GILBERT: Were joined by Finance Minister, Senator Penny Wong. Minister, thanks for your time.
WONG: Good to be with you.
GILBERT: The outgoing minister, Simon Crean, has urged the Government to drop the plan to raid super concessions for the wealthy. He says it would be trashing the legacy of Hawke and Keating. What do you say to that?
WONG: What Id say is this Government is firmly in the tradition of Hawke and Keating and past Labor Governments. Were about creating wealth and ensuring there is opportunity and fairness. That is the Labor tradition.
And when it comes to superannuation, we are building on the Labor tradition. Two key policies: increasing the superannuation guarantee from 9 to 12 per cent, a critical aspect of work unfinished from the Keating era. And the other thing were doing is making sure low income workers, millions of Australians who are on lower incomes, get a fair tax break on their super. Something that they dont currently get and, were Tony Abbott to be elected, he wants to rip away.
GILBERT: But Simon Crean, first and foremost, was a member of the expenditure review committee, until last week when he was sacked from the Cabinet. So if we wanted an indication of where the Government was going, this is a pretty clear indication, isnt it? He was sacked from the ERC last week, so he knows exactly where youre planning to make savings, ie, on super.
WONG: I dont get into hypotheticals, and I certainly dont get into any gossip about what might or might not have been discussed in a Cabinet committee. I take my responsibilities as a Labor minister more seriously than that.
GILBERT: But hes disclosed it, hasnt he?
WONG: No, I dont agree. What I would say about superannuation is this is the Party, the Labor Party, that built superannuation over the opposition of John Howard and the Liberal Party. And we are the Party that is strengthening superannuation through the increase in the superannuation guarantee and the tax break for millions of low income workers. Now I think that is a very proud record and a very proud policy platform.
GILBERT: Martin Parkinson has recently said that to be sustainable or to have these concessions on a sustainable footing in an ageing population, that there will need to be changes. Thats a view supported by the head of AustralianSuper thats a $60 billion fund. Is that your view?
WONG: I have a very strong view about the importance of sustainability into the future. Whether its super or other parts of the Budget, you always have to look at what your decisions will mean looking out ahead. And thats why, if you look at our past budgets and the number of saving decisions weve taken over the opposition of Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey if those had not been taken, things like the Private Health Insurance rebate changes, our net debt position in 2020 would be $250 billion worse. We are
GILBERT: Is that why youre looking then at reining in the concessions?
WONG: This is why we will always look at how you ensure strong, sustainable superannuation, and a strong sustainable budget position not withstanding all the challenges that the budget and the Government and the economy face given whats happening to nominal GDP.
GILBERT: But how do you think that thats going to be received in the electorate? People who have put away their nest egg and feel that the Government is again changing the rules?
WONG: Well, what Id say to people first is dont believe everything you read. And I know that budget speculation always abounds at this time. But I think on Budget night, a lot of the stories that are written prior to the Budget are demonstrably inaccurate. And so Id say to people: look at our record and look at our support for superannuation.
GILBERT: Gary Grays the new Minister for Resources. He was elevated to Cabinet. He seems to have defended, yesterday, the States rights to increase resources royalties. He says its... he seems to be suggesting its a good combination and that the resources industry are contributing more to state coffers than they ever have before, and thats a good thing.
WONG: Well
GILBERT: ...The Treasurer has a very different message though, to the States. He doesnt think royalties should be increased.
WONG: I dont know how you quite get that from Garys comments. I read Garys comments as making the very obvious point that the resources sector is contributing a significant amount of revenue to State and Federal governments. I always think its interesting in this debate that the Liberal Party would die in a ditch to defend against a mining tax but would also die in a ditch to defend the rights of Liberal states to impose mining taxes in the form of royalties, which is more inefficient.
GILBERT: He seems to be sympathetic, do you deny that? To the States raising royalties?
WONG: I think Gary is a strong supporter of the resources sector. So if you ask me, what is he sympathetic to, hes sympathetic to the views of mining companies, as he should be as the Resources Minister. He will always listen to their views and he has a very strong record of not only working in that sector but understanding its importance to his state.
GILBERT: And on that front as well on 457 visas, hes argued at just how important they are to that economy that needs labour when there are critical skill shortages. This, again, he seems to be distancing himself from the Prime Ministers rhetoric on 457 visas.
WONG: I think its very important in this debate to remember what the policy position is, rather than people getting carried away about what they think someone said or what they think someone said means. The policy proposition of the Government, supported by all members of the Government, is that 457s, that is short term migrant labour, should be used to fill skill shortages that are genuine, and not to ensure that Australians are not able to take jobs for which theyre entitled.
GILBERT: So the Prime Ministers been guilty of some colourful rhetoric when the policys different.
WONG: No, look, I just think its very important in this debate to be really clear about what the policy is, and the policy is clear.
GILBERT: The promise to lift wages in the child care and aged care sectors apparently has led to the unions to try and renew their push for membership targeting in the workforce., some 300,000. Do you concede that that injection of funds to the aged care and child care sectors is going to have that effect of boosting union membership as well?
WONG: What Id say is an injection of fund is important for those sectors. Its important for the principle of opportunity, because we want our children to have the best possible start in life. Thats why we have our Gonski platform, and thats why we want to improve school funding. And its also why we want to ensure we continue the improvement of quality in child care centres and similarly in aged care. We need to make sure that people in those occupations are paid appropriately.
GILBERT: But the unions will also get a benefit of this, wont they, with their numbers going up?
WONG: Unions are entitled to advocate for improved wages and conditions for their members, thats their job.
GILBERT: But youve put a condition on this funding to be only given to centres that have signed up enterprise bargaining agreements. That gives a competitive advantage to the unions.
WONG: Hang on, you can be part of an enterprise bargaining agreement and not be a member of a union.
GILBERT: It doesnt happen as often, certainly not with low paid workers.
WONG: Hang on, lets get this... were not saying were only going to pay a person X whos a union member and not person Y. What were saying is we want to use the enterprise bargaining framework. And you know why? Because what we want is this injection of money to go to wages, to improve the labour supply into those industries, which is important, and not simply to be taken as profit by centres and increasing charges to parents. Its a very sensible policy position.
GILBERT: One final issue I want to ask you about, the boat arrivals weve seen in the last few days. Obviously another tragedy at sea and theres no sign that the boats are going to stop at this point. What I want to ask you, though, as Finance Minister, is the financial impact on the bottom line. According to the figures around today, the Government had budgeted for 12,000 arrivals. Weve already seen more than 15,000 arrivals in 2012-13. How significant is that impact to the Governments costing?
WONG: Well, we have to update all our estimates in every budget update. We have to review them and update where appropriate, and thats what well do with this as with other budget parameters. And what we will do, unlike Joe Hockey, is we will be transparent to the Australian people about what we are spending on and the decisions, the choices, we are making to fund important reforms like DisabilityCare and our plan for school improvement. My challenge to Joe Hockey is: instead of the rhetoric, why dont you come up with some costings?
GILBERT: But your funding for the boats and the asylum seekers has been costed at around $2.5 billion for this year, down to $1.3 billion for next year. How is there going to be a decline given the trajectory of the number of arrivals that were seeing?
WONG: This is a budget question, this is a question about reviewing those forecasts and considering whether or not they need to be updated, as with any other forecast, and well be doing that.
GILBERT: Youve been critical of Joe Hockey but he has said that once the Pre-Election Fiscal Outlook is out, he will release the details. Thats fair enough, its what Oppositions do.
WONG: Look, you know, its really interesting that Joe beats his chest regularly about ending the age of entitlement, and then comes into the Parliament and votes against the Governments plans to ensure the Baby Bonus is more sustainable. He has no credibility. Its entirely hypocritical.
GILBERT: Finance Minister, Penny Wong, thanks for your time.
ENDS