Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, Assistant Minister for the Public Service
TOM CONNELL, HOST: Well, last week we had Labor’s big move on tax changes. Today we had the Coalition indicate at least part of its response. Joining me live now for the first time this year, the two of them that is, the Assistant Minister for the Prime Minister, Patrick Gorman, and NSW Liberal Party President Jason Falinski. Gentlemen, thank you both for your time. Jason, I’m going to start with you because the movement’s on your side. Peter Dutton said he won’t take any tax cuts away that have already been delivered. So, basically the lower middle income changes will stay. Is that a good move? And what else should he do?
JASON FALINSKI, NSW LIBERAL PARTY PRESIDENT: Well, mate you know, Peter’s sticking to the principles of our party, which is that we believe in lower taxes. So, where we can, we will deliver lower taxes for Australians so they can keep more of the money they earn. And obviously what Maury should do is ensure that ‘my word is my bond’, tax cuts that Anthony Albanese signed up to and agreed to are put to the parliament and make everyone in parliament vote up or down on whether they keep their promises or not.
CONNELL: So, as to where you differentiate, then, does that mean you’ve got to take something that is still different? There’s not much point in railing about a broken promise unless it’s different and does that mean middle- and higher-income earners that’s where the party’s looking?
FALINSKI: Look, it’s fair to say Tom, that what we’re looking to is tax relief across the board, regardless of what your income is. And these stage-three tax cuts were part of stages one and two, where tax relief was delivered to people on lower incomes. We know that people on higher incomes have been suffering through bracket creep, that there are a lot of Australia, that the ABS data tells us that those people earning higher incomes are actually the people suffering the greatest amount of financial stress at the moment, something that is not spoken about a lot. But this is a matter of trust. This is a matter of, you know, ‘when I give you my word, it is my bond and I will keep the promises that I make.’ Now, you know, if it was good enough two years ago, then it should be good enough now.
CONNELL: So, where are we at to think on that Pat? Do you just accept that when people hear in the future Labor say, ‘we have no plans’ , what that means is ‘oh we might be tinkering in the background, but we couldn’t possibly tell you about that?’
PATRICK GORMAN, ASSISTANT MINISTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER AND ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE: Well I think actually, the end of Jason’s answer kind of outlines exactly why we need a new tax package and why we’ve put this forward to the Australian people and indeed the parliament, which is things have changed over the last two years. They’ve changed quite dramatically. We’ve seen real changes in interest rates, we’ve seen inflation pressures driven by conflict around the globe. Of course we needed an adjusted tax plan. And what I think we haven’t seen from Mr. Dutton or indeed what Jason just said is: what are they going to do when this is actually in front of the parliament? Are they going to vote for Labor’s tax cut for middle Australia? Or are they going to vote against it and then just say, ‘oh, well, we won’t touch it now that it’s done?’ I think it’s really interesting that we’ve seen Mr. Dutton all over the country this week. He can’t actually say what he’s going to do in parliament in the weeks to come. We’ve been really clear about-
CONNELL: We’ve got a little bit of time, it’s a pretty dramatic U-turn. It’s a pretty dramatic U-turn. I suspect they’ll accept that and then tinker in particular with that second highest bracket. But anyway, I’m sure you were watching my presentation at the top with baited breath. Well Patrick, more importantly-
GORMAN: Well Tom you seem to know more about what Mr. Dutton’s got to do than he does.
CONNELL: Ah, look, you know, you get a bit of intuition after being a grizzled veteran now of the press gallery. But Patrick, what Jason and I want to know is, what about the people out in the Perth wine bars that we know that you-
FALINSKI: Door knock.
CONNELL: Yeah. Is it door knocking or is it sort of just breezing in and ordering a Chardonnay?
I’m not sure. Are a few of them saying, ‘Hey mate, come on, we’re middle Australia too. Sort us out.’
GORMAN: Well, it’s Fringe World at the moment in Perth, Tom, which means that we’ve got artists from all over the globe here, performing, showing what a great, vibrant arts community we have in Perth, supporting the wine bars, pubs, restaurants, cafes and more in the Perth electorate. And like I say, I haven’t been to a wine bar for a couple of weeks, but I’ve been out buying my coffee each morning and I’ve had quite a bit of support-
CONNELL: Geez.
FALINSKI: No wonder they’re complaining about a downturn in revenue.
GORMAN: I’ve had quite a bit of support. I’ve had quite a bit of support for the position we’ve put forward in my electorate, 80% of people will be better off under this plan. In the McKellar electorate, which is dear to the hearts of all of us on this panel, 76% of taxpayers will be better off under the plan that Labor has put forward. I think people see why we’ve done this. They see who it is that we’re trying to help. And they also recognise that all 13.6 million Australians get a tax cut under this plan.
FALINSKI: So, Tom, this is fundamentally-
CONNELL: Yeah, a couple of them drop every year.
FALINSKI: Yeah, sorry. So, Tom, this is fundamentally the problem with Labor’s attitude to tax, which is they don’t see tax policy as growing the cake, so everyone’s better off. They just see it as taking from one group to give to another. And the more you divide Australia, the smaller the cake gets and the less we have to divide up. And the problem is that now, how would we know or trust anything that the Albanese Government has to say on tax? We know that they’ve followed the Australia Institute, the most extreme left-wing think tank in Australia, on this policy. You know, you only have to read their documents to see some of the other things that they also advocate, like a wealth tax, like capital gains tax on the family home. You know, Labor can say, rule those out now but-
GORMAN: Tom we’ve got to rewind. Now we’re going to rewind. I think I’m going to stop Jason before he- I don’t know where he’s about to take us, but let’s be clear about who we are seeking to help. It’s middle Australia who are under huge cost of living pressure. I was with some early childhood educators in the electorate of Perth on Tuesday, talking about what this means for them. And if you’re an early childhood educator, on $45,000 a year, under our plan, you get an $804 tax cut under the plan that Mr. Dutton and Jason are still defending they get nothing.
FALINSKI: No, Patrick, they get $315. If they’re on $70,000 a year, they get $874,- tax increase, a tax benefit. So, your plan isn’t what you say it is. And by the way they’ve already been delivered tax relief. And by the way, this dividing Australians doesn’t wash. And the problem that you have is, how would we believe anything now that the Prime Minister has to say on tax, given we know his word isn’t his bond?
GORMAN: Jason, your federal party is led by someone who wakes up every morning seeking to divide Australians. What we wake up every morning so we can do is to help them. That’s what we’ve done with this tax plan.
FALINSKI: Well, Patrick, that’s a nice you know focus group line, I’m sure. But the fact is that the way that you’ve approached this tax debate is, ‘Aren’t we great? We’re taking from these people over here.’ And you only have to look at Dan Ilic’s posts online characterising Australians on $180,000 as being sort of wine swilling premium economy people who go to Aspen every summer. That’s not the people we’re talking about. There are a lot of ordinary Australians these days due to bracket creep, due to inflation caused by the waste and mismanagement of federal and Labor governments across this country who now find themselves earning what used to be good incomes but can’t make ends meet.
CONNELL: Quite heated today. I’m enjoying this. I almost had time to duck out for coffee there. I just thought I’d let that go. We better end on the RBA. Come on, Patrick. This is not the done thing. Premiers sniffing an election nearby and saying, let’s cut rates next week when inflation’s got a four in front of it. These are bizarre, these calls, aren’t they?
GORMAN: I’m pretty relaxed about Premiers having views on these things. I think most Australians have a view. It’s not the job of the Commonwealth Government to give sort of that sort of public advice to the RBA. We have a different role, I love that we have an independent reserve bank, I think it served us well.
CONNELL: Hang own, it is the role of the states? Commonwealth no, states play on. Is that how this works?
GORMAN: I don’t think RBA will be in any way bothered by Premiers expressing their view. They express views on a range of things that aren’t within their responsibilities. That’s happened since Federation. It’s pretty normal. It’s pretty normal. It doesn’t bother me and it doesn’t bother the RBA. I’d be surprised. So I don’t think it needs to bother Jason and I don’t think it needs to bother you.
CONNELL: Jason, would the RBA care what you have to say Jason?
FALINSKI: Look, I agree with Pat that state governments do spend a lot of time talking about things that have nothing to do with them. But the long and the short of it, though, is-
CONNELL: Alright lets end on kumbaya…
FALINSKI: Okay, no problem. We’ll stop there.
CONNELL: We’ll go in 5 seconds, do it in 5.
FALINSKI: Oh no, I was just going to say genuinely, this is irresponsible political lead. We have an independent reserve bank that sets monetary policy. We know since the 1980s that that has produced better outcomes for Australians in terms of real wage increases.
CONNELL: Jason. Pat, talk next week. Thank you.
