Topics: Federal Budget, political party fundraising
E&OE…
Peter van Onselen
Alright let’s discuss this outrageous “broken promise” with two men, one who knows a lot about it from the past, Ed Husic, and someone who knows a lot about it in the present, Senator Scott Ryan. Welcome to the program.
Scott Ryan
Evening, Peter.
Ed Husic
Evening, Peter.
van Onselen
Alright, is it a broken promise, Scott Ryan, honestly?
Ryan
Well let’s just take a breath….
van Onselen
You can take a breath after you’ve answered the question.
Ryan
The Finance Minister came out today and had a press conference where he outlined that special measures will be included in the Budget next week. We’re only 144 hours away from Joe Hockey getting on his feet. Let’s wait and see…
van Onselen
But that makes it a broken promise, doesn’t it?
Ryan
Let’s wait and see what’s in the Budget, Peter.
van Onselen
You’re going to come on here and refuse to talk about the deficit levy after the Finance Minister confirmed it?
Ryan
Well, the Finance Minister confirmed there will be special measures on high income earners to take the place of the fact that structural changes in the Budget that the Government will be implementing do take time to build. We’ll hear the details about that next week so let’s talk about it next week.
van Onselen
So who’s right, the Finance Minister and the Treasurer, who think that the deficit levy’s a good idea, and the Prime Minister, or Peter Costello who thinks it’s an insanely silly idea?
Ryan
Well, we all respect Peter Costello and the work he did. He faced a similar problem, a mess left by Labor, and he had to bring the Budget back into balance, and he successfully did it. We aim to emulate that and do exactly the same thing. It took ten years…
van Onselen
But he says that he thinks this is silly.
Ryan
Look, we can respectfully disagree with one another in the Liberal Party, it’s not something….
van Onselen
Do you agree with Jamie Briggs, that he’s like one of these aging footballers who’s lost his skillset?
Ryan
I was never a very good footballer so I wouldn’t comment on anyone else’s football skills, Peter. I was at best a fourths in the back pocket. Look, we can disagree with people in the Liberal Party and that is something that we’re proud of. But this…
van Onselen
Did Jamie Briggs go too far though? It was disrespectful.
Ryan
I didn’t see what he said, and knowing Jamie it was probably said and intended in entirely good nature.
Husic
Oh wow.
van Onselen
You’ve got a view on that, do you Ed Husic?
Husic
I watched it, it’s pretty gratuitous. He gave a whack to Theresa Gambaro, he gave a whack to Peter Costello and he went and gave a fairly big whack to Fairfax as well. I thought that in terms of Peter Costello, he’s backed the Liberal Party, the Coalition, even when we appointed him to the Future Fund he was writing columns critical of Labor, and then when the Coalition took government he’s been pretty supportive and he makes one comment that he thinks that this deficit levy’s a bad idea and he had Jamie Briggs go completely over the top this morning.
van Onselen
Because Labor knows how to treat it’s former senior politicians doesn’t it?
Husic
Absolutely, we do. I have to say, credit to Scott. I mean, Scott was the most diplomatic today, I heard Jamie Briggs and I heard Simon Birmingham today, I thought you were the most diplomatic of the people that…
van Onselen
He’s a lot closer to Peter Costello, I think, than those two.
Ryan
Let’s be honest here, what you described there Peter, I didn’t see it, I was at a breakfast in Mornington outside Melbourne. But I can understand how that would be a good natured comment, there’s no problem with people in the Liberal Party disagreeing. But the most important thing here is, let’s wait and see what the measures in the Budget are. It’s not that long.
van Onselen
Ok, well we don’t need to see them for me to ask you this question, I’m going to get to you about Labor’s hypocrisy in a moment Ed Husic, but let me ask you about this, do you agree with Christopher Pyne that voters will thank the Government for breaking its promise?
Ryan
Well I don’t know the context that Christopher mentioned that. I think…
van Onselen
But even just the wording, the idea that voters will be thankful for a tax increase.
Ryan
I’m not going to comment on phrases used by colleagues, the words I would use, and Christopher might not use the same words I would, so that’s not meant to be a criticism, the words I would use are that I think the voters come to respect a government that is honest with them, that makes difficult decisions…
van Onselen
So honesty in government, but not in opposition.
Ryan
… and asks them to share common sacrifice for the greater good. That’s what we did under the previous Coalition Government, the Australian community knows that they delivered a result and they know that Ed and his mates wasted it.
van Onselen
Ok I’m going to get to you to a moment, Ed Husic, I’ve got one last one though for you Senator Scott Ryan. If it’s about sharing the pain, why is there going to be a company tax cut at the same time that there’s a PAYG tax increase?
Ryan
Well, on an economic level, everywhere around the world countries have been cutting company tax, and as even the Henry Review found, corporate tax, the incidence of it eventually flows through to lower wages in particular, but also slightly higher costs for consumers. It’s about actually making investment in Australia more attractive.
van Onselen
Alright no retort to that Ed Husic, I’ve just got to ask you, it is hypocrisy for Labor to be critical of this broken promise at the same time as refusing to get out of the way in the Senate for your broken promise, which was the carbon tax from the 2010 Election.
Husic
We were constantly reminded by the Coalition of the words we took, or the position that we had, in relation to the carbon tax and they made out that would be operating at a different standard, at a higher standard, that they would…
van Onselen
So is your point that you guys are down here but they should be up here?
Husic
No, my point is that you had pictures of Tony Abbott standing in front of big blue screens with the words “cut taxes,” you had Tony Abbott say it was an absolute principle of democracy, that governments should not, and must not do one thing before an election and do the opposite afterwards.
van Onselen
But Ed Husic, you have heard my criticism of exactly that.
Husic
You’ve had all that and then they’ve come in and they’ve done the absolute opposite.
van Onselen
Absolutely, and I am critical of them for that, and you know that. However, Labor equally said there would be no carbon tax, went against that, got punished by the electorate, but is now refusing to get out of the way for the party that took to an election a desire to get rid of that and won a resounding victory.
Husic
And we took to the election a policy that said we would get rid of the carbon tax in a way that it was constructed.
van Onselen
But you lost.
Husic
But we said we would put in an ETS and we have said to the Coalition be fair dinkum, direct action is just basically a subsidy of polluters, it is not going to cut emissions, it is not going to help us meet our target, and they need to be serious about making sure we meet our 2020 target. So, they need to put in an ETS, or to be able to demonstrate an ability to cut emissions.
van Onselen
We’re not talking about the carbon tax, not with you we’re not.
Ryan
Peter there is one policy area that Labor and the Coalition went to the election agreeing on. And there were some changes, for example to the Budget, that the Coalition agreed with Labor, such as the changes to higher education funding. Yet Labor right now in the Senate is stopping us implementing not only our promises, but their promises.
van Onselen
And you know I think that’s ridiculous and you’ve managed to segue into your portfolio but we’re talking economics tonight. Structural deficit, that’s what everybody tells us needs to be dealt with. Tony Abbott himself said that we don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
Ryan
Yep.
van Onselen
Yet we learn today, from the Finance Minister, that there is a revenue grab which does nothing to address the structural deficit. Now you’re as interested in economics as the next person, that doesn’t make sense, and that’s why your good colleague from Victoria Peter Costello thinks that the deficit tax is a bad idea.
Ryan
It’s also why Senator Cormann outlined it was a temporary measure because structural changes to the Budget take time to be reflected in budget outcomes.
van Onselen
So it’s about the politics of the short term? Looking like it’s better than it is.
Ryan
Well no, hang on. Even with Peter Costello’s article yesterday, one of the areas where I did disagree with him was where he referred to this measure, the way it was mooted, the way he described it, would save $400 million in interest payments. I think that’s a significant amount of money to save for future taxpayers because it’s money we’re borrowing that they have to pay back.
van Onselen
Alright, Ed Husic, Labor’s getting a free kick here with the Government over this but at the end of the day there is a risk for your side of politics that this deficit levy ends up being seen as the “pay back Labor’s debt” levy. By the time it comes off, if it does come off ahead of the election ahead, which is what some speculation is, then it will just simply be something that had to happen because of Labor’s build-up of debt. How do you respond to that?
Husic
Hang on a second, we’re not getting a free kick, they’re kicking themselves.
van Onselen
That’s true.
Husic
They are not matching the words that they said in opposition in government and so they’re introducing what we’ve labelled as a deceit tax because clearly they said that they would cut taxes and they’re not. And they’re going through a world of pain because of the decisions they’ve made. I just want to pick up a number of points that Scott made. When we proposed reducing the corporate rate of tax, we were opposed by the coalition and in the end we had to shelve the idea…
Ryan
You couldn’t fund it.
Husic
They were never going to support it in the Senate.
Ryan
It was unfunded.
Husic
So now they’re saying…
van Onselen
Hang on, you’ve had a retort there from Senator Scott Ryan that it was unfunded. But we’re in deficit now at least then there was this theory of a surplus, that of course was never going to happen.
Ryan
It was offset. Our corporate tax cut was offset and all made clear before the election. What Ed’s talking about was a corporate tax cut that was funded by the mining tax…
van Onselen
But things are so much worse since the election, Senator, you’ve told us that though MYEFO.
Ryan
And we’ve also said we’re going to deliver on our commitments. The point I make is they promised the world, through a mining tax that collects no money. We said it was going to collect no money, they didn’t believe us and then they dropped their corporate tax cut.
Husic
I’ve got to make a comment.
van Onselen
Alright, Ed Husic.
Husic
Here’s the insanity of their position, they’re going to give a corporate tax cut while the impose a levy on big corporates for the Paid Parental Leave scheme. So you know, you explain to me the common sense in that.
van Onselen
Well it’s a corporate tax cut, just not for the top 200.
Husic
Can I just quickly make another point, and that is there’s something quite obscene about what’s going to happen next week. We’re going to have a budget that’s going to slug low and middle income Australians and the only group that’s going to profit out of this is the Liberal Party because they’re going to be raising all these funds at all these big functions next week…
Ryan
You didn’t do that?
Husic
… including one, that we discover today, that Ian Harper who heads up their competition review was going to speak at a fundraiser for Joe Hockey.
van Onselen
I want a reaction from both of you on this, because at the end of the day you’re as bad as each other. You both break your promises from one election to the after election climate, it’s your side doing it now, Senator Ryan it’s, your side, Ed Husic, that did it in the 2010 Election. When it comes to funding you’re as bad as each other once again, because buying time of the Minister is something that is long been known. I know most of you don’t like it, I’ve heard that, not from either of you, but I suspect you fall into that category, it’s the unfortunate part and parcel of politics. But voters are cynical, commentators are even getting cynical. Unfortunately maybe we’re contributing it to it with our negativity on this but how do you respond? How does either side, without attacking each other, how does either side restore the public faith in politicians? Because I know both you gentlemen, and most of your colleagues in the Parliament are there to do good things, but there is an image problem and it is sparked by difficult and sometimes contradictory decisions that are taken along the way. What do you do to get it back?
Husic
Well I think from our perspective, we went through the events of the 2013 Election and we paid a high price for, again, the public believing that we were doing something that we said we wouldn’t do and I think that there’s, and we have swapped notes on this, that there will be a generation of us that have learned through a heavy price, that you do need to perform better, and I think there is that. I genuinely think that, as I said a few months ago, I think it’s wrong that the Liberal Party’s going to profit next week getting a whole bunch of people to raise funds…
van Onselen
There you go, you’re being partisan again. I don’t want to be partisan on this one. I think both sides do these sort of things and I know that the public’s cynical about it, I accept that you point out the Liberals but Labor does similar things as well. How do we get a reaction from you Scott Ryan? We’ve heard Ed Husic, other than the last part where you got partisan, we’ve heard a quality answer there, what’s your response, how do we deal with it?
Ryan
I think the hung Parliament was very destructive. We have seen hung Parliaments occasionally work and it did function without instability in Victoria when Steve Bracks won an election with a hung Parliament and it did work in New South Wales when John Fahey was Premier, albeit with a hung Parliament and independents controlling the balance of power. I think the hung Parliament was very destructive last time because primarily people didn’t seem to know what was going to happen the next day and I think that the Greens in particular bear a great deal of responsibility for that. And of course if I could finish on this, our criticism of Labor was that they never stood up to them.
van Onselen
But I’m telling you what, what’s going on at the moment, the Greens are thriving at Labor’s expense, Clive Palmer’s party’s probably going to thrive at the Coaltion’s expense because of the deficit tax but we are out of time, I’m sure you’re both really disappointed in that. Senator Scott Ryan, Ed Husic, representing the Labor Party, thanks very much for both your company, much appreciated.
Ryan
Thanks Peter.
Husic
Thank you.
(Ends)