SENATOR PENNY WONG, CAMPAIGN SPOKESPERSON: Today, I want to talk about Medicare because we've seen Mr Turnbull come out and tell the Australian people that he is not going to privatise Medicare. Well, Mr Turnbull on this issue is about as believable as Tony Abbott was when he stood up and told the Australian people before the last election, no cuts to health, no cuts to education. We all remember what happened then.
I say to the Australian people, don't look at what Mr Turnbull says look at what he and his Government have done. He didn't want to privatise Medicare, can he explain why the Liberals set up a 20 person $5 million taskforce to look at privatising the Medicare payment system, something that Mr Turnbull, when asked, described as a high priority for his Government. He should explain that.
Second, if he doesn't want to privatise Medicare, can he explain why the Liberals have tasked the Productivity Commission to look at how services such as Medicare could be outsourced. We all know what that means.
If he didn't want to privatise Medicare, have a look at the scoping paper that the Productivity Commission has released. In that, what we see is that one of the things that people - one of the groups who have expressed an interest in the privatisation of payments are the big banks. I guess I want to ask this of Mr Turnbull: Mr Turnbull, which aspect of the Medicare payment system did your Government look at giving to the big banks? Which aspect of the Medicare payment system did your Government look at giving to the big banks?
But more than that, the best guide to future behaviour is past behaviour. Under the Liberal Party, they've made decisions to take $4 billion out of Medicare and medicines over the budget period. That's what Mr Turnbull's plan for Medicare is, privatisation and $4 billion taken out of Medicare of the forward estimate period. So, what we have seen from the Liberal Party over the term of this government has been nothing less than an attack on Medicare step by step. Now they want Australians to believe it's all over. Well, it just doesn't wash. Happy to take questions.
JOURNALIST: Senator, what are your worst fears if a plebiscite goes ahead on same-sex marriage?
WONG: I have been very clear about this. Just as the best mark of future behaviour is past behaviour, the best guide to that in terms of Medicare, I'd apply that proposition to the plebiscite. We have seen the incapacity of members of the Coalition to have a respectful debate when it comes to marriage equality. We have seen what Mr Christensen has said, seen what Cory Bernardi has said. They are not able to have a respectful debate on this.
A plebiscite was proposed not because the Liberal Party decided they want to progress this issue. A plebiscite was proposed because the Liberal Party decided they couldn't progress this issue, because members of the hard right of the Liberal Party were too angry about it and Malcolm Turnbull tapped the mat. After saying to everybody he didn't support a plebiscite, he's tapped the mat and given in to Abetz, Bernardi and Christensen. That is what has happened.
JOURNALIST: If a same-sex marriage plebiscite will be so divisive, will Labor block legislation in the Senate setting one up?
WONG: I have seen the Liberal Party trying to make this the focus. If marriage equality is your focus, vote Labor because what we are saying to people is we will do what needs to be done. A Labor Prime Minister, Mr Bill Shorten, will present a bill to the House of Representatives to make marriage equality law.
JOURNALIST: Will you block or pass the bill setting up a marriage equality plebiscite?
WONG: Have you seen the bill?
JOURNALIST: No.
WONG: No-one has seen the bill. No-one has seen the bill. This has been a proposition that the Liberal Party have been trying to use to take attention off Malcolm Turnbull's capitulation to the right, his capitulation on this important issue.
Let me tell you, LGBTI Australians everywhere are so disappointed thathe has capitulated on this issue because we understand what it means. They are trying to get attention away from his capitulation by trying to talk about what happens after the election on a bill they haven't even drafted. They haven't even put out there.
Let's remember that this has been Liberal Party policy from prior to the time Mr Turnbull knocked off Mr Abbott, it dates back to Mr Abbott's prime ministership. No bill, yet somehow they want to talk about what happens after the election. This election will be about Medicare, it will be a referendum on Medicare, on schools, on hospitals, on universities and it will be a peoples vote on marriage equality. If you elect a Labor Government we will deliver it.
JOURNALIST: Back on Medicare, despite what may have been looked at in the past, the Prime Minister being quite categorical in his denial of any privatisation. Given that, it is a little bit sneaky for Labor Party to continue to the claim that Liberals will privatise it, as a hallmark of your policy for this campaign?
WONG: I'm asked about sneakiness; you know what's sneaky? What's sneaky is a Liberal Leader before the last election telling people no cuts to health, no cuts to education and then cutting them. What is sneaky is the Prime Minister, Mr Turnbull, now expecting us to all take him on faith that somehow, despite the actions of the Government attacking Medicare, setting up taskforce, setting up Productivity Commission inquiries, obviously looking at whether the big banks can take up an aspect of the Medicare system.
Which bit of the Medicare system did Mr Turnbull's Government want to give to the banks? He should answer that question. What's sneaky is doing all that and then somehow saying to everybody "I know we are cutting $4 billion out of Medicare and medicines but trust us now, we really love it".
JOURNALIST: When the Prime Minister says categorically there'll be no changes to the current services in any format, no changesto Medicare, no privatisation. I think he even put a full stop in there, we just throw that out completely?
WONG: Isn't the question the Prime Minister: why have you done what you've done? Actions speak louder than words. Your actions as leader and as a Cabinet Minister have been to attack Medicare, have been to open the door to privatisation, the work of the taskforce thatyou described as a high priority. These are the actions of the Prime Minister. He wants you all to forget about and he wants youfocus on his words. We know what words from a Liberal leader as an election nears mean. We saw 'No cuts to health, no cuts to education.
JOURNALIST: Is this the biggest lie of the Labor campaign as it's being titled the Liberals?
WONG: The biggest lie of this campaign is the Liberal Party trying to tell the Australian people that they're supporters of Medicare in the face of all evidence to the contrary.
JOURNALIST: Is it appropriate for a man in a position of leadership within the AFL as president of a football club to be making jokes about female reporters drowning?
WONG: I've only seen the reports, I didn't actually listen to the comments, so I want to caveat my response with that, but I'll make the general response. Which is language that targets people in the sort of way you've described is inappropriate, whoever makes it, whether it's political and community leaders, football leaders. We ought not speak in ways that are suggestive explicitly or implicitly of violence. We ought not speak in ways that demean people in ways on the basis of their gender, regardless of who the person is, whether they're politicians, community leaders, sporting leaders.I think that's the general principle we should alladhere to.
JOURNALIST: Should Eddie McGuire resign as Collingwood Club President?
WONG: I refer to my previous comments. He, like any political, community or business leader, should observe that principle. We should not speak in ways that are suggestive of violence and we ought not to demean people on the basis of their gender. Thank you.
ENDS