Andrew Leigh

On 19 August, I spoke with Waleed Aly and Arthur Sinodinos about the Coalition's paid parental leave plan. It was a thoughtful conversation as always, but I couldn't resist pointing out that the plan gives five times as much to the richest as the poorest, and is yet to be properly costed. Here's a podcast. Transcript over the fold.

Transcript

19 August 2013

ABC Radio National Drive Interview – Waleed Aly

WALEED ALY

Will that levy hold or will it break? Senator Arthur Sinodinos and Andrew Leigh join me now, respectively Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition and Member for Fraser, previously Parliamentary secretary to Julia Gillard when she was PM. Gentlemen welcome.

ARTHUR SINODINOS

Thank you Waleed.

ANDREW LEIGH

Thanks Waleed.

WALEED ALY

Arthur start with you: that’s not really a good enough answer is it? Might be this, might be that, I’m not really sure.

ARTHUR SINODINOS

Well I don’t know what papers Joe had in the car with him, but I think what he was saying is that all will be revealed in due course in the sense that there is a definitive set of costings coming out, which will cover not only this, but all the other commitments we have made during this campaign. He made a reference to 50-70% of the cost of the scheme being covered by the levy and then there are offsets because the Government scheme no longer applies. States potentially make a contribution if State public servants are covered by the Federal scheme. So there are things like that which would have to be sorted.

I mean what’s definitive is that the levy would be on the bigger businesses that we’ve talked about I think before, but they will also be subject to a tax cut, so they are not worse off in that sense. They just don’t get the benefit of the tax cut in the same way smaller businesses do.

WALEED ALY

Yeah I understand that point, but a margin of error of 20% of the cost, I mean if it’s a $5 billion scheme, that’s a billion bucks.

ARTHUR SINODINOS

To be fair to Joe, I don’t think it’s right to say there is a margin of error. I mean he will give the more precise figures when all the costings come out together and as you can appreciate policies are being announced as we go and then when they’re all tallied up, you’ll have all the savings attached and then they’ll be a further contribution towards the budget bottom line.

WALEED ALY

Not a new policy though that’s been around three years. I would have thought he’d know the figure off the top of his head, unless of course the costings aren’t done yet in which case there is no way that he or your colleagues can stand before us and tell us that it’s responsible.

ARTHUR SINODINOS

No, no I think he, to be fair to Joe, all these costings will come out together in due course, by the last week of the campaign.

WALEED ALY

That’s when they come out, but he would know what the figures are.

ARTHUR SINODINOS

But I think what he is doing is, he is saving up all the stuff so you can see everything together, see the overall impacts on the budget bottom line and the impact on where we end up on the deficit and surplus for a particular year, for the budget.

WALEED ALY

Allright, Dr Andrew Leigh, I might get your reflection on this. If there is a productivity case to be made here that a Paid Parental Leave Scheme like this is a productivity measure, not a welfare measure, doesn’t this show that the Government is really behind on this, that it doesn’t have, at least there is a blind spot here in the way in which it’s approaching productivity.

ANDREW LEIGH

Well if that were the case Waleed then that might be true, but I am not aware of any serious economist who argues that the Coalition’s Parental Leave Scheme would boost productivity or participation relative to the existing scheme, which has already benefited around 300 thousand Australian parents.

The thing about the Coalition’s scheme is that it gives the most to those who have the most and in that sense it is completely at odds with the way in which the Australian social safety net has always worked. Ours has been a very targeted social safety net, that’s why it’s done so much to reduce inequality, this scheme will dramatically increase inequality and it’s very unclear where the money is coming from. I can just imagine what Arthur would have told John Howard when he was working as his Chief of Staff, if Labor’s Shadow’s Parliamentary Spokesperson had said that they didn’t know what a policy would cost, whether it would cover 100 or 50% of the cost. My back of the envelope says that the Company Tax increases raise 2.3 billion, the policy cost 5.5 billion a year so it only covers 42% of the cost.

WALEED ALY

Well ok that’s 5.5 but then there’s your policy as it stands currently costs about what? 2 point something? So you take that off the 5.5, because that 5.5 is not net. That 5.5 is for the whole program, but if that applies then the ones that currently apply don’t need to…

ANDREW LEIGH

And this is the thing Waleed, if we had what we had from the Coalition in 2010 and certainly from Labor in Opposition in 2007, costings policy by policy, then we’d be able to go through this. The real concern with the way the Coalition are doing costings this time around is they’re not producing costings for every policy, as Oppositions in all past elections have done. And so it’s left to the rest of Australia to worry where the rest of the money is coming from.

WALEED ALY

Well hang on, before that though, you can’t go too hard on that point. I mean they’re going to release costings in the last week of the election campaign. By all indications they’re going to release with a lot more time for public and for media to digest than you did in 2010 or in 2007.

ANDREW LEIGH

That’s simply not right Waleed. What we did in 2007, was each time we released a policy, we described precisely how that policy would be funded. Then at the very end, in the last couple of days in the campaign it was clear how all of those things added up.

The coalition are taking a different step, they are not announcing policy by policy how things will be funded, so their Company Tax cut had no supporting documentation as to how the policy would be funded. They haven’t even met their own, fairly low standard from 2010, an election we subsequently they had an $11 billion costings gap and the accountants who’d done the costings were fined for breaching professional standards. That’s deeply concerning I think and it does raise the spectre of hidden cuts to pay for these policies.

WALEED ALY

They’re not doing that this year, they’re going by the budgetary office, which they’re perfectly entitled to do. The same kind of people with the same sorts of qualifications as Treasury. But isn’t part of the problem with asking the Opposition to put costings up that the system’s rigged against them, because they submit their policies and then the boffins look at it and cost it and release it straight to the public instead of going back to them in the kind of iterative process that happens with costings for a Government, so the Opposition only gets stung by doing this.

ANDREW LEIGH
Well you can do it either way, you can put your costings up before then election period and then they are yours privately to release as you wish, or you can do them during the election campaign and they get released as you say but this is not Labor’s costings process, by and large the Charter of Budget Honesty is a creation of Peter Costello and John Howard.

WALEED ALY
As amended by Labor..Yeah.

ANDREW LEIGH

Well we’ve provided more transparency and accountability around it but I’ll give Arthur his due, I’m sure he was involved in the production of the Charter of Budget Honesty in its inception, it is a very good charter and I just wish that the Coalition were adhering  to it better in this election.

ARTHUR SINODINOS
Waleed, can I just comment, in 2010, the Government seemed to send all its costings to Treasury and Finance, at the end of the last week of the campaign, so there was very little time to adequately scrutinise them now that’s a Government, presumably, that would have had the benefit of doing some of these costings while they were in Government, using the resources and incumbency to do that.

So, you know, really in a sense we’ve got to get on and look beyond the current debate on costings, judge what the Coalition will put out in the last week of the campaign and there will be time for people to adequately scrutinise what is put out and I think it is good to end the campaign with having a debate around costings as a basis for discussing economic policy options. Beacuse I think the major issue we face as a country is our budgetary options going forward. There’s no two ways about it and it’s actually good to end the campaign with a debate about economic management.

WALEED ALY
Ok and I want to come to some of the substantive questions about the policy in a second, but you’ve got to admit that they are a lot of people who are perfectly entitled to look at this and say there is a lot of money, a lot of spending promises coming out of the Coalition. A side of politics that has run almost entirely on fiscal restraint over the last 3 years and none of it is being explained. Exactly how it’s going to be paid for.

ARTHUR SINODINOS
Well look Waleed, this is a real dilemma for the Coalition, because if we run on a complete policy of fiscal restraint then Labor would be saying they have no agenda, they have no priorities…

WALEED ALY
But you’ve running on that Policy…

ARTHUR SINODINOS
…then when you put out your spending priorities, people say well you’re spending money on this, you’re spending money on that, but if we can demonstrate that we are spending money on X, Y & Z this is how we pay for it, this is how we make a contribution to reducing the pressure on the budget bottom line then I think we’ve done our job.

WALEED ALY

All right, we’ll come back to it, [inaudible] get a chance for costings, I just want to ask you though, Arthur Sinodinos, what exactly is the productivity case for this, because this is what Tony Abbott says but it’s unclear exactly how forceful the argument is that a Paid Parental Scheme of this scale aids productivity.

ARTHUR SINODINOS
Well one aspect of this is what the Productivity Commission noted in one of its enquiries around Paid Parental Leave, which was the health gains, which not only benefits families, but society at large. Lower long term health costs, the likely long run productivity benefits from kids getting a minimum period of exclusive care and breastfeeding…

WALEED ALY
That’s highly speculative isn’t it?

ARTHUR SINODINOS

Well they were consistent with the recommendations of both the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and the World Health Organisation in terms of the minimum period that’s good for both mothers and kids.

WALEED ALY
Well that’s fine but that’s different from saying that there’s a productivity gain by funding woman to breast feed their kids more down the track because they were breastfed longer they will more productive.

ARTHUR SINODINOS
And I said there were aspects to this and the second aspect of this is to extent that it is maintaining attachment to the Labor force at various levels up the chain of jobs if you like, right, promoting labor force participation, particularly in a context where we have an ageing population, I think there is a major productivity benefit in an generic sense. Using productivity in its broadest interpretation if you like.

WALEED ALY
It doesn’t quite sound like the big winning argument that Tony Abbott is presenting as though it’s a productivity gain, it sounds like, it’s very watery I have to say.

ARTHUR SINODINOS
Well, he’s talked about it in generic terms I’ve given you some specificity and granularity

WALEED ALY

Ok…

ANDREW LEIGH
Can I just respond on those..

WALEED ALY

That was almost Rudd-esque

WALEED ALY
Yes you can.

ANDREW LEIGH
Just a , you know, there’s always a risk when three blokes sit around and talk about parental leave but I mean Arthur’s suggestion is first of all that there will be a productivity increase through children, I mean that may be the case but if you’re born in 2013, we won’t see that until at least the 2030’s when you’re entering, when that child enters the Labor force. And if there is a benefit in terms of participation, my read of the evidence is that attachment to the labour force is most fragile at the bottom of the income spectrum, rather than the top of the wage distribution. It’s early childhood workers who are wondering whether or not it’s worth their while to stay attached to the labour force, less so accountants and lawyers…


ARTHUR SINODINOS
Well can I just give a quick comment on that Waleed, because someone on average earnings will get I think $21,000 more under the Coalition scheme than they will under the Government scheme so for someone on average full time earnings, which admittedly may be be higher than that of childcare workers and there are actions being taken on that front, will get that $21,000 extra, so in fact it is very supportive of those who have a wage above the actual minimum wage.

WALEED ALY
Yeah but those who’ve got a low wage would be worse off under this scheme wouldn’t they?

ARTHUR SINODINOS
No, no they wouldn’t be, because they get their actual wage or the minimum wage whichever is the greater, from memory.

WALEED ALY

Ok, sure, just one thing I want to pick up on Andrew is the superannuation element…

ANDREW LEIGH

The Compulsory Superannuation that’s right…

WALEED ALY

The Coalition scheme includes Superannuation as part of this entitlement, Labor’s scheme doesn’t, because its not connected to work place entitlement, it’s a welfare programme effectively. Isn’t that a massive blind spot in Labor’s plan, particularly given the differential levels of Superannuation that happen at the other end for woman, in relation, compared to men.

ANDREW LEIGH
Waleed, our approach to Superannuation for low income earners is that low income earners, have traditionally been in a particularly unusual situation where their superannuation is taxed higher than their earnings, so we’ve taken away the tax on superannuation for those earning below $37,000. That’s of much greater benefit than providing superannuation for the period of Parental leave.

The Coalition may well provide Superannuation as part of Parental Leave, but they will raise the taxes on superannuation contributions for low income workers, for everyone earning under $37,000, two thirds of whom are women. So that’s I think going to be a much bigger hit to superannuation for low income earners and to the gender superannuation gap which I do think matters.

Just one other quick thing, Arthur’s claim about a Mother on average earnings being $21,000 better off, was rated mostly false by PolitiFact today and they did that on the basis that Mr Abbott appeared to have used an overly high figure for average female earnings.

ARTHUR SINODINOS
This was average salary for women who worked full time.

WALEED ALY

Indeed, so…

ARTHUR SINODINOS

That was the definition which is around $65,000. So it may be PolitiFact or whoever are looking at the average salary for women, we were looking at the average salary for women who worked full time.

ANDREW LEIGH

Indeed, and so, but Mr Abbott’s claim was the generic one, a mother on average earnings and to exclude part timers I think is a significant blind spot, particularly  given that there is quite high part time participation among women. I don’t like to get into too many of these scrappy things because Arthur and I do enjoy having a consensus on most of the big questions, but I think this is an important difference.

ARTHUR SINODINOS
Well, a bit of specificity and granularity is good from time to time.

WALEED ALY

You’ve gone there twice Arthur!

ARTHUR SINODINOS

Well it’s Kevin Rudd being back as you say, it’s sort of you know, a bit of programmatic specificity

WALEED ALY

Ah it’s in the ether I, look forward to your ascension to some sort of leadership role and the various other managerial words that  you can come up with Arthur, I’ll keep track of them and I’ll watch with interest.


Gentlemen we are out of time, but I look forward to us locking horns again…

ANDREW LEIGH

Thanks

ARTHUR SINODINOS

Thanks

WALEED ALY
On other issues of granularity or something, I can’t even keep track of it, Andrew Leigh, Labor MP for Fraser and Arthur Sinodinos, Liberal Senator for NSW, Parliamentary secretary for the Opposition Leader.

ENDS

On last night's ABC702 Political Forum, I joined Liberal MP Malcolm Turnbull and David Smith from the US Studies Centre in a congenial conversation with host Richard Glover about the philosophical differences between the parties (I argued Labor is the party of egalitarianism and liberalism), the Coalition's uncosted paid parental leave scheme, negative advertising, and the situation in Egypt. Here's a podcast.

Today I joined my parliamentary colleagues to launch our 2013 election campaign. We also announced $10 million for the second stage of the University of Canberra's Sports Hub, a new sport and health research, training and administration facility to inspire and engage young people in sport and fitness across the capital region. My thanks to our volunteers and the ACT Labor team including Chris Sant who is running for the second Senate seat and candidate for Hume Michael Pilbrow.

CAMPAIGN MEDIA RELEASE

10 MILLION INVESTMENT IN REGIONAL SPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE AND HEALTH PROGRAMS

The Rudd Labor Government today announced $10 million towards the University of Canberra Sports Hub project, which will provide state-of-the-art sports facilities and community engagement programs for Canberra and the surrounding region.

The Sports Hub project includes the building of a sport and health research, training and administration facility. The project will also establish a mobile sports fitness and health clinic which will work to promote the benefits of an active lifestyle through community engagement and participation.

The UC Sports Hub project is a collaborative effort between the Rudd Labor Government, the ACT Government, the University of Canberra Union and the ACT and Southern NSW Rugby Union.

ACT Senator, Kate Lundy, Member for Fraser, Andrew Leigh MP and Member for Eden-Monaro, Mike Kelly MP made the Regional Development Australian Fund announcement today during a visit to the University of Canberra.

Senator Lundy said the Rudd Labor Government is serious about investing in Canberra to meet future challenges and opportunities.

“The Sports Hub will provide world class shared sporting and research facilities, sports testing, talent identification and coaching clinics for students and coaches in regional communities, access to research support,” said Senator Lundy.

“Establishing an internationally recognised Sports Hub will ensure the region has the expertise in the sport and fitness fields, which will in turn attract more businesses and research to the region, driving economic growth and sustainability

“This project will add to the state-of-the-art facilities that already exist at the Australian Institute of Sport and will help to further increase Canberra’s international reputation for sporting excellence and engagement,” said Senator Lundy.

Member for Eden-Monaro, Dr Mike Kelly said this project reaches out beyond Canberra’s borders and will be a massive boost for the entire region.

“The establishment of mobile sports fitness and health clinics will allow the project to deliver real benefits to a number of communities in the ACT and surrounding region,” said Dr Kelly.

“Sports clubs across the region will have the benefit of working with these clinics to boost sports participation and promote healthy and active lifestyles especially in our children.

“I commend the foresight of the project in reaching out to communities in Queanbeyan, Cooma-Monaro and down to the South Coast,” said Dr Kelly.

Member for Fraser, Andrew Leigh said the building and construction phase of the project will also provide jobs and an economic boost to the Canberra community.

“Canberra plays a significant role as a regional hub city to a broader population of around 600,000 people, and is committed to building connection, belonging and collaboration within the region,” said Dr Leigh.

“This is an investment in sports research and industry and this project will continue to give back to the community and will provide an ongoing economic benefit to the local and regional economy.

“This is another exciting project for Canberra and the region following an announcement from the ACT Brumbies and the University of Canberra to partner up to build a new $16 million ACT Brumbies' headquarters at the University of Canberra,” said Dr Leigh.



The funds for the project are from the latest round of the Regional Development Australia Fund. Funding for this project is already included in the budget

This morning, I spoke on Fairfax TV about polling, optimism and Paid Parental Leave Scheme. The Government's Paid Parental Leave scheme, which has been used by over 300,000 parents, is fair and financially sound. By contrast, the Opposition's plan is regressive and at odds with the Australian social safety net that aims to give more to those who need it most. Here's a vodcast of the conversation.

My opinion piece today looks at the costings challenge for the Coalition.

It's Time for Abbott to do the Maths on Costings Gap, The Canberra Times, The Age, 19 August 2013

Imagine if you decide one day to use a new accountant to do your taxes. He promises that everything will be done on time, and you’ll get a hefty tax refund.

You hand him the group certificate from your employer. He says the figures on it are not worth the paper they’re written on. You point out that he’ll have to use some estimate of your income. He responds, ‘don’t worry - we won’t be adding up your tax return this year’.

You ask about that promised refund. He shows you a draft of the return. It shows the same deduction claimed in two places.

As tax day approaches, the accountant keeps promising to do your return ‘plenty of time’ before it’s due. But with three weeks to go, you’re starting to fret.

If this tale sounds familiar, it’s what it would look like if Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey ran an accounting firm.

The story to date. In 1998, John Howard and Peter Costello came up with the notion of a ‘charter of budget honesty’. Prior to the election, Treasury would release an independent budget statement (the Pre-Election Fiscal and Economic Outlook, or PEFO) and the resources of Treasury and Finance departments (and now the Parliamentary Budget Office) would be available to all parties to cost their policies. Based on this, both Government and Opposition can produce costed policies.

Ironically, while the Charter of Budget Honesty was a Liberal invention, they failed to comply with it at the last election. Post-election analysis by Treasury uncovered an $11 billion gap in the Liberals’ costings. The Liberals had claimed in that campaign that their costings had been audited, but the firm who did the job were fined for professional misconduct.

This time around, the Liberals have a costings gap that is – on their own admission – $70 billion. They have pledged to give fringe benefits tax breaks back to people who do not use the car for business purposes, and to restore the private health insurance rebate for the richest Australians. Their proposed paid parental leave scheme offers nothing more to a worker on the minimum wage than the current scheme, but provides over $70,000 per baby to those who earn the most. Each of these policies are skewed towards the most affluent. Together, they constitute a massive cost to taxpayers.

The problem for the Liberals is that they have spent the past three years saying ‘no’ to Labor’s sensible savings measures. As a result, they are now in the position of promising to spend more, tax less, and pay down debt faster; oblivious to the fact that it isn’t mathematically possible to achieve all three.

In the first week of the campaign, Mr Abbott’s sole policy announcement of substance was a cut in the company tax rate. Spruiking it, he airily claimed that it would be paid by savings he’d already announced. Unfortunately, those savings have already been taken by the commitment to give a massive tax cut to big miners and big polluters. Once that’s paid for, Mr Abbott has nothing in the kitty.

For Australian families, Mr Abbott’s costings gap means tax increases or service cuts amounting to thousands of dollars for the typical household. Most likely, that means a reduction in the quality of schools, hospitals, and family payments.

Over recent budgets, Labor has made some tough decisions affecting the public service. Anyone who knows our federal public service is aware that any ‘fat’ is long-gone. If elected, the Liberals are likely to maintain the efficiency dividend, and to add on top of it their policy of getting rid of 12,000 to 20,000 Canberra public service job cuts. This would be devastating for our city, and yet it would be only a small fraction of the costings gap that Mr Abbott needs to make up. Even after slashing the Canberra public service, abolishing the Schoolkids Bonus and scrapping Trade Training Centres, Mr Abbott is still left without enough money to pay the bills.

So will the Liberals provide some honest answers? In July, Mr Hockey said that if the PEFO figures were the same as those in previous budget updates “PEFO won’t be worth the paper it’s written on’. Last week, he went further, saying of Treasury costings, ‘These numbers just look stupid so we won’t be adding up our policies.’

These were such extraordinary statements from a would-be Treasurer that even Mr Abbott contradicted them, saying ‘The budget bottom line will be there for everyone to see.’ Yet while Mr Abbott is promising that his full suite of policies will be out in ‘plenty of time’ before the deadline, he is increasingly looking like a teenager preparing to pull an all-nighter to get the assignment done.

And now, the jig is up. In PEFO, Treasury has confirmed what the Government has been saying for months – that the forecasts in the budget and its updates reflect the best estimates of the experts. The Liberals no longer have the excuse that they’re waiting for PEFO. Now, let’s hope they’re finally willing to level with the Australian people about their tax rises and service cuts.

Because as much as Mr Abbott likes to talk about the laws he wants to repeal, he can’t repeal the laws of mathematics.

Andrew Leigh is the federal member for Fraser, and his website is www.andrewleigh.com.

On 14 August, I spoke to the National Rural Health Alliance about their top three priorities for improving rural and regional health: health workforce, disability, and telehealth/NBN.http://www.youtube.com/v/6yLj_7XCytc?hl=en_US&version=3

I appeared on ABC RN Drive with Waleed Aly and Arthur Sinodinos last night, discussing special economic zones, Coalition costings, minority government, and Waleed turning 35. Here's a podcast.

On 14 August 2013, I spoke with Lyndal Curtis about Trade Training Centres, Labor's historic environmental reforms, and the risks to Canberra posed by Coalition cuts. Alas, Zed Seselja was to have joined the conversation, but withdrew at the last minute.

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

Today we announced $9.4m for new training centres in the ACT as part of a long term Labor Government program to secure jobs for young people and grow our economy:

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

This morning, I had the pleasure of chatting with Mark Parton about Labor's investments, the importance of the public service, and the joys of election campaigning. Here's a podcast.