to the Prime Minister for the efforts that they have put in. The Housing Australia Future Fund is a key part of our housing policy, but not the only part. There are a range of other things that we're doing at the same time and I'm proud to have included a big bold, ambitious housing agenda in the Budget. But the Housing Australia Future Fund is key to that, it's time for the Greens to vote for it. If they genuinely want more social and affordable housing in our communities, they'll vote for it in the Senate.
JOURNALIST:
If they're determined to continue making their statement and go beyond what you clearly see as sabre‑rattling, is a double disillusion a real possibility in terms of the government's determination not to be intimidated and pushed around by them?
CHALMERS:
I don't think it should get to that. I think the Greens party, like some other parts of the crossbench, should get on board with the Housing Australia Future Fund. And if the argument is that we should be doing other things and more things, well, that's what we are doing. We've got a broad and ambitious housing agenda. We've only been in office for 12 months, and we've lifted the NHFIC cap, we've got the Housing Australia Future Fund, we've got the biggest increase to Commonwealth Rent Assistance in three decades, we've got hundreds of millions of dollars already flowing and so it shouldn't get to some kind of impasse in the Senate. It's time to put the interests of people who desperately need more housing first, ahead of the political interests of any one political party on the crossbench, and to vote for the Housing Australia Future Fund.
JOURNALIST:
Why won't the government guarantee some extra spending on housing to ensure this bill won't be defeated?
CHALMERS:
Already over the course of recent months as we've engaged in a respectful way with the Senate crossbench, we have announced a number of other aspects to our policy, which is partly about addressing the concerns that the crossbench have raised, and not just the Greens. We do what we can ‑ and Murray does this on a daily basis as a minister in the Senate ‑ we do what we can to try and accommodate the legitimate concerns that people raise with us from time to time. We've done a heap of that in the course of recent months, but this can't go on forever. It's time to put the ambit claims and the political games behind us, it's time for the Greens to actually vote for more social and affordable housing and not just say that they believe in it.
JOURNALIST:
Treasurer, what would you say to Australians who are asking questions and expressing concerns ‑ as someone with their hands on the purse strings ‑ about the payment of $3 million compensation to someone in the absence of a conviction in that matter? What would you say to Australians who are asking questions about that?
CHALMERS:
I'd say that there is a legal process involved in that and I don't intend to get into the middle of it. There are good reasons why we don't engage in a political way in those kinds of outcomes. I haven't and I don't intend to today.
JOURNALIST:
Should Katy Gallagher make a statement to the Senate this week to correct or clarify what she knew about the allegations about Miss Higgins?
CHALMERS:
Katy made a statement over the course of the weekend, and the statement that Katy made, made it really clear that the exchange in the Senate ‑ which has been the subject of much commentary over the last few days ‑ was an exchange between an Opposition frontbencher, Katy, who was asking questions, and a government minister who was supposed to be answering them. And that exchange referred to the then government's charge that Katy had known for weeks about these allegations and there had been some decision to ‑ quote unquote ‑ "weaponise it" ‑ and that wasn't true, that wasn't the case. You know, some members of the parliament, frankly on both sides of the parliament, including Peter Dutton, including Scott Morrison and others, were aware in the days leading up to the airing of that report, that there were allegations that were being made, but the exchange in the Senate referred to whether or not Katy Gallagher had known for weeks and that we had taken some kind of collective decision to weaponise it and that hadn't happened. So Katy explained that on the weekend, no doubt she will make decisions about what she says to the Senate during the course of the week, and the Opposition has flagged that they will ask questions about it. But the idea that Katy Gallagher has misled the Senate is frankly absurd. And more than that, the idea that Katy hasn't acted with utmost integrity and diligence is equally absurd. Now, Katy Gallagher has more stores of personal integrity than all of her Liberal and National pursuers combined. I have never worked with a better person than Katy Gallagher. Katy Gallagher is drawing on deeper reserves of personal integrity than anyone that I have ever worked with. And I think frankly, the idea that these allegations about something that happened in a Liberal Minister's office in a Liberal Government is somehow the fault of the then Labor Opposition is equally laughable. And so I think we all know what's going on here. But Katy has explained ‑ I think she did a very good job of explaining on the weekend what she was referring to in that Senate estimates exchange. I think Murray might want to add to this as well.
JOURNALIST:
It's been reported that Senator Kitching found this far from laughable and expressed her concerns to Opposition MPs in the Senate about what she believed to be the weaponisation of these allegations. I mean, you wouldn't dismiss her concerns, would you?
WATT:
Obviously, and sadly, former Senator Kitching is no longer with us. And I don't think it's helpful to be discussing events that may or may not have involved someone who has passed away. I think that this entire debate has become unseemly. And the reason I wanted to step up with Jim is that I equally ‑ as a colleague of Katy Gallagher's in the Senate ‑ want to talk about her incredible integrity. Jim has had the privilege of working alongside Katy in the Expenditure Review Committee. I have had the privilege of working alongside Katy in the Senate, and like Jim, what I want to say is that there is no more ethical person in the Australian parliament than Katy Gallagher. I've seen that on a daily basis, and frankly, most Opposition members would agree with that. In her role as the Manager of Government Business in the Senate, and previously the Manager of Opposition Business. Katy has been responsible for all sorts of sensitive, discreet negotiations with members of the opposing parties, the crossbench. She does that with the utmost integrity as she does everything with the utmost integrity. And frankly, I think it's a bit disappointing that there are members of the Opposition, who are seeking to bring back a pretty dark chapter from the last parliament when the last government was in office, which as Jim has said, seems to involve as all the main actors, people involved in the Liberal Party. I don't think it's productive. I don't think it's helpful. And I'm very concerned about the effect of this public debate on some of the people who are central to it.
JOURNALIST:
Those precise views were shared by the federal police. They had deep misgivings about what they perceived, as what turns out to be justifiable concerns, about the politicisation of this case. Yet Mr Albanese agreed with the shadow education minister at the time, Tanya Plibersek, they agreed to meet Brittany Higgins before the trial. Do you think in retrospect, as PM now, he may regret that meeting ‑ notwithstanding the meeting later that day with the Prime Minister at the time, Mr. Morrison. Do you think it was time for all politicians to withdraw from that case ahead of the trial, which turned out to be aborted. Do you think in retrospect that would have been much wiser?
WATT:
Well, I certainly don't think and I don't think there's been any evidence produced that any member of the Albanese government or the then Labor Opposition did anything in any way to interfere with a criminal trial and a criminal process. What I suspect has happened is that members of the Labor Party were concerned about the welfare of Brittany Higgins in a situation where it was pretty clear she wasn't getting a lot of support from the government she'd worked for. And I think people reacted on a human basis to provide support to someone who was clearly very distressed, but I don't think there's been any evidence produced whatsoever to suggest that anyone from the Labor Party has behaved inappropriately in relation to those criminal proceedings.
JOURNALIST:
So no way that that concern could be perceived as pre‑empting the outcome of a court proceeding?
WATT:
I think that providing someone with emotional support is a long way from interfering with a criminal proceeding.
JOURNALIST:
Just one final one for Dr Chalmers if that's okay. You repeatedly quoted the RBA Governor who described your May Budget as broadly neutral when it comes to inflation. Given inflation remains stubbornly high, is it time for your budget to shift from a neutral approach to a contractionary one?
CHALMERS:
The Reserve Bank Governor said that the Budget is not adding to inflation, it's actually alleviating inflation. That's what the Reserve Bank Governor said. And that has been the objective of our Budget to take some of the edge off these cost‑of‑living pressures without adding to inflation in our economy. And the Reserve Bank Governor has said in his view, it will take pressure off inflation rather than add to it. Now our Budget was designed to deal with what is the primary challenge in our economy, which is cost‑of‑living pressures. That's why we provided cost‑of‑living relief in the most responsible way without adding to inflation. It's why we're investing in the supply side of the economy. And it's why we've shown a spending restraint which would be absolutely unrecognisable to our predecessors, forecasting a surplus this year for the first time in 15 years, making sure that we bank 87 per cent of the upward revisions to revenue ‑ much, much more than our predecessors ever contemplated. So we've got in our Budget, settings designed to deal with this inflation challenge in our economy. Reserve Bank Governor and his board will take their decisions about interest rates independently. We've got our own job to do, and that's what we're focused on doing.
Now before I let you go, I just wanted to say something briefly about this horrible tragedy in the Hunter Valley. Our hearts go out to everyone who's been impacted by this horrific tragedy in the Hunter Valley. A day that should have been a day of such joy has ended in such tragedy. I know that communities like the Hunter Valley will be feeling it today as they contemplate this horrific accident and the loss of so many lives. I know that there's a number of people still in hospital battling with injuries and our hearts go out to them as well. This is one of those things that's very hard to come to terms with a day which should have been a beautiful, loving and joyous day has ended in tragedy. Our hearts go out to everyone who's been impacted. Thanks very much.