Interview on ABC24 Capital Hill - 14 August 2013
Campaign Transcript
TRANSCRIPT OF ANDREW LEIGH, MEMBER FOR FRASER
ABC NEWS24 INTERVIEW
PARLIAMENT HOUSE
14 AUGUST 2013
E & O E – PROOF ONLY
_____________________________________________________________
Subjects: Preferences, PEFO and budget honesty, Trade Training Centres.
_____________________________________________________________
LYNDAL CURTIS: But now joining me to discuss the day's events Labor member for Fraser Andrew Leigh. We were expected to be joined by the Liberals Senate
candidate in the ACT Zed Seselja but he is not here. Andrew Leigh, welcome. We will start with Labor so far refusing to agree to the Liberals'
demands that it preference the Greens last at the Federal election. For the first time Tony Abbott will preference Labor over the Greens. The move
mostly harms the Greens chances in their first and only lower house seat of Melbourne.
ADAM BANDT: The reality is that people are able to allocate their own preferences. In Melbourne, I think there will be a lot of people from across the political
spectrum, including those who are aligned to the Liberal Party who won't be happy with Tony Abbott directing them to send their preferences to a
Labor backbencher.
TONY ABBOTT: Frankly, I say to Mr Rudd, this is a test of your leadership. Are you man enough to say to the Greens I am going to say to the Greens I am going to
put you last?
LYNDAL CURTIS: Andrew, the floor is yours this afternoon. Is there a chance that the move by the Opposition will actually help the Labor Party?
ANDREW LEIGH: First, I am sorry that Zed Seselja is not here. I would have enjoyed the debate with him today and certainly Gary Humphries I don't think would ever
have stood you up like this. So, it is a disappointment there. The Liberal Party gave Adam Bandt his seat there last time by virtue of directing
preferences to him. So, by taking that away I think Cath Bowtell has a strong showing. I think Cath Bowtell is a great candidate and would make a
great member for Melbourne.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Labor is under pressure in other seats, particularly inner city seats. There is a seat of Batman in Melbourne and even Anthony Albanese's seat and
Tanya Plibersek's seat of Sydney. Do you think David Feeney in Batman and Mr Albanese and Ms Plibersek will be breathing a little bit of a sigh of
relief at this announcement?
ANDREW LEIGH: Certainly I think it has electoral outcomes in some of those seats and better informed pundits than me will look at that. I would be very happy to run
on our environmental record, our small-G green record for this election. The world's biggest network of marine parks and an historic price on carbon
pollution and finally sorting out the Murray Darling Basin mess after more than a century of mucking around. It is hard to find a term in the Federal
Parliament where we have passed as much good environmental reform as this one.
LYDNAL CURTIS: Labor Party people, including Anthony Albanese, have been critical of the Greens. Mr Albanese called them parasitic. Chris Bowen says the Labor
Party shouldn't ever have another agreement of the sort it had in the last parliament. Did the Labor Party err, having the formal agreement it had
with the Greens in order to get back into Government because the Greens weren't ever going to support the Liberal Party were they?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think they were very special circumstances and it is very hard to see them being repeated again. Mr Bowen is right when he says we shouldn't
strike that sort of formal agreement in the future.
LYNDAL CURTIS: There are seats where you need Greens support to win aren't there?
ANDREW LEIGH: We certainly get preferences from Greens voters and I, in my own electorate last time, got a range of preferences from Greens supporters. I think
they recognise that Labor has a great track record in environmental reform, in areas like social justice, on the question, for example, of same sex
marriage where Mr Abbott thinks it is a fashion. My own view is that love never goes out of fashion.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The Labor Party always trumpets the last parliament because of the amount of legislation that got passed, because of the things that were done. Is
there a perception that this parliament, at the very least, was a very bitter battle and that people wouldn't like to see a minority Government again?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think there was, Laura Tingle has used the phrase ‘scratchiness’ to describe the national conversation and that nicely sums up some of the
conversation on the last three years. Almost inevitable I think of tight numbers in the parliament of Mr Abbott choosing to focus almost purely on
the negative over that period. But we got an extraordinary amount of stuff done. You look at the reform record of the last parliament and it stacks up
so well. Things like DisabilityCare passing the parliament. A profits-based mining tax replacing the old royalties tax which didn't make much sense
to anyone. Getting the seat on the UN Security Council - it didn't go through the parliament but it is an amazing step forward for Australia.
LYNDAL CURTIS: I want to ask you a question about the ACT. The Greens are running a Senate candidate. Been lots of attempts to effectively unseat the Senate
spot that usually goes to the Liberals. Is there enough, do you believe, of a solid Liberal vote in the ACT to keep that seat with the Liberals and
anyone who attempts to get it will fail?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think Mr Seselja is clearly favourite in this race but Simon Sheikh will have the best shot of any Greens candidate who has run in the last ecade.
Mr Seselja won a controversial pre-selection against Gary Humphries who wanted to serve another term in the parliament. That will disenchant a
lot of ACT voters. Also, Simon Sheikh is a pretty seasoned grass roots performer and has been very much out and about in the electorate. He has
good chance but he is the underdog.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The release of the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook has done little to abate the vow over costings. The Opposition says the budget
numbers are still too volatile even though they match the economic statement of a fortnight ago, fuelling Government claims the Opposition's
hiding its plans to cut jobs and services.
JOE HOCKEY: The figures that came out yesterday clearly indicate that there is an enormous amount of potential volatility in the numbers. We are not going to do
what Labor does and make rash promises.
PENNY WONG: We won't do what Labor does and make forecasts that could vary. Let's remember why this statement is put out, it is because Peter Costello set up
the honesty and I pay him credit for that. It is a good thing and it means that the election campaign is there and the public and parties know
precisely what the Budget position is.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Andrew, you're an economist. The pre-election economic and fiscal outlook had in it what the Treasury said were confidence intervals around
forecasts saying there was part of the forecasts they were 70% confident about and showing a larger range that they could be more confident
about. Should those things about be part of every Budget that a Government delivers. Do they help people in understanding that forecasts are just
forecasts?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think they are. When I was on the House of Representatives economics committee, the Reserve Bank began publishing confidence intervals
around their forecasts and I was urging them to do that with all their forecasts. It reminds us, like weather forecasting, economic forecasting is not
a perfect science. But the numbers are out now, the Coalition has lost their last remaining fig leaf and it is time for them to start bringing out those
policies. The sooner they do that the better, then we can have a contest about ideas rather than the Coalition running this Campbell Newman
approach of a secret commission of cuts.
LYNDAL CURTIS: But the Coalition says it has put a range of policies to the Parliamentary Budget Office. Will the Government accept the costings from the PBO if
the Opposition puts them out?
ANDREW LEIGH: Absolutely we will. What the Australian people expect is a full suite of policies from the Coalition. They haven't gotten that to date. They have dribs
and drabs. They have claims about savings. For example, when Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey released their company tax cut, they claimed that they
had previously announced savings that would pay for it. It just wasn't true. They had announced savings which were completely gobbled up by
their tax cut for big miners and polluters leaving the company tax cut entirely unfunded. It is not good for democracy if the Australian people can't
judge properly costed policies. If all they have from Mr Abbott is attack lines and secret plans rather than being honest about what he will do.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Although, the Coalition raises the Labor Party in 2007, when it was Opposition released its costings the day before the election. Both sides have
had problems in this area haven't they?
ANDREW LEIGH: But it has never been more important for the Opposition to come forward and the reason for that is they have spent the last three years saying yes to
every special interest but no to every reasonable saving. Having said no, for example, to our saving on fringe benefits tax for cars, saying you need
to produce evidence if you want to claim a tax deduction on using your car for business use. That is nearly $2 billion that they have to find in
reduced services or increased taxes. It is why we are asking reasonable questions about whether they will continue the Better Schools reforms and
whether they will cut from hospitals or cut more public servants or consider raising the GST.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Cut more public servants than effectively the Government has done by proposing - imposing successive efficiency dividends?
ANDREW LEIGH: We expect that to be met first and foremost through non-staffing reductions. They have been in the senior levels of the public service where the
growth has been five times as fast as the more junior levels. We are concerned about an imbalance there. The Coalition will just cut across the
board, two-year hiring freeze and at least 12,000 gone but maybe up to 20,000 or more.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Would it be easier for the public service to look at non-staff cost cutting if you hadn't imposed what have been successive efficiency dividends over
the last few years?
ANDREW LEIGH: The efficiency dividend has been tough on public service agencies, there is no denying that and I hear that when I am speaking with my
constituents around town. What that points to is we're well beyond cutting through fat. The Coalition, if they were to cut these 12,000 jobs would be
cutting deep into bone. They would be stripping away services that Australian families rely on and the expectation that Australian families have
that they will have a country where they can go to a family assistance office, where they can get help overseas if they have an emergency, where
they will get assistance with a Medicare claim and where public servants will do great management of programs. All that is at threat if you strip away
and attack the public service as the Coalition look like doing.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The PM Kevin Rudd began talking about the need to skill young people when he was Opposition Leader in 2007. It is a theme he has returned to
in the second week of the campaign, hoping to remind voters of his record in the top job the first time around.
KEVIN RUDD: One of the first undertakings I gave way back then as Leader of the Opposition was to build trades training centres across Australia. It is part of
building the country's future. These things don't just appear out of thin air and they are here because Governments decided to make them happen.
That is why across the nation today we are announcing that the total number of trades training centres that we are having nationally will now rise
to more than 500.
CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Today he has announced 137 new trades training centres at a cost per centre of $1.1 million. The only problem is that the trade training
centres that built over the last six years have cost on average about $3.4 million. The public will never see 137 trade training centres at the
rice tag of $200 million.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Do you accept and I spoke to Bill Shorten about this earlier, that the project that was started in 2007 is not yet completed, it was a 10-year program
but as Christopher Pyne says, you're behind in the schedule?
ANDREW LEIGH: Those Trade Training Centres are rolling out across the country and they are delivering amazing results for kids. I ever been into some of the
centres where you can see children staying at school, who might have otherwise dropped out but for trades training centres and also students
having the opportunity to dip a toe in the water of a trade, to try a bit of hospitality, carpentry and metal work without signing up for a full
apprenticeship. They are getting the skills for the future within that context of school where they can also get great science, literacy and numeracy
skills at the same time.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Is the aim to ever the people who do that move onto apprenticeships because there have been problems particularly with completion rates for
apprenticeships, people taking them up and failing to complete them up and failing to complete them?
ANDREW LEIGH: Some will and some won't but this is absolutely a way of reducing that problem of apprenticeship completion because students can try a trade
while they are at school. They don't have to commit entirely and I think we get a better fit. There will always better fit. There will always be students
that move around with different education programs. You might have done a bit yourself in your studies. I know I did. Certainly those Trade
Training Centres I think are part of building an education system for the future and they are at risk if the Coalition is elected. They aren't fans of
Trade Training Centres, just as they're not fans of the Better Schools reforms.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The Coalition Governments in the past have been fans of apprenticeships haven't they?
ANDREW LEIGH: Apprenticeships are fine and well but Trade Training Centres fill an important gap. If you look at how to get the high wage, high skill jobs in the
future it will be through investing in education right now. With an economic in transition, more than ever before you need to invest in education.
That is not just schools and universities, it is also getting trades training right. We need the education system to get better and we need the
infrastructure, the NBN, the roads, rails and ports that we have historically invested in.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Andrew Leigh thanks for your time.
ANDREW LEIGH: Thanks Lyndal.
ENDS
Campaign Transcript
TRANSCRIPT OF ANDREW LEIGH, MEMBER FOR FRASER
ABC NEWS24 INTERVIEW
PARLIAMENT HOUSE
14 AUGUST 2013
E & O E – PROOF ONLY
_____________________________________________________________
Subjects: Preferences, PEFO and budget honesty, Trade Training Centres.
_____________________________________________________________
LYNDAL CURTIS: But now joining me to discuss the day's events Labor member for Fraser Andrew Leigh. We were expected to be joined by the Liberals Senate
candidate in the ACT Zed Seselja but he is not here. Andrew Leigh, welcome. We will start with Labor so far refusing to agree to the Liberals'
demands that it preference the Greens last at the Federal election. For the first time Tony Abbott will preference Labor over the Greens. The move
mostly harms the Greens chances in their first and only lower house seat of Melbourne.
ADAM BANDT: The reality is that people are able to allocate their own preferences. In Melbourne, I think there will be a lot of people from across the political
spectrum, including those who are aligned to the Liberal Party who won't be happy with Tony Abbott directing them to send their preferences to a
Labor backbencher.
TONY ABBOTT: Frankly, I say to Mr Rudd, this is a test of your leadership. Are you man enough to say to the Greens I am going to say to the Greens I am going to
put you last?
LYNDAL CURTIS: Andrew, the floor is yours this afternoon. Is there a chance that the move by the Opposition will actually help the Labor Party?
ANDREW LEIGH: First, I am sorry that Zed Seselja is not here. I would have enjoyed the debate with him today and certainly Gary Humphries I don't think would ever
have stood you up like this. So, it is a disappointment there. The Liberal Party gave Adam Bandt his seat there last time by virtue of directing
preferences to him. So, by taking that away I think Cath Bowtell has a strong showing. I think Cath Bowtell is a great candidate and would make a
great member for Melbourne.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Labor is under pressure in other seats, particularly inner city seats. There is a seat of Batman in Melbourne and even Anthony Albanese's seat and
Tanya Plibersek's seat of Sydney. Do you think David Feeney in Batman and Mr Albanese and Ms Plibersek will be breathing a little bit of a sigh of
relief at this announcement?
ANDREW LEIGH: Certainly I think it has electoral outcomes in some of those seats and better informed pundits than me will look at that. I would be very happy to run
on our environmental record, our small-G green record for this election. The world's biggest network of marine parks and an historic price on carbon
pollution and finally sorting out the Murray Darling Basin mess after more than a century of mucking around. It is hard to find a term in the Federal
Parliament where we have passed as much good environmental reform as this one.
LYDNAL CURTIS: Labor Party people, including Anthony Albanese, have been critical of the Greens. Mr Albanese called them parasitic. Chris Bowen says the Labor
Party shouldn't ever have another agreement of the sort it had in the last parliament. Did the Labor Party err, having the formal agreement it had
with the Greens in order to get back into Government because the Greens weren't ever going to support the Liberal Party were they?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think they were very special circumstances and it is very hard to see them being repeated again. Mr Bowen is right when he says we shouldn't
strike that sort of formal agreement in the future.
LYNDAL CURTIS: There are seats where you need Greens support to win aren't there?
ANDREW LEIGH: We certainly get preferences from Greens voters and I, in my own electorate last time, got a range of preferences from Greens supporters. I think
they recognise that Labor has a great track record in environmental reform, in areas like social justice, on the question, for example, of same sex
marriage where Mr Abbott thinks it is a fashion. My own view is that love never goes out of fashion.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The Labor Party always trumpets the last parliament because of the amount of legislation that got passed, because of the things that were done. Is
there a perception that this parliament, at the very least, was a very bitter battle and that people wouldn't like to see a minority Government again?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think there was, Laura Tingle has used the phrase ‘scratchiness’ to describe the national conversation and that nicely sums up some of the
conversation on the last three years. Almost inevitable I think of tight numbers in the parliament of Mr Abbott choosing to focus almost purely on
the negative over that period. But we got an extraordinary amount of stuff done. You look at the reform record of the last parliament and it stacks up
so well. Things like DisabilityCare passing the parliament. A profits-based mining tax replacing the old royalties tax which didn't make much sense
to anyone. Getting the seat on the UN Security Council - it didn't go through the parliament but it is an amazing step forward for Australia.
LYNDAL CURTIS: I want to ask you a question about the ACT. The Greens are running a Senate candidate. Been lots of attempts to effectively unseat the Senate
spot that usually goes to the Liberals. Is there enough, do you believe, of a solid Liberal vote in the ACT to keep that seat with the Liberals and
anyone who attempts to get it will fail?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think Mr Seselja is clearly favourite in this race but Simon Sheikh will have the best shot of any Greens candidate who has run in the last ecade.
Mr Seselja won a controversial pre-selection against Gary Humphries who wanted to serve another term in the parliament. That will disenchant a
lot of ACT voters. Also, Simon Sheikh is a pretty seasoned grass roots performer and has been very much out and about in the electorate. He has
good chance but he is the underdog.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The release of the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook has done little to abate the vow over costings. The Opposition says the budget
numbers are still too volatile even though they match the economic statement of a fortnight ago, fuelling Government claims the Opposition's
hiding its plans to cut jobs and services.
JOE HOCKEY: The figures that came out yesterday clearly indicate that there is an enormous amount of potential volatility in the numbers. We are not going to do
what Labor does and make rash promises.
PENNY WONG: We won't do what Labor does and make forecasts that could vary. Let's remember why this statement is put out, it is because Peter Costello set up
the honesty and I pay him credit for that. It is a good thing and it means that the election campaign is there and the public and parties know
precisely what the Budget position is.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Andrew, you're an economist. The pre-election economic and fiscal outlook had in it what the Treasury said were confidence intervals around
forecasts saying there was part of the forecasts they were 70% confident about and showing a larger range that they could be more confident
about. Should those things about be part of every Budget that a Government delivers. Do they help people in understanding that forecasts are just
forecasts?
ANDREW LEIGH: I think they are. When I was on the House of Representatives economics committee, the Reserve Bank began publishing confidence intervals
around their forecasts and I was urging them to do that with all their forecasts. It reminds us, like weather forecasting, economic forecasting is not
a perfect science. But the numbers are out now, the Coalition has lost their last remaining fig leaf and it is time for them to start bringing out those
policies. The sooner they do that the better, then we can have a contest about ideas rather than the Coalition running this Campbell Newman
approach of a secret commission of cuts.
LYNDAL CURTIS: But the Coalition says it has put a range of policies to the Parliamentary Budget Office. Will the Government accept the costings from the PBO if
the Opposition puts them out?
ANDREW LEIGH: Absolutely we will. What the Australian people expect is a full suite of policies from the Coalition. They haven't gotten that to date. They have dribs
and drabs. They have claims about savings. For example, when Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey released their company tax cut, they claimed that they
had previously announced savings that would pay for it. It just wasn't true. They had announced savings which were completely gobbled up by
their tax cut for big miners and polluters leaving the company tax cut entirely unfunded. It is not good for democracy if the Australian people can't
judge properly costed policies. If all they have from Mr Abbott is attack lines and secret plans rather than being honest about what he will do.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Although, the Coalition raises the Labor Party in 2007, when it was Opposition released its costings the day before the election. Both sides have
had problems in this area haven't they?
ANDREW LEIGH: But it has never been more important for the Opposition to come forward and the reason for that is they have spent the last three years saying yes to
every special interest but no to every reasonable saving. Having said no, for example, to our saving on fringe benefits tax for cars, saying you need
to produce evidence if you want to claim a tax deduction on using your car for business use. That is nearly $2 billion that they have to find in
reduced services or increased taxes. It is why we are asking reasonable questions about whether they will continue the Better Schools reforms and
whether they will cut from hospitals or cut more public servants or consider raising the GST.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Cut more public servants than effectively the Government has done by proposing - imposing successive efficiency dividends?
ANDREW LEIGH: We expect that to be met first and foremost through non-staffing reductions. They have been in the senior levels of the public service where the
growth has been five times as fast as the more junior levels. We are concerned about an imbalance there. The Coalition will just cut across the
board, two-year hiring freeze and at least 12,000 gone but maybe up to 20,000 or more.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Would it be easier for the public service to look at non-staff cost cutting if you hadn't imposed what have been successive efficiency dividends over
the last few years?
ANDREW LEIGH: The efficiency dividend has been tough on public service agencies, there is no denying that and I hear that when I am speaking with my
constituents around town. What that points to is we're well beyond cutting through fat. The Coalition, if they were to cut these 12,000 jobs would be
cutting deep into bone. They would be stripping away services that Australian families rely on and the expectation that Australian families have
that they will have a country where they can go to a family assistance office, where they can get help overseas if they have an emergency, where
they will get assistance with a Medicare claim and where public servants will do great management of programs. All that is at threat if you strip away
and attack the public service as the Coalition look like doing.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The PM Kevin Rudd began talking about the need to skill young people when he was Opposition Leader in 2007. It is a theme he has returned to
in the second week of the campaign, hoping to remind voters of his record in the top job the first time around.
KEVIN RUDD: One of the first undertakings I gave way back then as Leader of the Opposition was to build trades training centres across Australia. It is part of
building the country's future. These things don't just appear out of thin air and they are here because Governments decided to make them happen.
That is why across the nation today we are announcing that the total number of trades training centres that we are having nationally will now rise
to more than 500.
CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Today he has announced 137 new trades training centres at a cost per centre of $1.1 million. The only problem is that the trade training
centres that built over the last six years have cost on average about $3.4 million. The public will never see 137 trade training centres at the
rice tag of $200 million.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Do you accept and I spoke to Bill Shorten about this earlier, that the project that was started in 2007 is not yet completed, it was a 10-year program
but as Christopher Pyne says, you're behind in the schedule?
ANDREW LEIGH: Those Trade Training Centres are rolling out across the country and they are delivering amazing results for kids. I ever been into some of the
centres where you can see children staying at school, who might have otherwise dropped out but for trades training centres and also students
having the opportunity to dip a toe in the water of a trade, to try a bit of hospitality, carpentry and metal work without signing up for a full
apprenticeship. They are getting the skills for the future within that context of school where they can also get great science, literacy and numeracy
skills at the same time.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Is the aim to ever the people who do that move onto apprenticeships because there have been problems particularly with completion rates for
apprenticeships, people taking them up and failing to complete them up and failing to complete them?
ANDREW LEIGH: Some will and some won't but this is absolutely a way of reducing that problem of apprenticeship completion because students can try a trade
while they are at school. They don't have to commit entirely and I think we get a better fit. There will always better fit. There will always be students
that move around with different education programs. You might have done a bit yourself in your studies. I know I did. Certainly those Trade
Training Centres I think are part of building an education system for the future and they are at risk if the Coalition is elected. They aren't fans of
Trade Training Centres, just as they're not fans of the Better Schools reforms.
LYNDAL CURTIS: The Coalition Governments in the past have been fans of apprenticeships haven't they?
ANDREW LEIGH: Apprenticeships are fine and well but Trade Training Centres fill an important gap. If you look at how to get the high wage, high skill jobs in the
future it will be through investing in education right now. With an economic in transition, more than ever before you need to invest in education.
That is not just schools and universities, it is also getting trades training right. We need the education system to get better and we need the
infrastructure, the NBN, the roads, rails and ports that we have historically invested in.
LYNDAL CURTIS: Andrew Leigh thanks for your time.
ANDREW LEIGH: Thanks Lyndal.
ENDS
ACT secures three new trade training centres - 14 Aug 2013
JOINT MEDIA RELEASE
Minister for Education Bill Shorten / Minister Assisting for Industry and Innovation Kate Lundy / Member for Canberra Gai Brodtmann / Member for Fraser Andrew Leigh
$9.4 MILLION FOR THREE NEW TRADE TRAINING CENTRES IN ACT
The Rudd Labor Government today announced $9.4 million for three new Trade Training Centres in the Australian Capital Territory.
This investment is part of our positive plan to ensure all Australian students are given every opportunity to secure high skill, high wage jobs beyond the China mining investment boom.
Through this new investment, Trade Training Centres will be established at:
- Marist College Canberra
- Trinity Christian School
- University of Canberra Senior Secondary College Lake Ginninderra
The University of Canberra Senior Secondary College Lake Ginninderra Trade Training Centre will benefit students in the greater Belconnen area and will lead students at:
- Belconnen High
- Canberra High
- Hawker College
- Kingsford Smith School
- Melba Copland Secondary School Copland Campus
- University of Canberra High School Kaleen
It is part of a national announcement led by the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd which will see thousands of students in 225 schools across Australia benefit from new training opportunities in 137 new Trade Training Centres.
Federal Labor will continue to invest in new Trade Training Centres if re-elected to ensure young Australians gain the skills they need to compete for the jobs of tomorrow.
Trade Training Centres in schools will address skill shortages in traditional trades and emerging industries by equipping schools with the state-of-the-art industry standard facilities they need.
The Prime Minister and Minister for Education Bill Shorten today announced the outcome of Round Five Phase One, the next instalment of Federal Labor’s $2.5 billion, ten year Trade Training Centres in Schools program.
The funding announced today will ensure that students at 225 secondary schools around Australia can learn skills such as, carpentry and joinery, metal fabrication, agriculture and horticulture at one of the 137 new Trades Training Centres.
Of the 225 schools, 122 are servicing regional and remote communities in the Northern Territory, Western Australia, Queensland, New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and South Australia.
These new Trades Training Centres are concrete evidence of Federal Labor’s determination to ensure every young Australian can get the skills they need to succeed, no matter what field they want to build a career in.
The Trade Training Centres in Schools program goes beyond building facilities and encourages schools to work with local businesses.
This investment is a win for businesses because Trades Training Centres help ensure students get the skills which local employers need.
Schools are encouraged to work with local employers who can support the schools with expertise, equipment and provide on the job placements, school based apprenticeships and traineeships for students.
Federal Labor has now announced funding of over $1.4 billion for more than 510 Trade Training Centres benefitting more than 1,290 secondary schools across Australia. Over 60 per cent of these schools are located in regional Australia.
Of previously announced Trades Training Centre projects, over 70 per cent have already been built – this is a great achievement considering the first funding round only opened in March 2008.
The Trades Training Centres in Schools program is targeted at increasing Year 12 or equivalent attainment and improving student career options particularly in skills shortage areas. Eligible low socio-economic secondary schools have been prioritised in funding allocations.
In addition to the $209.8 million announced today, Federal Labor will provide a further $200 million under Round Five (Phase Two) of the Trade Training Centres in Schools Program.
Funding for this program is already included in the budget.
The full list of successful new Trades Training Centres is available at: http://tinyurl.com/ttcisp-2013
Talking Politics with Mark Parton on 2CC - 13 August 2013
Breaking Politics with Tim Lester - 12 August 2013
TRANSCRIPT OF ANDREW LEIGH MP
‘BREAKING POLITICS’ WITH TIM LESTER
12 AUGUST 2013
E & O E – PROOF ONLY
Subjects: Election campaign, First debate, NBN, Costings, Peter Beattie.
TIM LESTER: Andrew Leigh, welcome into Breaking Politics.
ANDREW LEIGH: Thanks Tim.
TIM LESTER: How’s the campaign going?
ANDREW LEIGH: I’m loving it. I was out in Amaroo, in my electorate, yesterday – door-knocking, talking to people about the National Broadband Network. One bloke said he’d just gotten it hooked up, and he was enjoying using it to have better conversations with relatives overseas. Gotta say Tim, no-one came up to me and said “the real problem with the National Broadband Network is they’ve brought the fibre all the way to my home, and I wish they’d stopped it in the cabinet down the street,” but maybe Mr Turnbull meets people like that when he doorknocks.
TIM LESTER: Funny guy. Now all of the evidence is that at least nationally Labor, not by a lot perhaps, but is losing this campaign. Do you get any of that sense in the electorate?
ANDREW LEIGH: I don’t Tim. I get a real sense of optimism, and I don’t think - even in the electorate of Fraser, people are overly focused on polls. They’re thinking about the way in which the campaign will affect them. They’re judging parties based on policies – our carefully thought out education policy, Mr Abbott’s eleventh hour conversion to say “well I’ll have what he’s having.” Our record of investing in health, and Mr Abbott’s record of taking a billion dollars out of the health care system when he was health minister. So they’re the sort of fundamental issues my electors seem to be talking about.
TIM LESTER: Last night, Prime Minister Rudd took notes into the first of the major campaign debates, which seems like a pretty straight up and down contravention of rule number 15 if you go through the rules and check them out. What do you think happened there?
ANDREW LEIGH: Tim, I have no idea what goes on in these sort of debate rules, it's a kind of arcane insiders game - but I do think that the debate saw Mr Rudd clearly lay out the challenge for Australia at a time when the economy's in transition, with the number of jobs that the mining boom created in construction now starting to taper down. You've seen our forecasts for unemployment ticking up a bit, and that means important investments in education need to be sustained if we're to manage the transition into a more services, manufacturing based economy. You saw that positive story coming through from Mr Rudd; little more than the sort of slogans you've seen right through the campaign from Mr Abbott.
TIM LESTER: Mr Rudd also tried to suggest that the Coalition in government might change the GST. He suggested also, that the Coalition was 70 billion dollars awry in terms of its costings, both of which Tony Abbott says are absolute fantasy. Don't we have to accept Mr Abbott at his word on both of those things?
ANDREW LEIGH: Well Mr Abbott and his front bench team have been clear that they're reviewing the GST. Now Tim, why do you review the GST, if not to think about raising the rate or broadening the base? Or is he seriously suggesting his reason for doing the review is to change the name, or to bring it down? I mean, let's be honest, he's doing the review with an eye to raising it in the future. Why else would you do that review? On the Coalition's costings gap, $70 billion is Mr Hockey and Mr Robb's figure and if they want to debunk it, the way to do it is to bring their policies out of witness protection. Mr Robb repeatedly says that he's got nearly 50 policies sitting in his desk drawer. He says they've got covers, you know that's lovely they've done those cute little laminated covers for them, but if they're so good for the Australian people, why are they in Mr Robb's desk drawer rather than out in the open?
TIM LESTER: Well they've got a cover to say we haven't seen the Pre-election Fiscal and Economic Outlook, the PEFO document we expect to see tomorrow. So until now it's fair to say until they've got those numbers and can digest them, why would they put out all their policies with a bottom line costing?
ANDREW LEIGH: But they've had a series of treasury updates Tim - and as Martin Parkinson, secretary of the Treasury has said, the numbers in those Treasury updates are produced using the same methodology that tomorrow's PEFO numbers were produced by. I mean the original idea that the Coalition talked about in 2010 was that the first year after the election would be consolidation, second year would be policy development, and then the third year they would be out there selling their costed policies. But here we are now, four weeks to an election with a huge costings gap in the Coalition. $70 billion means $7000 for every Australian household in either reduced services or higher taxes. The Coalition's got to come clean, tell us what they're hiding, be honest about the cuts they'll make.
TIM LESTER: Be reasonable, when would it be fair from here to expect the Coalition to have a full costing of their policies with a bottom line?
ANDREW LEIGH: Tim, I think if this had been Labor in opposition, everyone would have expected to see that six months ago. So certainly, the costed policies cannot come soon enough. Mr Abbott can't do this sort of airy hand waving "oh I've already identified savings". I mean last week he's referred to savings that he has already spent. I've sat down and gone through his savings, they total $13 billion - the same amount as his tax cut to big miners and big polluters. He doesn't have savings to spare. His company tax cut, announced last week - $5 billion policy, is an unfunded policy. That's a serious challenge for the Australian people.
TIM LESTER: He does though, have a reasonable case when he says "well we want to introduce policies so they can each be discussed and considered, spaced out over an election campaign" so inevitably costings will tend to get pushed towards the back end of an election campaign won't they?
ANDREW LEIGH: But I think Tim, that's a serious problem at a time when we've had big revenue write-downs and when the choices for politicians are tougher than ever before. I mean when you talk about 2007 with the rivers of gold coming from the Mining Boom Mark I, maybe this costings debate wasn't as apposite as it is today. But right now, you have a situation in which budgets are tight, in which tough choices have to be made. If Mr Abbott's not willing to back tough choices like means-testing the private health insurance rebate, or saying to people who want an FBT tax break "show us a bit of evidence you're using the car for business use" then he has to find other savings. It's really important that he comes through and does that for the health of our democracy. Good policy isn't produced in smoke filled back rooms, it's produced in discussion in public and the Coalition's policies will actually end up being better policies the more public debate they're exposed to.
TIM LESTER: Do you welcome the return to politics and the introduction to Federal politics of former Queensland premier Peter Beattie, and do you think he might be a future Labor leader at a Federal level?
ANDREW LEIGH: We've got a leader, and I don't think he's going anywhere Tim. Certainly Mr Beattie though, is a man whose track record should be welcomed. Under him, Queensland's unemployment rate halved. Under Campbell Newman, Queensland's unemployment rate is going back up and that's because of policy choices. Peter Beattie chose to make Queensland ‘the Smart State’, to invest in education and technology infrastructure. Federal Labor's doing just the same, but the Coalition want to take a leaf from the current Queensland premier's playbook. They want to put in place a commission of cuts. They want to put in place significant cuts to public services but they're not going to level with the Australian people before the election about what they'll be. Do you think Campbell Newman would have been as popular at the last election if he'd told the people of Queensland he was going to get rid of teachers, fire fighters, nurses, police officers? I don't think so.
TIM LESTER: Andrew Leigh, we're grateful for your time today.
ANDREW LEIGH: Thank you Tim.
Tax deductibility for gifts to National Arboretum - 12 Aug 2013
Media Release
In a win for one of Canberra's most important national institutions, a re-elected Rudd Labor Government would make gifts to the National Arboretum tax-deductible.
ACT representatives Senator Kate Lundy, Member for Fraser Andrew Leigh and Member for Canberra Gai Brodtmann said that this decision will encourage philanthropy to help build one of our great and newest national icons.
Already, generous Canberrans have contributed significantly to the major buildings on the arboretum site. It is hoped that this decision will inspire more donations to support the rest of the National Arboretum as well.
The National Arboretum opened in February and has been receiving 50,000 visitors a month, cementing itself as one of Canberra's greatest tourist attractions.
The Government’s decision to provide the attraction with deductible gift recipient (DGR) status through a specific listing in the tax laws will ensure the project gets much needed ongoing support.
The arboretum is home to an extraordinary collection of living trees, cultivated for conservation, scientific research and education, especially in regards to the impacts of climate change.
Australians who make donations of more than $2 to the arboretum will be able to claim the gift as a tax deduction.
The National Arboretum is a jointly funded initiative between the Commonwealth and ACT governments. The ACT Government has contributed approximately $50 million with the Commonwealth Government allocating $20 million as part of its centenary of Canberra gift to the people of the ACT.
Gifts will be tax deductible from 1 July 2013, however a legislative amendment will be necessary to give effect to this. Funding for this commitment is already included in the budget.
Pledge to support quality child care, call for Opposition to follow - 12 August, 2013
Federal Labor MP for Fraser, Dr Andrew Leigh, was welcomed at a Braddon early learning centre today to sign a pledge committing to the work of the National Quality Framework (NQF) for childcare and early childhood education.
He used the opportunity to challenge the Federal Opposition to do the same.
“Labor’s record in child care is a proud one. Since 2007 we have raised the child care rebate to 50%, provided for better training and pay for workers and improved standards in centres with smaller child to carer ratios. I urge my opposition counterpart to sign the NQF pledge also.”
The NQF started in 2012 and covers most long day care, family day care, preschool and outside school hours services. It aims, with reforms being phased in before 2020, to raise quality and drive continuous improvement.
“Labor is committed to supporting a higher qualified workforce and ensuring quality education and care is delivered while maintaining affordability for parents,” said Dr. Leigh.
“We know how important a child’s early years are. We want to attract and retain the best people to child care and early learning for all of the community’s benefit.”
The NQF pledge supports a Community Child Care Co-operative campaign for quality child care and education.
Acting Director at the Goodstart Early Learning Centre at Braddon, Jessica Dakin, was delighted the local member took up her invitation to visit the centre and commit to future support.
“It was great to have Andrew come and pledge his on-going support for the NQF reforms,” said Ms Dakin. “The children also enjoyed chatting with him.”
“Goodstart is committed to quality education and care for each child and is fully supportive of the reforms, and at Braddon we are always looking for opportunities to connect and share with our local community.”
Talking Economics on ABC24 - 11 August 2013
Getting Involved
Fostering the ACT's Young Future Leaders, The Chronicle, 6 August 2013
In public life, it’s all too easy to confuse leadership with power – to think that the only ones who exercise leadership are generals, judges, ministers and CEOs.
In fact, leadership is much richer and more diffuse. All of us have the ability to lead in our own communities. We’ve seen leadership from the community organisers who ran a successful campaign to provide Safe Shelter to the homeless; the coordinators in Volunteering ACT who join up volunteers to community organisations; the entrepreneurs who created innovation hub Entry 29; and activist Liz Dawson who has persuaded dentists to do pro bono work to give people back their smiles.
Leaders aren’t found on pedestals, they’re all around us.
That’s why I recently ran a workshop on leadership for high school and college students on the northside of Canberra. We talked about the issues people felt passionate about, practiced public speaking, and heard from social entrepreneurs Melanie Poole (who co-founded Vocal Majority) and Ben Duggan (who created Raising Hope).
I think the students enjoyed the chance to share their stories, try out some new skills, and hear from the guest speakers. I appreciated hearing their stories about overcoming fears, helping classmates, and even rescuing injured wildlife. At the end of the three-hour session, I left with a sense of energy and optimism about the positive work that these teens will go on to do in our communities.
In encouraging future leaders, one of the big challenges is to make sure everyone has their say. And when it comes to choosing our representatives in parliament today, the challenge is the same. At present, about half of all 18 year-olds aren’t on the electoral roll. Since my electorate of Fraser is the largest electorate in Australia (with over 133,000 voters) and has several university campuses in its midst, my guess is that there are probably more unenrolled young people in Fraser than in any other electorate in Australia.
Fortunately, the Australian Electoral Commission has recently switched its procedures to allow online enrolment (not the old-fashioned print-it-out-and-post-it-in approach). This means that it’s easier than ever to get on the electoral roll using your laptop, tablet or smartphone.
So if you know a young person who isn’t enrolled, please encourage them to go to www.aec.gov.au to sign up. Moreover, people don’t have to wait until they’re eligible to vote – they can sign up at age 16 or 17, so they’re ready to vote as soon as they turn 18. With an election just around the corner, there’s never been a better time to get on the roll.
Finally, I’m always keen to encourage future leaders. So if you know a young Canberran who’s keen on making a difference but doesn’t know where to start, feel free to suggest they email me. There are plenty of community organisations looking for support, and I’m more than happy to help connect them with one that would be suitable.
Andrew Leigh is the Federal Member for Fraser. His website is www.andrewleigh.com, his email address is [email protected], and he is on Twitter as @ALeighMP.
It's Time - To Enrol
Don't miss your chance to decide country's future, Daily Telegraph, 9 August 2013
One vote can make the difference.
In the 1919 federal election, the seat of Ballarat was won by National Party candidate Edwin Kerby with 13,569 votes, defeating – by just one vote – Labor’s Charles McGrath with 13,568 votes. Had any one of Kerby’s supporters changed their mind, the result would have been different.
Tight elections aren’t just a relic of history. At the last election, five of my colleagues in the House of Representatives won their seats by less than 1 percentage point. Had they lost just 1000 of their supporters, the result would have gone the other way. And with fewer Labor MPs, Tony Abbott would now be celebrating his third year as Prime Minister.
This year, the rolls will close at 8pm on Monday 12 August. If you’re not on the electoral roll by then, you’re missing out on your chance to shape Australia’s future. Just about every political observer agrees that this election will be close. And yet too many Australians, particularly young Australians, are not having their say about the future of the country.
Right now, almost 1.4 million eligible Australians – close to 10 per cent – are absent from the electoral roll. By far the largest group of missing voters are young people: nearly half a million 18-24-year-olds are not enrolled. This means that one in two 18-year-olds, and one in three 19-year-olds, risk not having a say at the ballot box.
Australia is unusual among developed nations in having a system of compulsory voting. Introduced for federal elections by a private member’s bill in 1924, it slipped into legislation with little debate. Over the period between 1915 and 1942, all the Australian states and territories also adopted systems of compulsory voting. A few other developed nations (such as Belgium and Singapore) also compel their citizens to vote. But most do not.
Compulsory voting reflects the fact that with rights come responsibilities. Just as juries ensure that court decisions reflect society’s norms, and the census makes sure that we survey everyone, universal voting is the only way to guarantee that election outcomes reflect the views and values of all Australians.
By not enrolling to vote, younger Australians are sending a message to politicians that says: ‘please ignore our issues’. This is a worry because the younger you are, the more policy matters to you. Young Australians are more likely to be affected by increases in university funding and Austudy allowance; will get more use out of the National Broadband Network; and will benefit more from the safety net of DisabilityCare. If we act decisively on climate change, young Australians stand to get the most benefit.
Getting on the electoral roll has never been easier. Recently, I joined Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus at a demonstration of the Australian Electoral Commission’s new online enrolment system. In a few minutes, university students Charlotte Barclay and Karina Curry-Hyde signed up to vote on their iPads.
If you know someone who’s not enrolled, ask them to take a few minutes on www.aec.gov.au and sign up. Enrolment works on any computer, including tablets and smartphones.
Remember, choosing a government is the responsibility of all of us. Friends don’t let friends stay off the roll.
So if you’re an unenrolled 18 year old, imagine yourself sitting in an armchair in 2073, surrounded by loving grandchildren. When one of them asks ‘how did you vote in the great election of 7 September 2013?’, will you have an answer?
Andrew Leigh is the federal member for Fraser, and his website is www.andrewleigh.com.
ABC RN Drive with Waleed Aly & Arthur Sinodinos - 5 Aug 2013
Transcript - ABC RN Drive with Waleed Aly & Arthur Sinodinos - 5 Aug 2013
Waleed Aly: Time to talk our political panel, two of our favourite politicians, Senator Arthur Sinodinos, Parliamentary Secretary to the Opposition Leader, previously chief of staff to Prime Minister John Howard. And Dr Andrew Leigh, member for Fraser, previously the parliamentary secretary to Julia Gillard when she was Prime Minister. Gentlemen, welcome back to the show.
I've got to say that I was very intrigued, that when you're not on our program, you guys are getting together, making all kinds of bets. This is scandalous behaviour. It's an interesting bet. You're looking at annualised real GDP growth which was 2.5 per cent, trend unemployment which was 5.7 per cent and average variable mortgage interest rates which were 6.2 per cent. And it seems to me that each of you is betting that if the other side get in, those indicators will get worse. Have I got that right Arthur?
Arthur Sinodinos: My recollection, my hazy recollection is that that is right. Not that I had drinks at the time. Yes, at the end of a convivial evening I thought it was not a bad bet. Andrew might remember better, he proposed the bet.
Andrew Leigh: That's right. The bet is settled based on December next year. My wager is if Labor is elected then those indicators will improve. If the Coalition is elected then a majority of those indicators will go backwards. Arthur's is the reverse.
Waleed Aly: A majority? Hang on. You're backing off already.... surely you mean all of them will go down?
Andrew Leigh: Oh well. I expect all of them to go down but the bet is a majority of the indicators, two out of three.
Arthur Sinodinos: Andrew was kind enough to agree it would be 12 months, December next year, rather than June next year.
Waleed Aly: But Arthur, you wouldn't have finished blaming the previous government for everything that's gone wrong by then, would you?
Arthur Sinodinos: We're expecting a surge of confidence when we come to office which will help unlock some of those high household savings and get business confidence up, and get people investing and get things cracking.
Waleed Aly: Yes, not doubt you are. Alright. Let's look at some specific policies. Two-hundred million dollars to save the car industry, Dr Andrew Leigh, that's come from your side of politics today. Why it is a good idea to be throwing more money at the car industry which has shown a history of taking our money and then leaving anyway?
Andrew Leigh: Well, we know that there are a lot of direct jobs in this sector Waleed, something like 50,000 direct jobs and then hundreds of thousands of jobs that depend on the car industry. And if you're thinking about industry assistance you really want to think about two things, the first being the spill-overs to other sectors and we know the car industry does a lot of research and development. So, you'd expect some spill-overs there. Also, the geographic concentration. Parts of Australia with a big car industry tend to be heavily reliant on that industry and so this is really important for people working in sectors, in the automotive sector, just to have confidence that they will have opportunities in the future.
Waleed Aly: But we've given them money in the past and it hasn't saved their jobs.
Andrew Leigh: Well, it's certainly we've seen challenges for the manufacturing sector and that came particularly at a time when the Australian dollar was high. With the Australian dollar coming down, that' put the automative sector in a much more confident position. But also too, I think it's important that we have purchases of Australian cars by government. The Commonwealth is now purchasing the vast majority of its cars is Australian made cars. But you've got states and territories that are buying one in four Australian made cars. So that matters.
Waleed Aly: Arthur, what is exactly is the Opposition's policy on this. I know the Opposition has said it wants to wind back some of that additional funding but we don't yet have anything that approximates a figure, exactly how much the Opposition would be providing to the car industry, at least that I have been able to find.
Arthur Sinodinos: Let me go back a couple of steps. Some time back we'd indicated that a wind-back of 500 million which was not to take car subsidies back to where they were under the Howard Government, but approximately to that level because we thought the level of subsidies being provided at the time was sufficient and then, on top of that, there would be productivity commission review at some stage before there was any further assistance to industry to try and demonstrate some of the points that Andrew was talking about. What's happened since then is when Labor came in they had a series of programs that they ramped up, automotive subsidies. Some of those have since been cut back, and then more recently the fringe benefits tax changes had potentially quite a big impact on new car sales. We're talking around 1.8 billion, I think, being the cost of that measure. The government is now talking about an extra 200 million which is aimed principally at Holden but which really only, in a sense, is a very small off-set to this rather big change you've had recently because of FBT. It's actually quite a mess.
Waleed Aly: It sounds like you're playing off 1.8 billion against 200 million. But they are different things. The 1.8 billion is not money that is being taken away from the car industry and they are giving 200 million back. The 1.8 billion is income they will receive in tax by making sure the fringe benefits tax, as it is is applied more rigorously.
Arthur Sinodinos: But if you trace that income, it'll happen because they'll be less car sales, right.
Waleed Aly: No, that doesn't necessarily mean that at all.
Arthur Sinodinos: It's not a net... I'm trying to get away from this idea that this is somehow a net benefit to the car industry because it's not. You have see it in the context of this FBT decision recently. And to go back to your earlier point, which I think is the right point, what's happened over time is, even with the ramp up in subsidies, industry has been cutting back on employment. Even today, Kim Carr, the manufacturing minister still hasn't spelled out what the conditions are for the car industry to receive this 200 million and therefore what guarantees do you have that they'll be extra jobs or jobs maintained and we don't go down the route we've going down over the last couple of car assistance packages.
Waleed Aly: Can we go to the issue, what will happen in event of a hung parliament? Tony Abbott's been keen to talk about this. He was asked today what would happen in that. He said he'd stand aside and let Labor have the government benches basically.
Tony Abbott: The short answer is 'yes' because we want to deliver strong government. We want to deliver a decisive government that gets on with the job of building a better Australia. That's our business. Our business is a safe and secure Australia that builds on a strong and prosperous economy and we will not get that from a another hung parliament.
Waleed Aly: On the other side of it, Kevin Rudd was asked whether he would lead a minority government. his is what he said:
Kevin Rudd: If they're fair dinkum about this, that is we don't like Independents, we don't Greens, why do they preferencing them all over the country. They are doing this, I presume, in Dennison. We have double standards here. As for us, we're all about securing a majority government of the Australian Labor Party.
Waleed Aly: Andrew Leigh, that's a non-answer, I think you'd have to agree. What exactly will the Labor party do if there is a hung parliament?
Andrew Leigh: Well certainly if we look at the last few years, I think you can look at a minority parliament which has managed to get an awful lot done Waleed, whether that's putting a price on carbon pollution, creating disability care, better schools reforms, nearly 600 bills have passed through the House of Reps. I don't think anyone can look back at this minority parliament and say that it hasn't been a productive parliament. I think the point that Mr Rudd is making is simply if Mr Abbott believes that there shouldn't be Independents in the parliament, then it's odd to preference them on September 7, and refuse to deal with them on September 8.
Waleed Aly: He's not saying they shouldn't be there. He's just saying he won't do a deal in case of minority government circumstances. Am I to take from your answer that you will form a minority government if it comes to it?
Andrew Leigh: It would not be my decision alone, but my general view is that this minority parliament has been an effective one. Clearly governments would always prefer to govern in majority. If you look back over the last few years you see an Australia that is more prosperous, that has more jobs, that is a fairer nation than it was when this minority parliament began.
Waleed Aly: Arthur Sinodinos is it a good idea for Tony Abbott to opt out of the horse-trading that would go in in the event of a hung parliament given that that would encourage voters to go, well, he has to win by a lot if he's going to be the prime minister and that's unlikely so I may as well vote for the other mob?
Arthur Sinodinos: Well I think it's in fact the reverse. He's trying to encourage people to vote for him on the basis that he won't have any truck with a minority government. He wants to be a majority government and I think he's making that pitch because frankly I think most Australians want a majority government of one complexion or the other. I don't think, as a country, we need to end up where we've ended up in the last three years. While I accept what Andrew is saying from his perspective from what he regards as the achievement of the parliament, I think if you go out there and ask the public what they want, they want more certainty, they want more predictability and that comes with having a majority government.
Waleed Aly: The other issue that was raised today was the carbon tax. Tony Abbott says his first order of business would be to get rid of the carbon tax. Gentlemen, is it really that important an election issue now that both sides of politics are now saying they are going to abolish the carbon tax? I'll start with you Andrew.
Andrew Leigh: Well certainly we've said we'll move to the floating period immediately and I think then we'll be in the same situation as 30 countries around the world using the most effective, the most efficient way of reducing carbon pollution which is simply to put a price on carbon pollution. That'll see, as we go to the floating price, we'll see the price come down from around $25 to around $6 a tonne. And, we’ll be linking in with the European emissions trading system which brings a sense of stability to it. This is just the textbook economic way of dealing with climate change, if you believe it's real as I do and I know Arthur does, then as John Howard said the most straight forward way of dealing with climate change is through an emissions trading scheme.
Waleed Aly: Arthur Sinodinos, do you think it's more efficient to deal with it by providing direct money from government to people who are going to do things that we think might reduce emissions?
Arthur Sinodinos: Very good point. The reason we've gone down this route is frankly we found there was resistance from the community to putting their hands in their pocket on this issue. If you go back and track peoples' willingness to pay and do something about climate change, you use the Lowy Institute poll as a measure all the way back to when the community reached a tipping point on climate change in 2006-2007, it was clear that people were uneasy with the idea of putting their hands in their pocket.
Waleed Aly: Isn't that why you have leadership?
Arthur Sinodinos: Whether it's a carbon tax or whether it's in the form of a floating price, that's why we came up with direct action, because people were concerned about the cost of living and the government seems to be adding to the cost of living at a time when electricity demand was already being markedly effected by a ramp up in state investment plans which was raising electricity prices very significantly.
Waleed Aly: People are always going to be concerned by cost of living pressures, not least when politicians are constantly telling them they should be worried about cost of living pressures. Doesn't there come a point when you have to show leadership on this, look the electorate in the eye and tell them this is what has to happen? Like what the Coalition did with the GST?
Arthur Sinodinos: You have to take the community with you and sometimes you won't take them with you if you keep shouting at them to do something that they are unwilling to do. You've got to find a way around that. That's why Abbott came up with the formula he did and through direct action it keeps our options open. It gives up time to see how the world develops, what schemes occur overseas because, don't forget, this is one of the very few cases, if not the only case in the world, of economy-wide carbon tax or floating price, quite different to some of the schemes you'll find sprouting up in California, China, other places.
Waleed Aly: Just one final question to both of you. Asylum seeker policy was really everything in the lead up to this election campaign. Then today it hasn't been mentioned. Do you think we're done with that issue now as far as the public conversation goes and the election campaign is likely to go off onto different terrain. Let's start with you Arthur.
Arthur Sinodinos: I think the issue will continue to bubble away. The Coalition will continue to monitor what's happening with regard to PNG and Nauru. No doubt, we will talk about it further during the campaign. Yeh, it's been a major issue over a considerable time so I can't see that's it's going to fall off the radar completely. As Tony Abbott made clear in his pitch yesterday, he's going to be talking more about his plans for the future rather than just focussing on those particular issue which he has embraced (?)the last few years.
Waleed Aly: Final word to you Andrew.
Andrew Leigh: I agree with Arthur on this one. Asylum seekers are going to be an important debate for Australia but I hope that the debate that is going to be conducted over the coming weeks is a little more sober and bi-partisan than we've seen in the past. These are some of the world's most vulnerable people and I think we need to focus on compassion.
I think just one word of correction, a very rare mistake that Arthur made. Ours is not an economy-wide carbon price. It covers around 60% of emissions because it excludes agriculture and transport.
Arthur Sinodinos: I take your point on agriculture, that's right.
Waleed Aly: Yep. I think we can agree on that. The point about compassion is an interesting one. That seems the be the Greens' slogan.... We'll see how it unfold. Gentlemen, I look forward to speaking with you, hopefully in a week or so.... Thanks gentlemen.
Waleed Aly: Time to talk our political panel, two of our favourite politicians, Senator Arthur Sinodinos, Parliamentary Secretary to the Opposition Leader, previously chief of staff to Prime Minister John Howard. And Dr Andrew Leigh, member for Fraser, previously the parliamentary secretary to Julia Gillard when she was Prime Minister. Gentlemen, welcome back to the show.
I've got to say that I was very intrigued, that when you're not on our program, you guys are getting together, making all kinds of bets. This is scandalous behaviour. It's an interesting bet. You're looking at annualised real GDP growth which was 2.5 per cent, trend unemployment which was 5.7 per cent and average variable mortgage interest rates which were 6.2 per cent. And it seems to me that each of you is betting that if the other side get in, those indicators will get worse. Have I got that right Arthur?
Arthur Sinodinos: My recollection, my hazy recollection is that that is right. Not that I had drinks at the time. Yes, at the end of a convivial evening I thought it was not a bad bet. Andrew might remember better, he proposed the bet.
Andrew Leigh: That's right. The bet is settled based on December next year. My wager is if Labor is elected then those indicators will improve. If the Coalition is elected then a majority of those indicators will go backwards. Arthur's is the reverse.
Waleed Aly: A majority? Hang on. You're backing off already.... surely you mean all of them will go down?
Andrew Leigh: Oh well. I expect all of them to go down but the bet is a majority of the indicators, two out of three.
Arthur Sinodinos: Andrew was kind enough to agree it would be 12 months, December next year, rather than June next year.
Waleed Aly: But Arthur, you wouldn't have finished blaming the previous government for everything that's gone wrong by then, would you?
Arthur Sinodinos: We're expecting a surge of confidence when we come to office which will help unlock some of those high household savings and get business confidence up, and get people investing and get things cracking.
Waleed Aly: Yes, not doubt you are. Alright. Let's look at some specific policies. Two-hundred million dollars to save the car industry, Dr Andrew Leigh, that's come from your side of politics today. Why it is a good idea to be throwing more money at the car industry which has shown a history of taking our money and then leaving anyway?
Andrew Leigh: Well, we know that there are a lot of direct jobs in this sector Waleed, something like 50,000 direct jobs and then hundreds of thousands of jobs that depend on the car industry. And if you're thinking about industry assistance you really want to think about two things, the first being the spill-overs to other sectors and we know the car industry does a lot of research and development. So, you'd expect some spill-overs there. Also, the geographic concentration. Parts of Australia with a big car industry tend to be heavily reliant on that industry and so this is really important for people working in sectors, in the automotive sector, just to have confidence that they will have opportunities in the future.
Waleed Aly: But we've given them money in the past and it hasn't saved their jobs.
Andrew Leigh: Well, it's certainly we've seen challenges for the manufacturing sector and that came particularly at a time when the Australian dollar was high. With the Australian dollar coming down, that' put the automative sector in a much more confident position. But also too, I think it's important that we have purchases of Australian cars by government. The Commonwealth is now purchasing the vast majority of its cars is Australian made cars. But you've got states and territories that are buying one in four Australian made cars. So that matters.
Waleed Aly: Arthur, what is exactly is the Opposition's policy on this. I know the Opposition has said it wants to wind back some of that additional funding but we don't yet have anything that approximates a figure, exactly how much the Opposition would be providing to the car industry, at least that I have been able to find.
Arthur Sinodinos: Let me go back a couple of steps. Some time back we'd indicated that a wind-back of 500 million which was not to take car subsidies back to where they were under the Howard Government, but approximately to that level because we thought the level of subsidies being provided at the time was sufficient and then, on top of that, there would be productivity commission review at some stage before there was any further assistance to industry to try and demonstrate some of the points that Andrew was talking about. What's happened since then is when Labor came in they had a series of programs that they ramped up, automotive subsidies. Some of those have since been cut back, and then more recently the fringe benefits tax changes had potentially quite a big impact on new car sales. We're talking around 1.8 billion, I think, being the cost of that measure. The government is now talking about an extra 200 million which is aimed principally at Holden but which really only, in a sense, is a very small off-set to this rather big change you've had recently because of FBT. It's actually quite a mess.
Waleed Aly: It sounds like you're playing off 1.8 billion against 200 million. But they are different things. The 1.8 billion is not money that is being taken away from the car industry and they are giving 200 million back. The 1.8 billion is income they will receive in tax by making sure the fringe benefits tax, as it is is applied more rigorously.
Arthur Sinodinos: But if you trace that income, it'll happen because they'll be less car sales, right.
Waleed Aly: No, that doesn't necessarily mean that at all.
Arthur Sinodinos: It's not a net... I'm trying to get away from this idea that this is somehow a net benefit to the car industry because it's not. You have see it in the context of this FBT decision recently. And to go back to your earlier point, which I think is the right point, what's happened over time is, even with the ramp up in subsidies, industry has been cutting back on employment. Even today, Kim Carr, the manufacturing minister still hasn't spelled out what the conditions are for the car industry to receive this 200 million and therefore what guarantees do you have that they'll be extra jobs or jobs maintained and we don't go down the route we've going down over the last couple of car assistance packages.
Waleed Aly: Can we go to the issue, what will happen in event of a hung parliament? Tony Abbott's been keen to talk about this. He was asked today what would happen in that. He said he'd stand aside and let Labor have the government benches basically.
Tony Abbott: The short answer is 'yes' because we want to deliver strong government. We want to deliver a decisive government that gets on with the job of building a better Australia. That's our business. Our business is a safe and secure Australia that builds on a strong and prosperous economy and we will not get that from a another hung parliament.
Waleed Aly: On the other side of it, Kevin Rudd was asked whether he would lead a minority government. his is what he said:
Kevin Rudd: If they're fair dinkum about this, that is we don't like Independents, we don't Greens, why do they preferencing them all over the country. They are doing this, I presume, in Dennison. We have double standards here. As for us, we're all about securing a majority government of the Australian Labor Party.
Waleed Aly: Andrew Leigh, that's a non-answer, I think you'd have to agree. What exactly will the Labor party do if there is a hung parliament?
Andrew Leigh: Well certainly if we look at the last few years, I think you can look at a minority parliament which has managed to get an awful lot done Waleed, whether that's putting a price on carbon pollution, creating disability care, better schools reforms, nearly 600 bills have passed through the House of Reps. I don't think anyone can look back at this minority parliament and say that it hasn't been a productive parliament. I think the point that Mr Rudd is making is simply if Mr Abbott believes that there shouldn't be Independents in the parliament, then it's odd to preference them on September 7, and refuse to deal with them on September 8.
Waleed Aly: He's not saying they shouldn't be there. He's just saying he won't do a deal in case of minority government circumstances. Am I to take from your answer that you will form a minority government if it comes to it?
Andrew Leigh: It would not be my decision alone, but my general view is that this minority parliament has been an effective one. Clearly governments would always prefer to govern in majority. If you look back over the last few years you see an Australia that is more prosperous, that has more jobs, that is a fairer nation than it was when this minority parliament began.
Waleed Aly: Arthur Sinodinos is it a good idea for Tony Abbott to opt out of the horse-trading that would go in in the event of a hung parliament given that that would encourage voters to go, well, he has to win by a lot if he's going to be the prime minister and that's unlikely so I may as well vote for the other mob?
Arthur Sinodinos: Well I think it's in fact the reverse. He's trying to encourage people to vote for him on the basis that he won't have any truck with a minority government. He wants to be a majority government and I think he's making that pitch because frankly I think most Australians want a majority government of one complexion or the other. I don't think, as a country, we need to end up where we've ended up in the last three years. While I accept what Andrew is saying from his perspective from what he regards as the achievement of the parliament, I think if you go out there and ask the public what they want, they want more certainty, they want more predictability and that comes with having a majority government.
Waleed Aly: The other issue that was raised today was the carbon tax. Tony Abbott says his first order of business would be to get rid of the carbon tax. Gentlemen, is it really that important an election issue now that both sides of politics are now saying they are going to abolish the carbon tax? I'll start with you Andrew.
Andrew Leigh: Well certainly we've said we'll move to the floating period immediately and I think then we'll be in the same situation as 30 countries around the world using the most effective, the most efficient way of reducing carbon pollution which is simply to put a price on carbon pollution. That'll see, as we go to the floating price, we'll see the price come down from around $25 to around $6 a tonne. And, we’ll be linking in with the European emissions trading system which brings a sense of stability to it. This is just the textbook economic way of dealing with climate change, if you believe it's real as I do and I know Arthur does, then as John Howard said the most straight forward way of dealing with climate change is through an emissions trading scheme.
Waleed Aly: Arthur Sinodinos, do you think it's more efficient to deal with it by providing direct money from government to people who are going to do things that we think might reduce emissions?
Arthur Sinodinos: Very good point. The reason we've gone down this route is frankly we found there was resistance from the community to putting their hands in their pocket on this issue. If you go back and track peoples' willingness to pay and do something about climate change, you use the Lowy Institute poll as a measure all the way back to when the community reached a tipping point on climate change in 2006-2007, it was clear that people were uneasy with the idea of putting their hands in their pocket.
Waleed Aly: Isn't that why you have leadership?
Arthur Sinodinos: Whether it's a carbon tax or whether it's in the form of a floating price, that's why we came up with direct action, because people were concerned about the cost of living and the government seems to be adding to the cost of living at a time when electricity demand was already being markedly effected by a ramp up in state investment plans which was raising electricity prices very significantly.
Waleed Aly: People are always going to be concerned by cost of living pressures, not least when politicians are constantly telling them they should be worried about cost of living pressures. Doesn't there come a point when you have to show leadership on this, look the electorate in the eye and tell them this is what has to happen? Like what the Coalition did with the GST?
Arthur Sinodinos: You have to take the community with you and sometimes you won't take them with you if you keep shouting at them to do something that they are unwilling to do. You've got to find a way around that. That's why Abbott came up with the formula he did and through direct action it keeps our options open. It gives up time to see how the world develops, what schemes occur overseas because, don't forget, this is one of the very few cases, if not the only case in the world, of economy-wide carbon tax or floating price, quite different to some of the schemes you'll find sprouting up in California, China, other places.
Waleed Aly: Just one final question to both of you. Asylum seeker policy was really everything in the lead up to this election campaign. Then today it hasn't been mentioned. Do you think we're done with that issue now as far as the public conversation goes and the election campaign is likely to go off onto different terrain. Let's start with you Arthur.
Arthur Sinodinos: I think the issue will continue to bubble away. The Coalition will continue to monitor what's happening with regard to PNG and Nauru. No doubt, we will talk about it further during the campaign. Yeh, it's been a major issue over a considerable time so I can't see that's it's going to fall off the radar completely. As Tony Abbott made clear in his pitch yesterday, he's going to be talking more about his plans for the future rather than just focussing on those particular issue which he has embraced (?)the last few years.
Waleed Aly: Final word to you Andrew.
Andrew Leigh: I agree with Arthur on this one. Asylum seekers are going to be an important debate for Australia but I hope that the debate that is going to be conducted over the coming weeks is a little more sober and bi-partisan than we've seen in the past. These are some of the world's most vulnerable people and I think we need to focus on compassion.
I think just one word of correction, a very rare mistake that Arthur made. Ours is not an economy-wide carbon price. It covers around 60% of emissions because it excludes agriculture and transport.
Arthur Sinodinos: I take your point on agriculture, that's right.
Waleed Aly: Yep. I think we can agree on that. The point about compassion is an interesting one. That seems the be the Greens' slogan.... We'll see how it unfold. Gentlemen, I look forward to speaking with you, hopefully in a week or so.... Thanks gentlemen.