For the video of this program, click here.
LYNDAL CURTIS
First to you, Gai, the polls are not good for the government, and the fight on the carbon tax doesn’t seem to be getting any easier. Where to for the government?
GAI BRODTMANNLyndal, first of all, I just want to reiterate that we don’t comment on polls. They go up, they go down, they turn on a dime – so I’m not going to be commenting on the polls. What we’re introducing at the moment with the carbon price is major reform, and introducing major reform is hard. It was hard in the 80s when Hawke and Keating deregulated the economy, it was hard in the 90s when Howard introduced the GST. These sorts of things are major, major, significant changes for the Australian economy. They’re nation building changes. They’re designed to ensure that we have a secure and prosperous future for the economy for jobs. It’s hard – reform is hard – but we are committed to this reform and we are committed to ensuring that Australia is a prosperous nation in the future.
LYNDAL CURTISScott, is the public just picking up on the sound and fury that always goes before a major reform being legislated?
SCOTT RYANLyndal, firstly, this is not a major reform – but if we just put that to one side for a moment – what the polls reflect is a growing frustration with a government that has lost its direction, that is breaking all its promises, that is at war with everyone in the community. Industry groups – forty of them – have written to the Prime Minister. The energy sector doesn’t like the carbon tax, the transport sector doesn’t like the carbon tax, food manufacturing – our biggest manufacturing centre – doesn’t like the carbon tax. They’re only the ones that are included. Small business hasn’t even been asked to be on the carbon tax roundtable, and we all know what they think of it. They’re scared of increases in their cost of doing business and not being able to pass those on to consumers. That’s what the polls reflect.
LYNDAL CURTISBut Scott, in the letter today, the organisations don’t say that they don’t like a carbon tax, they say they agree effective action to tackle climate change requires comprehensive and sustained action by all major global emitting nations and that Australia must play its part. Aren’t they seeking to put their case into the negotiations, rather than saying ‘we don’t want the tax at all’?
SCOTT RYANWell what they’re expressing is a fear that the so called compensation – which is only necessary because a tax is being introduced in the first place – is actually still going to leave them worse off, at a competitive disadvantage, especially those that are export exposed or exposed to imports, and not be able to effectively compete and provide jobs for Australians.
LYNDAL CURTISGai, even if these are ambit claims from businesses and the unions, they’re setting the bar pretty high for the government and you would think it’s not a bar the government can leap – especially the Workers Union’s call for no jobs being lost.
GAI BRODTMANNWell I think that this is all just part of the healthy, robust debate about this issue. The industry organisations, the peak associations, the unions are all out doing their job. They’re out actually advocating for their members and ensuring that their members’ voices are heard. This is all part of the robust democracy that we have in Australia and also robust discussion on this major piece of reform. I think that in terms of the issues that they’re concerned about, this will all come out in the roundtables that are taking place over the coming months and in the working groups that are coming out in the coming months. There’s plenty of time for discussion. It needs to calm down, as Ged Kearney said today, it needs to calm down, as Paul Howes said today. We all need to get round the table and discuss this in a productive and constructive way. As you say, lots of industry and the unions support a carbon price. It’s now a case of actually working out the way forward.
LYNDAL CURTISIs there a problem, though, in working out that way forward if the public actually has stopped listening to your government and stopped listening to Julia Gillard?
GAI BRODTMANNI think they are still listening. There was healthy debate on it this morning on local radio, on 666. What we’ve made clear already is the fact that we are going to be compensating low income households, compensating middle income households, compensating those in fixed incomes such as pensioners up to 50% of what we glean from the carbon price. We’re also going to be providing assistance to industry as well as investing in clean energy technology. So that is clear. What we now need to discuss is the detail and consult with industry, peak associations, with community organisations and with the unions. This is all part of the process. Consultation is a good thing. It’s good that these people are out representing the views of their members and advocating for their members.
LYNDAL CURTISScott, while the government’s falling in the opinion polls and Julia Gillard is too, that support isn’t going to Tony Abbott, he has a net negative on satisfaction just like Julia Gillard. His numbers on preferred Prime Minister are below that of Julia Gillard, why isn’t he getting the benefit of the opposition from the Coalition rising in the polls?
SCOTT RYANWell Lyndal, that’s not a fair representation of what we’re seeing today. Tony Abbott has led the campaign against the waste and mismanagement of Labor, he’s led the campaign against Julia Gillard’s broken promise on the carbon tax. Australians do not have faith in this government. The only leadership issue is the one on the Labor Party’s side.
LYNDAL CURTISBut more people disapprove of Tony Abbott than approve of him. How do you explain that?
SCOTT RYANThe point is that the job of opposition is to point out the flaws of the government and to put up an alternative. When we go back to the issue of climate change, only one leader went to the last election with a policy to deal with it, and that was Tony Abbott.
GAI BRODTMANNOK Scott, the job of opposition is to put up an alternative. What is your alternative for the climate change issue? You’ve got direct action, but what’s the actual detail, and what’s it actually going to cost the Australian taxpayer?
SCOTT RYANWe have outlined, and we have costed, the direct action policy. Everyone knows what it’s going to cost, everyone contributes to it by virtue of them paying their taxes…
GAI BRODTMANNWhat is it?
SCOTT RYAN… it’s the Labor Party that will not give out a price on carbon. They will not tell people …
GAI BRODTMANNIt’s still being negotiated…
SCOTT RYANThey will not tell people exactly how much it’s going to impact on their home. They’re not going to tell businesses how much it’s going to impact on them. All we hear are mythical promises of compensation for a tax that Labor promised they would never introduce.
GAI BRODTMANNYou’re talking about mythical alternatives. What is the detail of the direct action plan, and what is the cost to Australian taxpayers?
SCOTT RYANThe detail of the direct action plan came out last year. We are talking about reforestation, we are talking about carbon in our soils – things that have benefits for the environment and for our agricultural productivity. The policy was put out and comfortably costed before the last election. What Labor wants to do now is run away from the promise that Julia Gillard made – “There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead” – nothing they say can allow them to run away from that commitment.
LYNDAL CURTISGai, will the problems be resolved, or do you have to wait for your poll numbers to improve to deliver? That’s the end game, isn’t it? You have to deliver on a number of fronts – on the carbon tax, on the mining tax, on the poker machine reforms.
GAI BRODTMANNWe have a major vision for this country in terms of ensuring that we are prosperous and strong in the future. The thing is that we are not focussed on the polls, we are focussed on delivering policy. That’s what we’re doing. We’re focussing on acting on climate change. That’s what we’re doing. We’re acting on child care issues, we’re acting on health, we’re acting on education reform, we’re acting on reform in a whole range of areas. We have a vision for this country’s future and we’re acting on it.
LYNDAL CURTISIt’s a lot of balls, though, to be up in the air?
GAI BRODTMANNIt is, but the thing is that when you do have plans and when you do have a long-term vision for this country, then you do need to act in a range of ways and you do need to hit a range of areas, because most of these areas were neglected under the Howard Government.
SCOTT RYANGai, I’ll tell you some things that never happened under the Howard Government, there was never talk of cutting medical research funding – it was doubled. You don’t deal with health by cutting medical research funding. There wasn’t talk of cutting child care rebates. Both of these are being mooted now which the Labor Party won’t deny. You don’t create jobs by taxing them.
LYNDAL CURTISScott Ryan, if we could move to the budget, one of the things the Nielsen poll showed this morning is that most people – in fact just over 60% of people – think it’s important to get to a budget surplus, but think the government could probably wait a couple of years. Do you think that’s reflective of the view in the community?
SCOTT RYANI think it reflects a complete lack of faith in the government to be able to deliver a budget surplus, Lyndal. There’s a moral component to this, which is that every dollar that is borrowed today is something that is going to be paid back by future workers. A $40 billion budget deficit is utterly and completely unsustainable, as well as being unfair to future Australians.
LYNDAL CURTISAnd yet you’ve just opposed two of the areas that might be cut under the budget. How does the government get to a surplus if the opposition wants to block its cuts?
SCOTT RYANWell Lyndal, I tell you, after they wasted billions of dollars on pink batts in roofs – which they were warned about – after they wasted billions of dollars on school halls which are still being wasted, I tell you what doesn’t come first in cutting the budget and that’s health and medical research funding.
LYNDAL CURTISGai, you’re preparing for what the Treasurer, the Prime Minister, the Finance Minister have all said will be a tough budget. You will likely lose a bit more skin along the way, won’t you, as a government?
GAI BRODTMANNLook Lyndal, I don’t know what’s in the budget and I’m looking forward as much as everyone to budget night and hearing what’s in it. In terms of what we’re doing, in terms of the child care issue that’s come up today, let’s go back to our record of achievement. In the time that we’ve been in government, we have increased the child care rebate from 30% to 50%. That has reduced the cost of household child care fees by about 6% over about 6 years. It’s a significant achievement. In terms of the health research, we’ve invested hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars into health research and $700 million in terms of the National Health and Medical Research Centre. There’s significant investment that we’ve made in these areas, but in terms of commenting on the budget, I don’t know what’s in it and I won’t be in a position to do that until May.
LYNDAL CURTISScott, going to back to my earlier point, do you think it’s a good look for the Coalition to be saying the government should get the budget back into surplus, but not agreeing with the cuts?
SCOTT RYANWhat we’re doing, Lyndal, is actually protecting households from the rapacious spending that’s driving up inflation that this government’s undertaking. Households of Australia should not be punished for the waste of the government.
LYNDAL CURTISBut if the government wants to wind back its spending, shouldn’t you support it?
SCOTT RYANWell it depends where, Lyndal. We’re not going to see Australian households punished for the waste of this government.
GAI BRODTMANNThe thing is, we are strongly committed to a budget surplus by 2012-13. What we need to remember, too, is the investment that we’ve made in saving this country from the Global Financial Crisis and saving this country from recession and in the process creating 750,000 jobs. There’s not many countries in the world that can laud those sorts of achievements…
SCOTT RYANThey did not create 750,000 jobs. Not even Wayne Swan at the height of his fibs about the package claimed that. What the government has done is turn a $20 billion surplus – money that was there for a rainy day – into record levels of debt. Running up more than $100 billion in debt in only a few short years. Australian households should not have to pay in for a government that cannot bring its own accounts into order.
LYNDAL CURTISAnd Gai, that’s just one sign, but you will have trouble getting some of these budget measures through the Parliament.
GAI BRODTMANNI don’t know what the budget measures are, so I can’t comment on that.
LYNDAL CURTISGai Brodtmann and Scott Ryan, that’s where we’ll have to leave Capital Hill for today. Thank you very much for joining us.