TRANSCRIPT
ANNA: Treasurer, thanks for joining SBS.
CHALMERS: Thanks, Anna
ANNA: $150 energy rebates. How did you arrive at that number? And according to people who've already been speaking on the streets of Australia this morning, they've found it fairly underwhelming in terms of how much it costs to do their grocery shop every week. Why $150?
CHALMERS: This is a bit more hip pocket help for households. It recognizes that even with all of the progress we've made together as Australians on inflation, that people are still under pressure. And so it's providing more help with electricity bills for another six months, taking $150 off those electricity bills, recognizing the pressure that people are talking about in communities around Australia and feeling in communities right around Australia. My message for them would be that it's not the only thing we're doing to help with the cost of living. We've got the tax cuts rolling out, we've got cheaper medicines, we're cutting student debt, we're strengthening Medicare, because more bulk milling means less pressure on families. It's one of a number of ways that we're easing the cost of living because we know that that's still a big pressure on household budgets.
ANNA: You haven't met that $275 cut to energy bill promise. So what do you say to voters that are now increasingly distrustful about election promises?
CHALMERS: Well, we cut electricity bills by $300 last year compared to what they would have otherwise been. The official inflation numbers show that electricity bills came off by 25% last year, and that's mostly, but not entirely, because of our efforts to help people with the cost of living by providing these energy bill rebates. So we're providing this help, this hip pocket help for households in the form of energy bill rebates at the same time as we add more cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy to the system.
ANNA: One of the other big pressures on families is childcare. You have made changes, but will Australians see universal free childcare in a second Labor term of government?
CHALMERS: Well, this budget will budget for two very big and very substantial steps towards universality when it comes to early childhood education, building more early childhood education centres, particularly in areas where there is a shortage, and particularly for nonprofit providers, as well as our three day guarantee, which is all about getting the system closer to universality. The Prime Minister, the ministers, myself, the whole government, big enthusiasts for early childhood education. It's a game changer for families and for children and for the national economy, because it makes it easier for people to work more and earn more if they want to, and it gives our kids the best start in life. That's why we're investing billions of dollars in the three day guarantee in new childcare centres as well. Getting closer and closer to universality
ANNA: Is the second term universal childcare plan a possibility.
CHALMERS: Well, I'm focused on the government's fourth budget, not a fifth budget, if we get the opportunity to deliver one. We've said that universality is our objective. That's our aspiration, and in a number of budgets. Now, really most of our budgets, we've taken very big steps towards making early childhood education cheaper. Now, building more centres, the three day guarantee. All of these things are the necessary prerequisites for universality, and that's why we're investing in them in the budget.
ANNA: Can I ask you about tariffs? Could the iron or trade with China end up being under threat here? We know the US has spoken to previous Australian governments about this issue. How realistic Do you think that is as a potential problem? Is it forecast for in the budget?
CHALMERS: Well, it remains to be seen whether the Americans go down that path. Obviously, we'll get more clarity in the coming days and weeks about new policies coming from the newish administration in the United States. More broadly, the uncertainty in the global economy and these escalating trade tensions are casting a dark shadow over the global economy and over our budget. One of the reasons why our budget, which is primarily about the cost of living, is also about investing in building our future and making our economy more resilient is because we are in a new world of uncertainty and unpredictability, and that's just one example.
ANNA: When it comes to the potential hole left by the US potentially pulling out of foreign aid in the Pacific. Is this budget going to put money in at least as a contingency to fill that breach?
CHALMERS: Well, we're already investing in our region, and in my portfolio, for example, we've done a lot of work when it comes to Pacific banking, recognizing the economic challenges and also the security challenge challenges in our amongst our nearest neighbours, and so we've been engaging with enthusiasm in a considered and a methodical way. People shouldn't expect a big increase in the aid budget on Tuesday night, but they can expect us to continue to engage in the Pacific and beyond in the service of our national and economic interests.
ANNA: What about the fraying of social cohesion in our own country? How will this budget address that? What extra funding will you put in place?
CHALMERS: Well, we made it clear over the course of recent months and over the past year or so that we're making more investments in combating a division in our society, making our society more cohesive at a really challenging time. We shouldn't pretend that there aren't opportunities for people who want to divide our community. And so we've announced already a number of important investments in keeping people safe and trying to keep our community as united as we can be, people will see that in the budget.
ANNA: Got a few questions here from our readers that I wanted to put to you. Firstly, in relation to carers, a question came through asking, Why have carers been let down time and time again as their financial security is eroded. What do you say to that?
CHALMERS: Well, first of all, I think from memory, whether it was the last budget or the budget before we took some steps when it comes to carers, and I understand carers being as important as they are in our communities and in our country, that we should always be looking to do the best we can buy them. I'd also say that so much of what, of our cost of living agenda, has been informed by and guided by people who need us the most. You know, whether it's the changes to payments, whether it's the rent assistance, whether it's the getting wages moving again, whether it's the cheaper medicines, is a big part of the story for carers, I know whether it's strengthening Medicare. All of these things together are about recognizing that people are under pressure, including carers, and doing what we responsibly can to help.
ANNA: What's in this budget for pensioners?
CHALMERS: Well, a lot of the cost of living help is motivated by the pressure that pensioners are under. If you think about that, the obviously, the indexation is automatic. But in addition to that, so much of our health agenda is driven by getting out of pocket health costs down. I spend a lot of time with the pensioners, particularly the age pensioners in my local community, and I know that out of pocket health costs are a huge part of the pressure that they're under. And so strengthening Medicare, the way that we froze the PBS at $7.70 in addition to what else we're doing in the PBS system, all of that is about recognizing that pressure and doing something about it.
ANNA: The coalition has this morning, foreshadowed significantly shrinking the money being spent on the NDIS. Do you need to match that?
CHALMERS: No, and that was a new half announcement made by the coalition today, and what we know is that they make these announcements on the run, and then they typically don't come clean on what that means for Australians with a disability. We've got investment in the NDIS to a more sustainable level. It was up near 14% growth now about 8% they're now talking about something between two and 3% they need to come clean to Australians with a disability about what that means for the services that they need and deserve, and more broadly, while they're at it, this week is the perfect opportunity for them to come clean on the $600 billion in cuts that they will need to find to fund their nuclear reactors, what that means For Medicare and pensions and payments and the NDIS and veterans, they have left it far too long to come clean on that.
ANNA: It's widely accepted that the interest rate increases hurt the poorest, hardest and first. Why didn't your government do more with the levers at your disposal to help them?
CHALMERS: I don't think any objective observer of this government could conclude anything other than we have in each of our four budgets now provided as much responsible cost of living relief as we can. We permanently increase working age payments, including jobseeker we've strengthened Medicare. We've made early education cheaper. We've provided two rounds of rent assistance. We've got wages moving again, starting with the minimum wage and industries dominated by women. These are all the tax cuts. We rewrote the tax cuts so that 3 million Australians on low and middle incomes didn't miss out. So this has been our motivation to help people who need help. We know that cost of living pressures are front of mind for people, and that's why cost of living is front and centre in this budget like it was in the first three.
ANNA: Economist Chris Richardson says much of our spending is stupid. Much of our taxing is terrible. Ken Henry, who's also been active in this space in his discussions, has also talked about acts of wilful bastardry around the way wealth inequality exists in our country. What do you look back on this term and your time as treasurer and wish you could have done more to address those big issues?
CHALMERS: Well, first of all, I mean, I respect those guys that they're not always right, but I always listen to them respectfully. Chris Richardson is more or less a permanent critic of governments. His job is to get his name in the paper. My job is to make it all add up when it comes to the comments that Ken Henry has made. I worked closely with Ken, I think the world of Ken Henry and the challenge that he is describing is really the challenge I was responding to when we took that big political risk to rewrite the tax cuts so that young people got a tax cut. It's the motivation behind what we're doing in student debt, what we're doing in housing, what we're doing in fee free TAFE. All of these things are about recognizing that the pressures in our economy and in our society do fall disproportionately. That's why there's been a focus on the most vulnerable. That's why there's been a focus on young people in particular, and so I will stack up my record on helping young people with the tax cuts and housing and education and all of these ways against our predecessors, because this is a government that cares about young people. We care deeply about the intergenerational disadvantage in our country. And as treasurer, I've made it a priority as treasurer in a second term.
ANNA: If that does happen, will those big questions around the structural nature of our tax system have to be addressed?
CHALMERS: Well, we're not proposing new changes to the tax system beyond what we've already announced when it comes to raising additional revenue. We've got the PRRT changes through. We still want to get the superannuation changes through we've made changes in multinational tax with reforming income taxes. So in terms of revenue raises, we're not taking to the election a new raft of that. There'll be some additional measures in the budget around compliance and the like, as you would expect, the issue that Ken is identifying when it comes to the generational disadvantage, and particularly as it relates to young people, we have got a very substantial agenda there, and I've run through it, taken the opportunity to run through it today, but the tax cuts, the student debt relief, the issues in housing and education, all of these things are motivated by the challenge that Ken rightly identifies.
ANNA: Finally, Treasurer, when we see the budget on Tuesday, will we see a net overseas migration number which suggests Labor is the party of a big Australia?
CHALMERS: You'll see the net overseas migration forecasts will be updated. We got a number for net overseas migration, I think, last week, or certainly in the last couple of weeks, and it showed that we were 10,000 lower than what we had anticipated. We're managing net overseas migration down in a responsible and a considered and a methodical way. There are always swings and roundabouts in the forecast. It's not just about how many people are arriving, but also how many people are leaving Australia, departing Australia. And so there'll be some some modest changes to the net overseas migration forecast. You'll see them on Tuesday,
ANNA: And any changes to visa costs, we know in the past, we've seen visas be a kind of easy area for treasurers to reap in some more revenue. Is that coming this time around?
CHALMERS: Well, what we've tried to do is we've tried to make sure that the cost of visas reflect our efforts to try and get through the backlog. I think you and I have spoken about this on a number of occasions. One of the big challenges that we had in the budget and in the public service was we had this huge backlog. And so from time to time, we've changed visa charges to help fund the efforts that we've made there to get the backlog down. Not prepared to foreshadow or flag any more steps in that direction, but what we've shown is a willingness to manage the visa system in a responsible way to try and get the backlog down to more manageable levels.
ANNA: Well we thank you very much for your time, speak to you on Tuesday.
CHALMERS: Thanks very much, Anna.
