SABRA LANE: Penny Wong, thanks fortalking to 730.

SENATOR PENNY WONG, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE: Goodto be with you.

LANE: The details ofthe Trans Pacific Partnershipare now out. I don't presumeyou've had time to read all6,000 pages,but is Laborinclined to support it?

WONG: Look,we will study the detail, weare very conscious of thebenefits of tradeliberalisation and certainlythis isan agreement whichcovers a very large part of theglobal economy.But we'll studythe detail closely, we are asalways,concerned by theinclusion of an Investor StateDispute Settlement clause.Wethink Andrew Robb should havedone whatJohn Howard did whenit came to the US Free TradeAgreement, which was to refuseto include one. But wecertainly will studythe detail andcome to a view about ourposition.

LANE: How long do you thinkLabor will need to examine thisbefore giving an indication asto whether you will support itor not?

WONG: Well, look, there arecertainly quite a lot ofcomplex aspects to thisagreement.One of them, ofcourse, is the costof andavailability ofmedicines.Andrew Robb assuresAustralians he hasn't doneanything in this agreementwhichwould impact upon theprice of medicine, nor theaccessibility of medicine.Wewill certainly be examining indetailthat aspect of theagreement to make sure what hesaid is true.

LANE: It has beensuggested that the Government'sindependent economic adviser,the Productivity Commission, begiven thejob to look at this.It would take the Commission, Iunderstand, four or fivemonths. Is that something youwouldlike to see happen, or doyou trust Parliamentscommittees on treaties to dothe job here?

WONG: Look, I certainlythink having a more rigorousassessment of the economicbenefits of trade agreementswould behelpful to the publicdiscussion of it.Obviously itis a matter for the Governmenthow it does that, but I think we've seen over recent months abit of a tendency, particularlyfrom the former Prime Minister,Mr Abbott, of having ago atanybody who raised concernsabout trade agreements, and Ithink, as somebody who is verysupportive of thebenefits oftrade for working people, forjobs in this country, I thinkit would be a good thing ifinstead ofhaving a go atpeople who raised concerns, theGovernment could actuallyaddress their concernscarefully, and interms of theeconomic benefits, I think itwould be a good thing if theGovernment could put on thetable the evidenceabout thebenefits of the agreementthey've negotiated.

LANE:Does Laborwant this deal to succeed? Willyou work with the Government tobring it about?

WONG: We want goodtrade agreements to succeed.Wewant trade liberalisation thatworks, as it should, to bringaboutbenefits in terms of jobsand better wages andconditions, and better economicopportunities for Australians,that'salways been Labor'sposition.That's the positionwe've held for some 40years.

LANE: The agreement includesclauses regarding InvestorState Dispute Settlements, whichbasically allows companies tosuegovernments if publicpolicies end up costing themmoney. Is Labor satisfied withthe protections there for plainpackaged cigarettes?

WONG: Well, Ineed to understand very clearlyhow those protections willoperate and if they are water tight, and I thinkAustralianswill want to understandthat.Let me make this point onthese clauses: if we were ingovernment, we wouldnotinclude them.We think they arebad policy.There is nosensible reason, as the HighCourt Chief Justice has madeclear, there is no sensiblereason for including them in trade agreements ina way that seeks to overridefuture domestic law.

LANE: Youverevealed today that Laborwill try to amend theGovernment's bill on foreigninvestment review to scrapthenew threshold that it wants inplace to trigger FIRBscrutiny of agribusiness purchases. Theywant that to be $55 million,Labor disagrees. Why, given thatfarming communities were happywith that?

WONG: Well, MalcolmTurnbull talks a lot aboutthe future, but what he has gotis a back to the future, abackward-looking policy forAustralia.At a time when weneed massive investment in ouragricultural industries, in our foodprocessing industries, at atime when foreign investmentwould help create more jobs andgreater economicopportunitieshere in Australia, heisputting forward legislationthat makes it harder for verymuch neededforeign investmentto flow both into ouragribusiness sector and alsointo our agriculture moregenerally.

LANE: But why theopposition given that farmingcommunities support this?

WONG: Well,let's understand what MalcolmTurnbull's backward investmentpolicy would mean.It wouldmean that investmentinagribusiness would be, for aforeign investor, would beharder than investment indefence or militaryindustries.

Now, there is no publicpolicy rationale forthat.That is all about a bitof National Party politics forBarnabyJoyce.It doesn't makeeconomic sense.

LANE: Now, PennyWong, there is a lot of talkabout tax reform at the momentto help Federal and StateGovernments findmore money topay for policies. You were theFinance Minister in the GillardGovernment that signed dealswith stategovernments forGonski, for example. It signeddeals for a big increase inspending here without fullyexplainingwhere the moneycomes from. How responsible areyou for the problem thatgovernments face now?

WONG: Well,hang on, there is a fair bit ofLiberal spin in that question,if I may say.We did lay out afunding plan forNDIS and forGonski and we said-

LANE: -But Labor neverexplained where the money wouldcome from.

WONG: Well, I don't agreewith that.We did set out a10 year funding plan in theBudget. But having said that,werecognise, unlike theLiberals did when they were inopposition, we recognise thefiscal challenge the countryfaces,we recognised there areproblems on the revenue side inparticular, we recognise theneed for a responsible approachto fiscal policy and to aresponsible discussion abouttax reform, and as Chris Bowenhas indicated we are up forthat.

LANE: Well, is Labor going tothensupport the funding for years fiveand six of Gonski and explainwhere all the money is going tocome from?

WONG: Well, what we arenot going to do is support ahigher GST or a broader-basedGST which as we have seenfromreports released over thelast couple of days, is aregressive tax which massivelyhits low income earners.

Now,onGonski, I think there is avery important economicimperative here to improve thenation's schools.We believe itiscritical to the futureprosperity of the nation, toensure not only that everychild has the opportunity to bethebest of who they are, butso that we can continue tocompete in an increasinglycompetitive globaleconomy.

Now, wewill have moreto say about these and otherpolicies ahead of the election,but let's remember the reasonwhythe Gonski reformswere important, is they wereabout making sure that childrenacross this nation could be thebestof who they are and theycould get the education thatthey deserve.

LANE: Senator PennyWong, thanks for talking to730.

WONG: Good to speak with you.