Ash Ambihaipahar:
Good morning, everyone. I’m Ash Ambihaipahar, I’m the Labor candidate for the upcoming federal election for the seat of Barton. I’m here with the Treasurer here at St George TAFE, which is my home turf. I think what’s really important to understand about TAFE locally has impacted our community in such a positive way. I grew up as a local here, a lot of my friends, our neighbours, our community members, have been able to benefit from the wonderful specialised facilities here at St George.
And I think it’s important to understand that a Labor government is always going to back TAFE. I think TAFE is so important to make sure that we have a really high bar in vocational education and training here in Australia. But I’m really glad that the Treasurer is here to have a chat with you about some of the great stuff that the Labor government has been able to achieve, particularly around free TAFE. So, I’ll hand it over to the Treasurer.
Jim Chalmers:
I’m really proud to be here with Ash today to support our brilliant, outstanding candidate in this local community, the federal electorate of Barton, and to be here at St George TAFE. TAFEs are opportunity factories in our country, and it’s wonderful to be here and also to be investing billions and billions of dollars in teaching and training the next generation of workers.
The trainees and tradies, apprentices, who are trained in places like this TAFE will build Australia’s future. We believe deeply as Labor people that by investing in the skills and abilities of Australian workers that we can build Australia’s future together. That’s what our investments in TAFE and training are all about.
Because of our efforts more people are working and training, more people are earning more and keeping more of what they earn because of the Albanese government’s tax cuts. Don’t forget that this weekend is the one‑year anniversary of the changes that we announced to the stage 3 tax cuts. The changes that we announced made sure that every Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut, not just people who are already on higher incomes. So, this is a very important anniversary on the weekend.
It also goes to the big difference between Labor under Anthony Albanese and the Coalition under Peter Dutton. Under Anthony Albanese fee‑free TAFE, 5 and a half thousand students from Ash’s electorate alone benefitting from fee‑free TAFE, hundreds of thousands of Australians. Under Labor, investing in TAFE, helping with the cost of living and building Australia’s future. Under Peter Dutton and the Coalition, he will cut TAFE training, he will make people worse off and he will take Australia backwards.
Nothing could speak to the difference between Labor and the Coalition more effectively than the absolute farce which is Peter Dutton’s long lunch policy. And this, again, goes to the very stark contrast and the big choice that we’ll be asking Australians to make later this year.
Anthony Albanese and Labor are for workers and trainees and tradies; Peter Dutton and the Coalition are for taxpayer‑funded long lunches. And that goes directly to the difference and to the choice when it comes to the 2 major parties contesting the election this year. Labor is for trainees and tradies and workers; Peter Dutton and the Coalition are for taxpayer‑funded perks and long lunches. And that is the difference between the parties. We are investing billions of dollars in training and in cost‑of‑living help and building Australia’s future. The only economic policy that Peter Dutton and Angus Taylor have is to get taxpayers to fund long lunches for bosses.
We call on the Coalition today to tell the Australian people how much will their long lunches policy cost them? What will they need to cut to pay for taxpayer‑funded long lunches? Why haven’t they come clean on how much this policy costs? Why won’t they tell us how they’ll prevent it from being rorted? Why won’t they tell the Australian people what’s in and what’s out when it comes to their long lunch policy?
The Coalition’s lunches policy is an absolute farce, and that’s why it’s falling down all around them. That’s why you hear them – it was only announced on the weekend, we’ve hardly heard boo from the Coalition on this, and that’s because they can’t answer the most basic questions. How much will it cost? How will they pay for it? How will they stop it being rorted? What’s in and what’s out? And again, this goes to the difference.
So, I’m really proud to be here with Ash, who is a wonderful candidate here in Barton. I’m pleased to be here to support the outstanding work of St George TAFE, teaching and training Australians to build Australia’s future. Nothing could be more important. And again, the choice this year, Anthony Albanese and Labor – investing in TAFE and training, helping with the cost of living, building Australia’s future – or Peter Dutton and the Coalition – taxpayer‑funded perks and long lunches, making Australians worse off and taking Australia backwards.
Happy to take some questions.
Journalist:
Maybe one for Ash to start: drawing on your experience as an employment and IR lawyer, I’m just wondering where you see areas for reform that you can take to the federal government?
Ambihaipahar:
I think one of the major things – so my background, I’ve had a diverse background in working with a number of unions and also working with – and employers association in the hospitality sector. I think and also I work [inaudible] community services as well. I think having a deep look at wage reform is really important, particularly around cost of living. I don’t have a particular set policy in mind at the moment, but I think [inaudible] around addressing cost of living, having to unpack how that process goes with [inaudible].
Journalist:
So, what were some of the biggest problems facing your previous clients?
Ambihaipahar:
From which organisation?
Journalist:
Sorry, in IR and employment law?
Ambihaipahar:
My background is quite diverse. I’ve had issues around – you know – unfair dismissal matters, industrial relations and bargaining and negotiations. I think there’s been some really great changes from an IR sphere with our kind of Labor government making reforms around it to make it much more better when it comes to negotiations and actually getting to the table to come up with an outcome. And I think that’s kind of a lot of the work that I did, particularly in the union movement. Particularly in hospitality with issues around sort of bargaining as well. But also, you know, [inaudible]. Thanks.
Journalist:
The Greens’ $800 payment for child back‑to‑school costs, would that help cost of living or would that be inflationary?
Chalmers:
We’re already investing billions of dollars in schools – including public schools – and that’s because we believe in the transformative power of early education, primary and secondary education, TAFE and training and universities. We believe in investing in the opportunities that Australians need and deserve to get great, well‑paid jobs. And so, we have our own policies when it comes to education.
The difference between Labor and the Greens is the Greens never have to make anything add up. They can issue press releases calling for lines of spending, often hundreds of billions of dollars in spending, and they never have to make it add up. So, our responsibilities are different. We work with them respectfully in the parliament, particularly in the Senate, but we’ve got different responsibilities here.
I’ve seen some reports of the Greens’ policy today. I haven’t been through it in any detail, and so I won’t speak for the Greens’ policy, I’ll only speak for Labor’s policy.
What we’ve been able to do as a Labor government under Prime Minister Albanese is to provide cost‑of‑living relief in the most responsible way. Tax cuts for every taxpayer, energy bill relief for every household, fee-free TAFE, student debt relief, cheaper medicines, cheaper early childhood education, getting wages moving again.
We’ve been able to do all of that as we’ve brought inflation down very substantially and in a very sustained way over the last couple of years.
We know that Australians are still under pressure, but together as a country we’ve made remarkable progress on inflation. When we came to office it was more than 6 per cent and rising fast. It now has a 2 in front of it, and we’ll get an important update towards the end of this month.
I’ll speak for our policies, which are primarily focused on easing the cost of living at the same time as we get inflation down. We have made some substantial progress.
Here is another opportunity to remind Australians about this important anniversary on the weekend.
On the weekend is the anniversary of Labor’s changes to the tax cuts. We weren’t prepared to see only people who were already on higher incomes to get a tax cut. That’s why we changed it. I pay tribute to the Prime Minister for his leadership to make sure that every Australian taxpayer got a tax cut.
You might recall that Sussan Ley was asked about whether or not the Coalition would roll back those tax cuts and she said that they would.
Those were her words, not Labor’s words. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party said that they would roll back these tax cuts.
Peter Dutton got so angry and worked up at the idea of every Australian taxpayer getting tax cut he called for an election over it.
Australians should never forget that if Peter Dutton and the Coalition had their way, Australians would be worse off and if the Coalition and Peter Dutton are elected at the election later this year Australians will be worse off still.
Journalist:
Will there be any new taxes that you’ll [inaudible] to the next election?
Chalmers:
No, our focus is on the tax changes that we’ve already announced, that we’ve already legislated or trying to legislate.
Obviously, the focus for us right now is making the very generous superannuation tax concessions for people with high balances still generous but a little less generous. Our priority is multinational tax reform. We’ve made a number of other changes.
We’ve made it clear that when it comes to the budget our priority is cost‑of‑living relief, doing that in the most responsible way.
We’ve been able to provide cost‑of‑living relief at the same time as we’ve delivered 2 surpluses, a $200 billion positive turnaround in the Budget and we’ve got the Liberal debt down from what we inherited.
Journalist:
Will you be taking a better budget position to the election than has been flagged?
Chalmers:
We’ve already delivered a better budget position than the one that we inherited at the election 2 and a half years ago.
When we came to office inflation was higher and rising, real wages, incomes and living standards were falling. There were a trillion dollars of Liberal debt and deficits as far as the why could see.
We’ve been working around the clock to clean up the mess that we inherited, and we’ve made some good progress
That $200 million turnaround in the Budget is the biggest nominal improvement in the budget in Australia’s history in one term.
We’ve got the debt down by $177 billion. We’re going to pay $70 billion less in interest over the next decade because of that.
Our responsible economic management has been a defining feature of the Albanese government, and we’ve been able to manage the government responsibly, not instead of providing cost‑of‑living relief but as well as providing cost‑of‑living relief. And that’s been a substantial achievement
Journalist:
Sorry, a couple more from the [inaudible]. A lot of talk about Sue Lines and her attending the Auschwitz event. Why was she chosen for the delegation and now removed?
Chalmers:
I haven’t been part of those discussions and my focus has been cost of living and teaching and training Australians with fee‑free TAFE and supporting wonderful candidates like Ash.
Journalist:
The National Cabinet meeting to respond to anti‑Semitism – some might say it’s too little, too late – and are these attacks being used for political advantage?
Chalmers:
Anti‑Semitism has no place in an inclusive and tolerant country like Australia. And these anti‑Semitic attacks, which are unfortunately becoming more frequent, are completely abhorrent, completely disgraceful and unacceptable in a country like ours. And that’s why we’re working with law enforcement and with the states and territories to crack down on anti‑Semitism.
The choice that leaders can make when it comes to this disturbing increase in anti‑Semitism is to try and be part of the solution, like Anthony Albanese is, working with the state and territory leaders, or to try and exacerbate these tensions for political gains and that’s unfortunately what we’re seeing with Peter Dutton. The responsibility of leaders is to try and calm and heal tensions, not make them worse.
Unfortunately one of the reasons that Peter Dutton is such a reckless and risky proposition is because when he sees division in our society he tries to exacerbate it and make it worse for political purposes. Whereas Anthony Albanese tries to respond to it and tries to heal it and tries to bring people together, and that’s what you saw with the efforts leading up to and coming out of national cabinet.
Journalist:
And just finally, when you use the term ‘terrorism’, which has been floated around some of these events at a Commonwealth level – which is what you’re responsible for – the Treasurer and the Attorney‑General can trigger certain funding responsibilities. Have you had any advice about whether one of those needs to be triggered, has been triggered or could be triggered?
Chalmers:
That matter is kept under constant review. As you know, we take seriously the advice of the relevant agencies when it comes to the definition of terrorist acts. Obviously, we’re aware, as you are in your question, that that has implications for some of the areas that I manage in my portfolio and Mark Dreyfus in his. So, when there are developments like we’ve seen in the last couple of days, indeed unfortunately in the last few months, we keep under constant review the kinds of responsibilities and issues that a definition of a terrorist incident invites.
Journalist:
So, the Prime Minister or the New South Wales Premier – I know it’s different state laws – [inaudible] uses the term terrorism, does it automatically trigger something? Do you have to do a declaration of some sort?
Chalmers:
There are a number of steps that are considered when events are determined to be terrorist incidents. We take a lot of private advice on that, I don’t typically air the advice that I get on that, but from time to time it is a matter of discussion, the arrangements that kick in. And if and when we’ve got more to say on this particular issue, we’ll say it.
Journalist:
[Inaudible]
Chalmers:
From an economic point of view, of course, when there’s a new administration in the US there are changes in policy and we are confident in our ability to navigate those changes in policy. You’ll see already, even in the lead up to the inauguration, Ambassador Rudd and others have had meaningful and I think very useful engagement with the incoming administration. Australia is well placed and well prepared when it comes to the new administration in the United States. We know that there are changes in policy. We expect those changes in policy. We’re confident in our ability to navigate them.
The very close partnership between Australia and the US and particularly the close economic partnership, benefits both sides. When it comes to matters of trade, it’s important to remember that the US, maintains a very substantial 2‑to‑one trade surplus with Australia. There has been that arrangement since, I think the Truman administration in 1952.
Our relationship with American friends is a very productive one, it’s mutually beneficial. From an economic point of view, in addition to the great work that Penny and Don and the Prime Minister and others are doing and Richard Marles, we will have a role to play in making sure that we navigate these changes to policy, always with an eye to advancing Australia’s national interest. And we’re confident that we can make any new arrangements and any new policies coming out with the US work for us.