Jarrod Bleijie:
Well, good morning, everyone. Councillor, as well, good to see you. Great to be in Logan this morning with a really exciting announcement. This is a milestone for the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. We have secured the deal with the federal government to fund just under 50 per cent of the minor and major venues across the state, and I want to thank the federal government for partnering with the Crisafulli government, because it’s a games in 2032 that is going to be all across Queensland, and Logan’s going to benefit.
Today, as part of this milestone, the old PCYC will be coming down. But it will be replaced with the Logan Indoor Sports Centre – 7,000 seat, nine‑court arena, which is just going to be an amazing community facility for the people of Logan and surrounds.
So, thank you to the federal government, to Jon Raven, the Mayor – good to see you again. And this is exciting, because although there is a lot of history with the old PCYC building behind me here and the kindy that was here that’s been relocated because of the efforts of the council, we’re going to see a wonderful 7,000‑seat Logan Indoor Sports Centre in preparation for the games.
So, I’m going to hand over to the Treasurer, then we’ll hear from the Mayor, and then we’re happy to take questions. Thank you, Treasurer.
Jim Chalmers:
Thanks, Jarrod. Nice to see you all. This is a really exciting day for Logan City and for South East Queensland. This site has been a really important part of our local community’s history, and now it will be a really important part of the future as well.
This will be a game changer for the kids and the families of Logan City and the surrounding areas. This is the biggest single investment in sporting infrastructure in Logan City ever, and it’s something that the federal government is very, very proud to partner with the state government on and work closely with Logan City Council on as well.
Now, in thanking the Crisafulli government for proceeding with this funding, I also wanted to acknowledge the commitment that was originally made by the Palaszczuk and Miles governments, particularly the local state member here, Cameron Dick, and the state members of this area, for making this commitment. And I wanted to thank Jarrod and his colleagues for following through as well.
This will genuinely be a game changer for sport and for our local community more broadly here on this site. To be able to have so much indoor sport, to be able to have 7,000 seats, to be able to attract all of the participation and all of the sport that that means is really a wonderful thing for our local community.
So, as the Treasurer, but also particularly today as the local member, I’m really, really proud of this investment that we are making as a federal government in conjunction with the state government and working closely with the Mayor as well. Let’s hear from the Mayor, and then we’ll take some questions.
Jon Raven:
Thanks, Jim, and thanks, Jarrod. It’s so great to have you both here today. This is something where people say to me, ‘What is Logan getting out of the Olympics?’ I can point directly to the Logan Indoor Sports Centre. And while the Olympics might be why the funding has been brought forward, it is something that our community desperately needs right now. We are 9 courts short today. So, as soon as we can build these, there’ll be young people flocking to this facility. They will absolutely overuse it. They will use it for decades to come, and this will be a legacy that we can talk about from the 2032 games.
And I know that this has been a passion project of both Jim and Jarrod, but also Cameron Dick, who have all known that we’ve had a shortage of sports centres in our city for a long time because we are growing so quickly and because we are the youngest city in the state with over 30 per cent of our population being under the age of 18. Those are the people who have benefited from this. This is an amazing announcement, and I cannot wait to see the construction start. We’ve been watching demolition happen day by day, and as someone who used to do demolition for a living, I can tell you the boys are doing a bang‑up job. But the next step is the exciting one, when we get to see construction begin, we get to welcome young people into this precinct, so it becomes a hub for community and for all kinds of sports and civic activity.
Bleijie:
So, folks, we also have the CEO of GIICA – Games Independent Infrastructure and Coordination Authority – to answer any technical questions. But obviously, before – before, obviously, the indoor sports centre can start, we have to demolish, which obviously this is a construction site. So, it’s just a great milestone today to be joined with the federal government and the local council here today for the demolition of the old PCYC.
Over to you. And then we can deal with all this, and then we can deal with other issues, federal and state.
Journalist:
When can we expect this to come online? Is this going to be available before the games for Logan residents?
Bleijie:
Absolutely. And what you will see, the demolition obviously will take a bit of time. We have to clear the site. We have to make good the site. We expect to announce very shortly – watch this space – for another announcement with the awarding of the principal design contractor. That will be – it’s in the last sort of throes of GIICA going through that process. Look, this will start as soon as a contractor is appointed. But we’ve got a lot of work to do before then. So, you’d expect to see construction start either end of this year or early 2027. But there’s a lot of work to do in the meantime.
Journalist:
So plenty of time to test it out as well, and probably one of the first facilities to come online for the games?
Bleijie:
Well, this is a part of a minor venue, not only a local indoor sports centre, the Sunshine Coast outdoor stadium, Barlow Park in Cairns, all part of our $7.1 billion deal with the federal government. And I think we are starting to see the fruits of the proper planning in the last year and a half. We’re now, you know, getting the sites ready, getting the sites established. And I think in our communities, not only in Logan City and South East Queensland, but across all of Queensland, you’re going to see a lot of work start this year and next year, once the principal contractors have been awarded, designs are done, and then you’re going to see things coming out of the ground, which is going to be exciting.
Journalist:
What are the sports that will be hosted here?
Bleijie:
So the BOCOG and Andrew Liveris’s team are currently working with the IOC on the sports for the 2032 games. Initially, there was ball sports you would expect here, taekwondo, karate, all those sorts of things. But that’s hard to say in absolute terms at the moment because the sports are still being decided. But having capacity for 9 courts and 7,000‑seat spectator, it means that this is – you know, there will be Olympic and Paralympic sports in Logan because of this venue.
Journalist:
The 7,000 people, what consideration are you giving to getting that many people in and out of this site?
Bleijie:
Well, do you want to –
Raven:
So, this precinct is fantastic because it’s so close to the Woodridge train station, which is being upgraded as part of the Kuraby to Beenleigh faster rail investment. That is a $5.3 billion investment in public transport, the biggest investment in public transport we’ve ever seen in Logan. That started last term underneath the previous government and is being continued now and Woodridge train station will be the centrepiece of that upgrade. People will be able to walk straight down from there across our great new active transport pathways into this location, which will mean it will be fantastic for the games but it will be, more importantly, fantastic for the years afterwards when kids are coming from all over the city and all over South East Queensland to compete against the best basketball team in the country, which is the under‑14 Logan Thunderboys.
Journalist:
Now, Mayor, you gave yourself a March deadline to attract funding for the other proposed venue here, it’s not [indistinct] of this agreement, but the privately built baseball stadium. Are you any closer to delivering that?
Raven:
Yeah, we’ve had some fantastic interest in the baseball stadium, and we’re working with partners overseas. Just 2 weeks ago, just before Lunar New Year began, we were talking to construction companies who are very excited about doing a proof of concept of how great a baseball stadium would be in South East Queensland and how good it would be to have a stadium that could be used for so much more than sport – it would be a community venue for amazing music and live music events so that our community has somewhere to go in the evening for nighttime entertainment. But more importantly, the baseball stadium would be located at Meadowbrook University for Griffith. That would encourage the 2 Js standing beside me to bring forward some funding from the city deal that would connect an active transport and public transport bridge from the university across the Logan Hyperdome. That would absolutely change the public transport network in our city. And we know that that’s something our residents are asking for every single day of the week.
Journalist:
How much is this venue going to be worth? Is there a price tag [indistinct]?
Bleijie:
So, as I indicated previously, the $7.1 billion deal that the Crisafulli government has struck with the Albanese government, that’s the funding envelope, and all the venues – minor venues and major venues, 17 in total – will be delivered within that funding envelope. We are deliberately not disclosing at the moment the individual costs because we want competition in the construction industry. And if we were to release all the individual budgets, then I would guarantee you that all the bids coming in are going to be that or more. And we’re not going to do it.
We’re working with the federal government. We’ve seen PBRs come in that Minister Catherine King and I have signed off on, and I’m very comfortable at the moment because they are coming in within the $7.1 billion figure. And that’s – so this budget here will be contained within the $7.1 billion.
The other thing is, if I tell this bloke, he’ll just want more millions and hundreds of millions like he’s already getting out of the Crisafulli government, and I guess the federal government. He’s a very good negotiator and dealmaker. And just look at all the housing announcements we’ve made together in the last month. It’s been very exciting for Logan.
Journalist:
The Treasurer mentioned it’s the single largest investment to sporting infrastructure in Logan. So what’s that dollar figure?
Bleijie:
That’s a good way to ask the same question a second time Marlina, and I’ll give you the same answer – it’s within the $7.1 billion figure. It’s not $7.1 billion this facility, no doubt, but –
Journalist:
But how do we know it’s – how do we know –
Bleijie:
Well, as I said yesterday, all – they will be all disclosed. When the contracts are issued, we will disclose those figures to the public. We want transparency and accountability in all of this. But at the moment, we are driving good efficiencies with the construction industry to make sure that we are getting value for the Australian taxpayer dollar and the Queensland taxpayer dollar.
Journalist:
How are Queenslanders supposed to know that you haven’t breached that 7.1 funding envelope if you haven’t disclosed anything, though? Andrew Liveris says there’ll have to be a rethink.
Bleijie:
Well, that’s a completely separate issue. Andrew Liveris, when he was talking about that, was the BOCOG budget, which is separate to the infrastructure budget. Andrew Liveris is required to fundraise and get sponsors for the delivery of the games and the actual event. The deal we struck with the federal government is the $7.1 billion to deliver the minor venues and major venues. And, as I said, Catherine King and I regularly talk and meet about these, and it’s in the same budget. We’re not increasing the budget.
And the federal government made it very clear to the state government when we were elected a year and a half ago – they’re not increasing their funding, and we have been as committed to that as respecting taxpayers’ money as the federal government has. That’s the budget, and it’s going to be delivered within the budget.
Journalist:
Treasurer, I might ask you a question on that, if that’s okay.
Bleijie:
No worries.
Journalist:
If there’s any unforeseen circumstances that might lead to delays or cost blow‑outs, would the federal government step in?
Chalmers:
Well, I think what Jarrod was saying is right in the sense that both sides are doing our best to make sure that there aren’t cost blow‑outs. We have committed together that $7.1 billion, and it’s in everybody’s interests to deliver those projects in the most cost‑effective way that we can. And the questions about the cost of this venue, obviously, we budget for a certain cost, but it wouldn’t make a lot of sense at a time when we’re in pretty complex negotiations with builders to show our hand. And so clearly, when the process gets further developed, we’ll make it clear the full price tag of this, but it is within the $7.1 billion that we’ve committed to collectively.
And let’s not lose sight of what this is all about: this is more than 9 courts, it’s more than 7,000 seats, it’s a vote of confidence in this local community. And we are passionate about making sure that local kids and local families get the sporting infrastructure and the community infrastructure that they need and deserve. That’s what this is about. And in delivering this for our local community, we’ll make sure we do it in the most cost‑effective way. And we’ll be transparent about cost in the usual way.
Journalist:
Treasurer, isn’t it true that there’s modelling being carried out to see how much revenue can be raised by limiting the number of negatively geared properties to 2?
Chalmers:
Yeah, we haven’t changed our tax policies. Our tax policies are all about delivering another income tax cut in July this year and another one in July next year, so that there are 3 income tax cuts from this Albanese Labor government. We are alive, obviously, to the intergenerational issues in the housing market and in the tax system, and we’ve got other policies to help address that sense of unfairness: cutting income taxes, making superannuation fairer, boosting the low‑income super tax offset, and in housing, building more homes and making it easier to save for a deposit. So those are our policies on tax and on housing.
It’s not unusual this far out from the Budget that the Treasury would be considering other options and other next steps, but they would, as always – any further steps along those lines would be a matter for Cabinet in the usual way.
Journalist:
So, is that a yes? You are considering it?
Chalmers:
I’ll just come back to you. I’ll go to Harry and then back to you again.
Journalist:
How likely is it that such a policy could be brought to Cabinet?
Chalmers:
Well, obviously, we’re still a little ways out from the Budget, and I’m not prepared to go into the details of the sorts of advice that Treasury provides us pretty regularly as we work through the options in the lead‑up to a budget. The Budget will be focused on spending restraint and savings. It will be focused on making our economy more productive against the backdrop of all of this global economic uncertainty. We’ve made that clear. And in the process of informing our deliberations and our discussions, the Treasury from time to time will canvas a whole range of ideas. That’s not unusual in February for a May Budget.
And so obviously not going to go into details. Obviously, no decisions have been taken in any of these areas. We’ve already got a tax policy and a housing policy, which is designed to address some of these intergenerational issues that people are right to raise with us. Any next steps beyond that would be a matter for Cabinet.
Journalist:
So, Treasurer, you’re saying you’re canvassing a lot of the issues and a lot of solutions. Is that your way of saying yes, this is one of them?
Chalmers:
Well, I think I’ve been very clear in saying, not just today or in recent days but in recent weeks and months, including in and around the Reform Roundtable that I convened in Canberra in September, we’ve got a tax policy, we’ve got a tax agenda, which is all about cutting income taxes. And beyond that, we know that there is a sense of intergenerational unfairness in the tax system and in the housing market as well. That’s why we work so hard and so closely together to try and build more homes in communities like this one and around Australia as well. It’s why we’re changing superannuation so people with low balances get bigger balances and can retire with more.
Now, in the last week of February, it’s not unusual for the Treasury to be canvassing a whole range of issues, a whole range of policies to inform discussions and deliberations of the Cabinet as we get closer and closer to the government’s fifth Budget in May. Not prepared to go into the detail of that. No decisions have been taken. We haven’t changed our tax policy. We’re focused on delivering those tax cuts to all 14 million Australian taxpaying workers.
Journalist:
Just one other thing –
Chalmers:
I’ll just give you a follow‑up because I gave Harry one.
Journalist:
Thanks. Well, is it frustrating then that quite clearly someone is talking and leaking details of these discussions and then on a personal level, you have children who will one day hope to own a home, how would you feel for them going to an auction and coming up against an investor that’s got multiple properties that are negatively geared? Can I ask you on a personal note, how do you feel for them?
Chalmers:
Well, first of all, on the first part of your question, I think it’s part and parcel of budget speculation that these stories pop up from time to time. I’m not especially troubled by that. I don’t know where it came from, but this is not unusual in the weeks and months leading up to a budget for this kind of speculation to be out there and running, and I’ve been very clear in saying we haven’t changed our policies. We’ve got tax policies and housing policies, and any changes or further steps will be a matter for the Cabinet.
On the second part of your question, you know, respectfully, this is not about my kids; it’s about everyone’s kids. It’s about a country which has been playing catch‑up for too long on this dire shortage of housing that we have. And we don’t have enough homes in local communities, not just this one, but right around Australia. I think it’s one of our defining economic challenges. It’s the reason why the Commonwealth government, the Labor government, has put tens of billions of dollars into building more homes. It’s why we’re making it easier for people to save a deposit with our 5 per cent deposits, because we understand that this is a big challenge, not just in our economy but in our society as well.
And so, the steps that we are taking to cut taxes, to boost super, to build more homes, to make it easier to save a deposit, that’s all about coming at some of these intergenerational issues which are, I think, obvious and pressing.
Journalist:
Treasurer, you mentioned looking at supply as a big issue. Is negative gearing something that you’re considering for the May Budget, given that there’s a stranglehold on housing supply?
Chalmers:
Well, I’m obviously not going to talk about the merits or otherwise of a policy that we haven’t adopted. And I understand and respect why you’re asking the question. I know what informs that question because issues of supply are very important to us. And we’re doing a lot on supply elsewhere in the budget, as I said – tens of billions of dollars of investment in the context of a budget where we’ve been getting the budget into better condition over time. And so housing supply is a big priority for the government, cutting income tax is a big priority for the government, making superannuation fairer, making it easier to save a deposit. This is all about getting at some of these issues that you’re asking me about.
Journalist:
The WA government is –
Chalmers:
We’ll just go here, and then we’ll come to you.
Journalist:
The Prime Minister said before the election that changes to negative gearing would be anti‑aspirational. Has the government changed its thinking?
Chalmers:
We haven’t changed our policies or our views when it comes to some of these issues we’re being asked about today. We’ve made it very clear that in the course of putting together the government’s fifth Budget, the same way for the first 4, that it’s not unusual for Treasury to be considering other options for the government to discuss and deliberate on and decide whether they want to go – whether we want to go ahead with it. That’s not especially unusual. I do understand and appreciate and respect that there’s a lot of interest in this. There’s always a lot of speculation in the lead‑up to budgets. That’s part – this is part of it on this occasion, but any changes to our policy in the future would be a matter for Cabinet in the usual way.
Journalist:
Can I just ask about [indistinct]?
Chalmers:
Yeah, sure, now that I’ve – this is your fault, Harry.
Journalist:
You opened the gate, mate.
Chalmers:
You’re not invited to the next one, Harry, okay?
Journalist:
Just on the billion dollars of potential fraud that Commonwealth Bank has reported to police recently, is the government concerned about the increasing instances of potential fraud in home lending and what’s Treasury doing about it?
Chalmers:
Well, these are very concerning reports. On the specifics of that case, you’d appreciate that given there’s a legal process underway, it’s not wise or advisable for me to weigh into the specifics of that one. I support the work of the regulators, and I support the work of the police in cracking down on any behaviour like this. Extremely concerning reports, and we back the regulators and the authorities in getting to the bottom of it. If people have done the wrong thing, then they should be punished for it, but I’m not going to get into the details of that case.
Journalist:
Would Treasury be involved in some of those investigations or supporting the police in that work?
Chalmers:
Not typically an investigative role, but obviously, the Treasury plays a very supportive role when it comes to the work of the regulators.
Journalist:
The WA government is arguing the Productivity Commission should recommend the Commonwealth keep its 2018 GST deal discount on mining revenue. Is that something you’re up to?
Chalmers:
We’ve got a Productivity Commission review underway, and it wouldn’t make a lot of sense for me to engage in a kind of running commentary on that. You know, we’ve made it clear in the west and in the east that we want a fair deal for WA in the GST allocation. We want to make sure that the mechanics of working out those calculations are as good as they can be, and that’s why we’ve asked the Productivity Commission to have a look at it. And I’m not going to get into that before we see what they recommend.
Journalist:
Treasurer, just one more for you?
Chalmers:
Last one after this.
Journalist:
Do you believe shares and ETFs owned by politicians in trading investment accounts should be disclosed on the Register of Interests, and do you believe the current rules around disclosure are too loose?
Chalmers:
Well, I think we’ve got a very serious case when it comes to the Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson. Tim Wilson is always talking the Australian economy down. Now, at the same time, we learn from the Australian Financial Review and from the Guardian that he has invested in a fund which performs better when the Australian market underperforms. So he needs to urgently explain to the Australian people why he thinks it is appropriate to bet against Australia and Australians in that fashion.
And so if you look at his disclosures, I think it paints a really troubling picture. He’s invested in a fund which does better for him when the Australian economy or the Australian market underperforms. And I’d be surprised if any objective observer of that thinks that that’s the appropriate behaviour of a Shadow Treasurer in particular.
Now, this is one of a number of reasons why, in the 3 Shadow Treasurers that I’ve faced in the last 9 months, Tim Wilson is by far the riskiest and the most extreme. This is a guy who has called for the privatisation of Medicare. He’s called for the abolition of compulsory super for people on low and middle incomes. He has said that there should be higher interest rates and higher unemployment because the Reserve Bank shouldn’t focus so much on jobs in communities like this one and around Australia. He has described work from home as apartheid.
So these are the things that Tim Wilson has said on the public record. It makes him the most extreme and riskiest proposition that I’ve faced in these roles as Shadow Treasurers. And I think these revelations about these sorts of funds that Tim Wilson is invested in paint a really troubling picture. I’d be very, very surprised if people thought that was above board for him to make those sorts of investments reported in the Financial Review today and the Guardian yesterday as well. It’s a matter for him to explain. He should do that urgently.
Now, at risk of finishing this overwhelmingly happy press conference on a negative note, can I just thank again the state government and the Logan City Council. Can I acknowledge Teresa Lane and her advocacy, my colleagues Catherine King and Annika Wells and the Prime Minister for supporting this. The Olympics in Queensland are going to be amazing, and this means that Logan City gets a slice of the action, and that’s a good thing. Thanks very much.
Journalist:
Treasurer, I just have to ask about gun laws here and the hate speech laws.
Chalmers:
Last one.
Journalist:
Are you disappointed the state government here won’t sign up for the National Buyback Scheme? And what do you think of the proposed hate speech laws here?
Chalmers:
Well, when it comes to the hate speech laws, I mean, you’ve had the opportunity to ask the Deputy Premier a number of questions about that. I try not to go out of my way to second‑guess or take shots at state governments making difficult decisions about complex and sensitive issues. And that’s the approach that I intend to follow in that regard, and, of course, it wouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that we would rather our gun buyback scheme was a genuinely national scheme. That’s certainly the Albanese government’s intention. We don’t think it’s right that there are so many guns on our streets, and so we are taking decisive steps to try and tighten and toughen our gun laws. We would like all of the states and territories to be part of that. Obviously, we’re disappointed that Queensland and the Northern Territory have indicated that they don’t want to be part of that, but it does still mean in other parts of the country that we can make some important progress together. Thanks very much.