Rafael Epstein:
Michael Sukkar joins us. He is both the Liberal member for the seat of Deakin here in Melbourne and also the Assistant Treasurer. Michael Sukkar, good afternoon.
Minister Sukkar:
Good day, Raf. Good to be with you.
Rafael Epstein:
Michael Sukkar, I’m sure you get letters and emails from people saying they have not had enough support. I’m sure your counterpart in the Victorian Government gets the same thing. Have we done enough to help business carry the burden?
Minister Sukkar:
Well we’ve certainly put in place, Raf – over a long period of time – unprecedented levels of support – particularly from the Federal Government – and they continue as you quite rightly say with the COVID disaster payments both to individuals who lose more than 20 hours a week in work receive $750 and those that lose between 8 and 20 hours receive $450 a week, and of course, $200 additional payments per week for people on income support, plus of course the business assistance program which we jointly fund with the Victorian Government of which we’ve paid out about $2.1 billion since July. Plus of course, JobKeeper – $45 billion into Victoria alone. They’re big numbers. I think it’s probably fair to say, Raf, though that there is virtually no way that the Federal or State Government can completely compensate Victorians – businesses and Victorian individuals – of the economic cost of the lockdown. They’re so big – the economic cost that is – of lockdowns that I’d be lying if I said that the Commonwealth Government or the State Government combined, can somehow compensate every single person…interrupted.
Rafael Epstein:
And again this is not a judgement but maybe it’s just the reality. Are you saying that we haven’t given enough to cover?
Minister Sukkar:
No, I think we’ve done absolutely everything that we prudentially can. I mean I get a lot of criticism from some quarters, Raf, that we’ve spent too much, that we have gone into the Commonwealth treasury well a bit too deep. So we get that criticism as well from some quarters that we’ve spent too much. I think I’m just levelling with you in saying that the economic costs of lockdown are so great that too fully compensate every single business and every single person at a State and Commonwealth level, I think is, and we try out best to, but I’d be thinking it is very difficult to do so which is why it’s so important that we get our vaccination rate up, that we get out of lockdown and that all the states and territories follow the National Plan.
Rafael Epstein:
Happy to come to the National Plan in a tick but if I could look back just for a moment. If I was an individual on JobKeeper but I earn money elsewhere, I’d have to pay back my JobKeeper money. But if I run a company getting JobKeeper and my revenue actually went up, I do not have to pay back JobKeeper. Why do you think that’s fair?
Minister Sukkar:
Well, no, no, Raf, JobKeeper payments ultimately funded employees. JobKeeper payments were funnelled through employers to the employees. The entire basis of the JobKeeper program was to keep people employed. Now you imagine if, and I’m sure you don’t have this, Raf because I listen to you a lot, but lets not have short memories about what we were facing 18 months ago.
Rafael Epstein:
This is not a question about whether or not the program was important or essential.
Minister Sukkar:
But I think that it is because if we had have put in place a program that basically said ‘we might take this money off you’, there would ultimately be less employees whose jobs would’ve been saved.
Rafael Epstein:
Then can I ask a question about the amount that did go out the door?
Minister Sukkar:
That’s not a decision that was taken for the sake of the businesses – important though they are – that was a decision taken to save people’s jobs and that’s ultimately what JobKeeper did.
Rafael Epstein:
$13 billion went to companies who had an increased turnover. That is something like what the Federal Government contributes to the National Disability Insurance Scheme each year.
Minister Sukkar:
Firstly I don’t accept that figure is correct…interrupted.
Rafael Epstein:
That’s from the Parliamentary Budget Office, isn’t it?
Minister Sukkar:
Well we’ve not seen any of the detail around that supposed costing. So firstly I don’t accept that but secondly, let’s go back, Raf. If in the midst of the pandemic we said to businesses ‘we might take this back’, what would have happened is…interrupted.
Rafael Epstein:
Well that’s what you do with tax, that’s what you do with…I mean again, it goes to my point about fairness. If I receive money from you as a person, I have to pay it back if I don’t need it. Why then don’t companies have to pay it back?
Minister Sukkar:
Raf the ultimate beneficiaries of JobKeeper were the individual employees who received the payment.
Rafael Epstein:
Well not all of it went to salaries though, did it? A lot of it went to people’s budget bottom lines.
Minister Sukkar:
What I’m saying is the ultimate entity that suffered was not the business, it would’ve been the employee. What I’m saying to you is with what is undoubtedly, in my view, one of the most successful programs that has ever been put in place by a government and I know that sounds a bit of a grand claim but given the quantum involved and how efficiently and effectively and how effective it was in saving jobs, I think I can quite rightly make that claim. It would be foolish to do anything that dissuaded businesses from entering the JobKeeper program because…interrupted.
Rafael Epstein:
But schools got money when they’d just built pools and gyms. Do you think that’s fair?
Minister Sukkar:
And Raf what we did after the first two quarters, we changed the test to make sure that it didn’t look at anticipated… interrupted.
Rafael Epstein:
But you didn’t take the money back. You’re not even making it transparent so we can see who received that money.
Minister Sukkar:
I think you’re showing a callous disregard of the employees involved because who suffers in the end if we got that program wrong and basically said we’re going to take back the money? Certain businesses wouldn’t have entered JobKeeper and they would’ve stood down their workforces or sacked their workforces. We’re here to protect people’s jobs, that’s what we did, that’s what JobKeeper did. What you’re suggesting – really what the Labor Party is suggesting – is that we should have taken that money back. Who would’ve suffered? It would have been everyday Victorians and everyday Australians which is something we would not be willing to support.
Rafael Epstein:
Michael Sukkar is with us, he’s the Assistant Treasurer. That means he’s part of the Prime Minister’s economic team. He’s also – as you probably know – a Liberal MP here in the seat of Deakin.
The National Plan, Michael Sukkar. The National Plan is a little bit vague. Do you think our contact tracing is optimal or partially effective at the moment? Because those two words back a big difference to which part of the plan applies. Is our contact tracing now optimal or partial?
Minister Sukkar:
Well look it’s very hard for me to comment, Raf, in all honesty. I think that we can say we’ve got some of the best contact tracing in the world. How you would specifically and legally define that I think is hard to tell, particularly with the Delta variant and how quickly it moves. I think our contact tracing protocols are about as good as what we’ve seen in other jurisdictions.
Rafael Epstein:
Well maybe I can put a frame around that question. The Federal Government is very keen to say the National Plan means we open up.
Minister Sukkar:
We’re very keen to say that.
Rafael Epstein:
I understand if you want to make that argument, I understand. But if I can just make this point about the modelling. The modelling actually indicates a really broad number of possibilities. We could be anywhere from shutdown half the time with hard lockdowns, to almost never shut down and that really depends on if our contact tracing is partial or optimal. But the Federal Government keeps on saying that the National Plan is open up but that is not what the modelling says.
Minister Sukkar:
Raf, I think that question is probably better put to the State Government who runs contact tracing but my perception is that it’s going pretty well and it’s certainly improved since the disasters of last year.
Rafael Epstein:
Do you accept that there’s a wide number of outcomes in that modelling and the Federal Government is only choosing one?
Minister Sukkar:
We’re very – I mean, Raf I can tell you right now – we are unashamedly of the view that once we reach the vaccination targets and that we’ve done extraordinarily well as a nation to give our health system the time it needs to prepare for the COVID-19 and Delta variants, that the minute we hit those thresholds, we’ve got to – consistent with the National Plan – open up. Perpetual lockdowns are not the answer.
Rafael Epstein:
Well that’s okay if that’s your plan but that’s not what the model says. It says only if the contact tracing is optimal do you have no more lockdowns.
Minister Sukkar:
Well Raf, again I mean we can quibble over words. I think it probably is optimal but the prescription in the National Plan can never force any Premiers hand. All of these things will be done based on judgements of the Premiers. But what we don’t want to see is Premiers finding other reasons or excuses to keep us locked down.
Rafael Epstein:
Can I ask about the Victorian Premier? Do you think Victoria’s strategy has changed and do you think the Victoria Premier is on board with the National Plan?
Minister Sukkar:
All that I’ve read and seen suggests to me that he does support the National Plan. Obviously he signed up to the National Plan so that’s the most obvious point and clearly yesterday’s press conference gave me a sense that the broad elimination strategy seems to have been abandoned. But again, they’re questions for the State Government.
Rafael Epstein:
So you don’t doubt that he supports the National Plan?
Minister Sukkar:
Well he signed up to the National Plan at National Cabinet so of course. All the Premiers and Chief Ministers signed up to the National Plan. We’ve got a compact with Australians, a compact with Victorians that says go out, get vaccinated and the light at the end of the tunnel is if you do your bit, then our economy will reopen, our lives will reopen. I love what you’re doing on the program today, people reminiscing about road trips. I mean, Raf, such simple and basic aspects of our lives…interrupted.
Rafael Epstein:
Tell me one of yours?
Minister Sukkar:
Road trips for me? Well I mean they seemed like long road trips when I was a child. We used to go, five of us children and my mum and dad, used to go to Mallacoota for holidays every year. We’d have a camping holiday in January every year. It was about a seven or eight hour drive but it felt like it was a lot longer.
Rafael Epstein:
That is a road trip. Five kids, what sort of car?
Minister Sukkar:
Well originally I think it was a Kingswood and a Ford Falcon EF so we’d go down in two cars.
Rafael Epstein:
Oh right okay. You didn’t have one of those station wagons with the seats in the back thing, the funny seats in the back?
Minister Sukkar:
Well we did, we sort of did, we had an extra seat but it still couldn’t accommodate five so we always took two cars. But yeah every year we’d go down to Mallacoota but my point is these are really basic parts of our life that we need to commit and we need to have that compact with Victorians.
Rafael Epstein:
I’m just not sure the modelling supports your very singular focus on what you say it says.
Minister Sukkar:
Raf, I think the basic principle is very clear here and that is once we get to 80 per cent of Victorians and Australians vaccinated – and remember, it’s a two test, it’s not just one state but it’s Victoria and the whole nation – that we need to reopen. We all read about them every day, we’ve got really cruel situations of people being stopped from seeing a loved one or a dying relative or attending a funeral. These are things and sacrifices I think we’ve all taken on the chin but now we have a pathway out and if Australians do their job and get vaccinated, we have to meet our end of the commitment and that is to open up. There’s always devil in the detail – I don’t doubt that, Raf – but the basic principle has to be right.
Rafael Epstein:
I will try to double back on the detail when I get a chance to have a word to the Federal Health Minister or others who are similar.
Thank you for your time.
Minister Sukkar:
Good on you, Raf. Thanks.
Rafael Epstein:
Michael Sukkar there. He’s the Liberal member for the seat of Deakin and the Assistant Treasurer.