Topics: Enterprise Tax Plan, crossbench negotiation in the Senate, sugar negotiations, ACCC inquiry into power prices, same-sex marriage plebiscite, parliamentarians’ work expenses.
E&OE …
PATRICIA KARVELAS:
Senator Scott Ryan is the Special Minister of State and the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Cabinet, welcome to the program.
SENATOR SCOTT RYAN:
Good evening Patricia, thanks for having me.
KARVELAS:
The crossbench is not playing ball, can you get your business tax cuts through before the Budget?
SENATOR RYAN:
To be fair Patricia, the crossbench only comes into play when the Labor Party takes such an opportunistic and intransigent approach. These are tax cuts that Ken Henry talked about, these are the tax cuts that Labor has previously spoken in favour of when they were in government and people should remember it is only because of Bill Shorten’s behaviour that we have to negotiate with the crossbench about this.
KARVELAS:
Labor went to the election saying that they opposed this plan. This has been their policy for a long time, they were very clear about it. I don’t know if you could really expect Labor’s support given they told everyone throughout the whole election campaign they weren’t going to support it, in fact, they campaigned against it.
SENATOR RYAN:
An opportunistic U-turn against what a number of them had been saying for years, including Bill Shorten and Chris Bowen after last year’s budget. But look, when it comes to the Senate, I’ve said before that I don’t predict the future, but I remain an optimist.
KARVELAS:
Are you going to split the tax cuts up? Will you try and pass cuts for businesses with a turnover of under $10 million first?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well the point we’ve got at the moment is we have a 10-year tax plan and we are going to put that to the Senate. The Labor Party’s being particularly opportunistic and saying nothing for the 100,000 businesses who have a turnover between $2 million and $10 million and employ two million Australians. But we plan to put the package to the Senate, as we took to the people as we were elected on a platform of implementing.
KARVELAS:
Ok, but we know that you have support up to the $10 million level. That’s the turnover you do have the numbers to get through so you’re going to have to split it aren’t you? I mean that’s just pragmatism.
SENATOR RYAN:
Let’s wait and see what happens in the Senate. The debate is yet to come.
KARVELAS:
You’re saying you want to put the full tax cuts to the Senate even though you know they are going to be voted down. Is that because you just want the optics of Labor voting against it? Is it just political theatre?
SENATOR RYAN:
We’re not walking away from our promise. Call me old-fashioned, but we’ve spent the last nine months trying to implement exactly what we said we’d do before the last July election. Whether that’s about the plebiscite on same-sex marriage, whether that’s on multinational tax avoidance, which is going through the Senate at the moment, whether that be on our 10-year business tax plan that will provide for jobs and better jobs and better paying jobs.
KARVELAS:
If you’re just tuning, the Special Minister of State Scott Ryan is my guest. Our number if you want to text in is 0418 226 576, you can also Tweet us using the hashtag RN Drive.
So if only a section of the business tax cuts is passed and, you know, I predict that $10 million level will be it because I’ve heard what everyone has to say, will you include the cost of the rest of the cuts in the Budget, even though, obviously, it’s a pretty costly exercise?
SENATOR RYAN:
Patricia, you’ve been a journalist long enough and I’ve been a politician long enough to know we don’t answer questions about what’s going to be in the Budget before the Budget is delivered in May.
KARVELAS:
Last night I asked Barnaby Joyce, he said ‘stick to the plan, we want to stick to the whole plan’, so some people are being a bit more open.
SENATOR RYAN:
Barnaby is the Deputy Prime Minister, but I’m not going to comment on what’s going to be in the Budget, that’s a general principle that everyone, or most people, in the Government will live by prior to its delivery on the second Tuesday in May.
KARVELAS:
Nick Xenophon has signalled publicly to your Government that he would look at cutting tax for big companies – so that’s beyond the $10 million level – if the Government guarantees it will implement a bipartisan emissions intensity trading scheme in the electricity sector. Is that worth looking at? Would that resolve a couple of issues at once because we know the business sector is behind this idea as well.
SENATOR RYAN:
Some have come out and said that, there are others who, I understand, haven’t suggested that.
Look, I haven’t caught up with that particular announcement from Nick if that was this afternoon, I’m afraid, but we said before the election that what we were committed to was doing our absolute utmost to implement exactly what we said we were going to do and that’s what we’ve spent nine months doing. I think it’s an important sign of good faith with the electorate at this time, that that is exactly what the Government tries to get through the Senate.
KARVELAS:
On One Nation’s voting strike in the Senate, Nationals Senator John Williams says One Nation is blackmailing the Government – ‘holding a gun to our head’, that’s a direct quote – how frustrated are you in your dealings with One Nation?
SENATOR RYAN:
Look, I haven’t seen that happen so far today. Some legislation has got through today, it’s been relatively non-contentious, but there was some that went through this morning.
KARVELAS:
But it was Labor, I understand, who voted for that non-contentious legislation. It wasn’t the support of One Nation that got it through?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well there was some where the legislation wasn’t contested, that’s probably the best way to describe it, by anyone in the chamber. I think the Treasurer summed this up particularly well this morning when he said he doesn’t think Australians expect their Parliamentarians to go on strike.
On the issue that One Nation has raised, which is the Queensland sugar issue, the Treasurer also outlined that he has been working with George Christensen and Barnaby Joyce and others and a draft agreement that could potentially resolve the issue has landed with one of parties, I understand, just today.
KARVELAS:
Some work has been done on this by the Government after George Christensen raised the profile of this issue. You say it is close to resolution, how close?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well again, I am far from an expert in the sugar industry Patricia, but as I understand it, the issue around sugar growers and the processor Wilmar that a potential agreement, which has taken several weeks to come to fruition mainly on the basis of Queensland law and the state legislation in Queensland, that it is very, very close to hopeful resolution.
KARVELAS:
The ACCC inquiry that was announced, it will take 12 months, how is this going to help businesses and families who are facing massive power bills right now?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well firstly, as the Prime Minister’s made clear, there are no silver bullets to an issue that has developed over many years. Now, in various states there has been deregulation, privatisation and competition in the electricity retail market. It became apparent from a number of reports that there were some abhorrent results where margins may be higher than comparable nations and comparable markets. The ACCC has quite extraordinary powers of discovery to get hold of documents, to conduct public and private hearings. What that will do is give us a comprehensive analysis of how the retail market for electricity is working and how it is actually flowing through to households, small businesses and larger businesses.
KARVELAS:
A report by the Australian Electricity Market Commission – the Government department (sic) that makes the rules for electricity and gas retail markets – says that an emissions intensity scheme would bring down power bills. So you’ve got an inquiry and you’ve got an alternative suggestion that, as I said a little earlier, business groups have backed, which could deal with some of these problems. Why not embrace this policy?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well Patricia, I am yet to be convinced that the impositions of, effectively, an additional cost can actually reduce prices. Now I’ve read a fair bit about this over the years, but simple economics would also say that imposing an additional cost – and it’s not Government policy – would somehow do that. There is an issue around the certainty of investment, which the Prime Minister and Energy Minister have spoken about, and even today, we saw some extraordinary language from Adam Bandt, the Greens Member for Melbourne, where he talked about how a new coal-fired power station would lead to ‘blood on the hands of the Government’. It’s exactly that sort of ideological – quite frankly – fanatical approach to energy generation that has got South Australia and Australia facing the challenges we do now.
KARVELAS:
You might call that fanatical – or whatever language you want to use about the kind of language that was used – but ultimately this idea that this Government keeps floating, doesn’t fly with investors. There is nobody at this stage, unless you can tell me there is somebody now and new news has emerged, that is interested in building this so-called clean coal-fired station. It is not happening.
SENATOR RYAN:
Well what the Government has said is that we have a non-ideological approach that we do have a range of issues …
KARVELAS:
But don’t you have to have an approach that has a basic business case? This doesn’t have a business case.
SENATOR RYAN:
But Patricia, it is exactly that sort of fanatical language that scares off investors …
KARVELAS:
You’ve either got a business case or not.
SENATOR RYAN:
For politicians to go out there and say building a new coal-fired power station would lead to the Government having ‘blood on its hands’, that is fanatical. That scares off investors. We’ve taken a neutral approach. The Prime Minister, two weeks ago, announced the potential expansion of the Snowy Hydro Scheme that would actually provide for greater energy stability and work’s being done on that over the next 12 months. And that’s exactly how the Government is looking at this – how do we provide for more affordable energy that is more secure that addresses our environmental needs?
KARVELAS:
Just a couple of issues before I let you go on your specific portfolio, the areas that you actually are in charge of – I know energy is not one of them although you’re entrenched in the debate like everyone else. On this issue of same-sex marriage, this postal plebiscite option has been looked at, it’s been confirmed that the Government has looked at this option. You are the Special Minister of State, would a postal plebiscite be a fair way to go about this?
SENATOR RYAN:
My view remains as it was last year, which is that we should have an attendance plebiscite that is, for all intents and purposes, like a referendum, which Australians are familiar with. That is the fairest, most transparent way to deal with this. It reflects the fact that we took that promise to the election. It is a relatively simple yes or no question and it is something that I think has strong public support. I remain entirely committed to that. I think it’s the fairest and most transparent way to deal with that question.
KARVELAS:
Does a postal vote not satisfy what you just described as the fairest way to do it?
SENATOR RYAN:
Our policy is to have an attendance plebiscite that is compulsory voting. I’ll let others judge how different a postal vote would be, but the Government …
KARVELAS:
Well what’s your view, do you think it’s much different?
SENATOR RYAN:
I think it would be very different. I think an attendance plebiscite that we took to the election, that I spent a lot of time designing with the Attorney General, that had every protection in place that we have at elections and referenda, it had support for both sides of the campaign, it was a process familiar to Australians, it had oversight of the electoral commission. I think that policy we took to the election as implemented is by far the best way to deal with this and that’s what the Government is committed to.
KARVELAS:
There is obviously an ongoing debate about having a free vote in the Parliament. I spoke to Trent Zimmerman on this program last week who said that he wants to see a free vote, and that’s the direction you should take. I had Tim Wilson on the program on Friday, on my ‘Backbencher Friday’ segment – a new segment, if anyone wants to listen on a Friday, it’s quite fun – where he told me also he was very sympathetic to this free vote idea. This coming on the back of 18C and the reforms there where the Government is arguing, and I know you’re very sympathetic to this, that you need people to have freedom of speech. Should your own MPs have freedom of speech to vote as they like on this issue?
SENATOR RYAN:
Well as Tim Wilson has also said, we did take a policy to the election.
KARVELAS:
The policy is dead, no one is going to vote for it.
SENATOR RYAN:
Every member of the Liberal Party, unless you’re a minister, has a right to exercise their conscience. I’ve always defended that and I always well, but the Government’s policy and the party’s policy was reflected in that election commitment and that legislation. It was reflected in the fact that Bill Shorten said a plebiscite would be ok. You mention 18C, well the arguments used against the plebiscite were quite, frankly, as offensive as the arguments used against 18C, which are ones that say we can’t trust Australians to have a fair, frank and reasonable debate. I have more faith in my fellow Australians than the Labor Party do.
KARVELAS:
Just finally, you’re taking a bill on work expenses to your party room tomorrow. Will you crack down on politicians using travel allowances to pay for privately owned property, something that annoys everybody?
SENATOR RYAN:
The Bill that I will be bringing forward implements the independent review that was brought down last year. It reinforces the independent authority that was set up earlier this year by legislation, which we put through the Parliament around a month ago. All the recommendations of that review, which go to some of the issues you raise, will be implemented over the coming months following, hopefully, the passage of this legislation.
KARVELAS:
Is there going to be any shift though on that issue of people? If anyone’s not across the issue, although I can tell you listeners are, you know, when your wife owns a house in Canberra and you can claim the $270 a night to stay in it.
SENATOR RYAN:
The background to that ruling, without going into all the history, is it has been in place for decades. It is made independently by the Remuneration Tribunal and it simply says that the easiest way to provide for an allowance for MPs when they travel – and people spend a lot of time in Canberra – is to provide a flat, per night rate, that is less than you receive in Melbourne and Sydney, reflecting that some people use their own accommodation and some people use accommodation they purchase. I rent an apartment with a colleague, for example. That is the simplest and most transparent way to deal with it, a determination made independently, not by politicians.
KARVELAS:
Senator Scott Ryan, thanks for coming on RN Drive.
SENATOR RYAN:
Thanks Patricia.
[ENDS]