JIM CHALMERS MP
SHADOW TREASURER
MEMBER FOR RANKIN

E&OE TRANSCRIPT
RADIO INTERVIEW
3AW MORNINGS
THURSDAY, 24 MARCH 2022 
 
SUBJECTS: Supporting pensioners who want to work; Costs of living skyrocketing while real wages are going backwards; Labor’s policy agenda to grow the economy the right way; A trillion in debt and not enough to show for it; Ending the Morrison Government’s rorts and waste; Culture and standards.

NEIL MITCHELL, HOST: Joining us now is Dr Jim Chalmers, he's the Shadow Treasurer. I'd just hasten to add he's not a useful doctor, he doesn't fix a broken leg, he's got a PhD in political science. But that's a PhD, that's impressive. Dr Chalmers, good morning.

JIM CHALMERS, SHADOW TREASURER: Good morning Neil, thanks for having me on your show.

MITCHELL: With due respect, if I was going in with a broken leg I wouldn't be going to you. 

(LAUGHTER)

CHALMERS: I'm in the same boat, that’s not unreasonable.

MITCHELL: First, can I get your feelings on this hidden army? Would you consider allowing pensioners to work more without losing money off their pension?

CHALMERS: We are having a look at it, Neil. We're conscious of the issues that have been raised by National Seniors, by yourself, by your listeners. We do have a problem right now where a lot of businesses are looking for workers.  So we're having a look at it, I'm talking with my colleague Linda Burney about it, a number of my colleagues around the country have raised it. As you probably know, and as your listeners probably know, if you're on the age pension you can earn up to $480 bucks a fortnight and still get the maximum pension. There is some flexibility there, but if there are ways to get more flexibility into the system, to do that responsibly and affordably, then we're certainly up for that conversation.

MITCHELL: I can't quite see how it would cost money, I mean it mightn't save you quite as much, but a pensioner earning money would be paying tax on what they earnt, you just wouldn't be screwing anything back out of their existing pension. It wouldn't actually cost money - well, it would cost a bit in the sense that you wouldn't be clawing it back, any idea how much?

CHALMERS: It would cost a little bit. We've begun to have a look at it but there's a lot of complexity in the system as you know. There's a lot of interactions and so you've got to work out how those interactions kind of net out.  But I understand where the idea is coming from. We've got this situation right now where the unemployment rate is falling, that's a good thing. We welcome that, we want that to be as low as possible. But a lot of businesses are looking for willing workers and there are willing workers amongst senior Australians. There's a work bonus in place, there's some arrangements so that you can still get the pension and work a little bit, but what we really want is the system to be really responsive and really flexible. Sometimes when people might be caravanning around Australia, they might want to perch somewhere for a few months and maybe help out at the local sandwich shop or something like that, then we want to make sure the system is flexible enough to accommodate that and that's the sort of thing we're looking at.

MITCHELL: Are you likely to have a decision on that before the election?

CHALMERS: I think it'd be hard Neil, to be upfront with you, because we need a lot of advice on it. Because it crosses over a couple of different departments, it crosses over different payments, Tax Office, Services Australia, the various pension interactions. So I don't want to sort of overpromise and underdeliver on your show, I’ll be very careful not to do that. But really to reassure you and your listeners, that it's something that we're conscious of, something that we're prepared to consult on, and if there's something that can be done in an Albanese Labor Government then we'd certainly be looking at it.

MITCHELL: But that's just where we stand with the petrol excise. I interviewed your Leader about it last week and he said we'd have a look at it but we can't promise that we'll say anything before the election. has that come anywhere? Is there a chance that you will go with a policy on relief on the petrol excise?

CHALMERS: First of all, we've only got five days before the Budget next week. The Budget gets handed down on Tuesday night and I expect the Government to move on this, frankly. I suspect by the time we get to the election there might have been some movement on it. If they do, or if they don't, let's see what they propose and let's see how much it costs. I think there is a real onus on us as the alternative government - and I think this is what Anthony was getting at too on your show - to be really responsible with every taxpayer dollar, to make sure we're getting maximum bang for buck. We do want to see cost of living relief for people right across the board. Petrol is one of the big pressures that people are under but it's not the only pressure - child care, rent, groceries are going through the roof at the same time as real wages are going backwards. So we need to be responsible, we need to work out where we can have the maximum impact. Let's see what's in the Budget and if anything needs to be done after that.

MITCHELL: You talk about spending the taxpayer dollar, you're getting a record amount. We're told $250 billion dollars from personal tax rates. That's too high isn't it? That's too much isn't it?

CHALMERS: There are tax cuts legislated in the Budget, which were supported by both sides of the parliament. So those tax cuts are coming. 

MITCHELL: They're just addressing bracket creep, really. At least they're addressing bracket creep, but they're not really helping people.

CHALMERS: We've got a few things going on in the Budget. There are lots of good ideas, right? The best way to think about the alternative Budget or the Budget, is there are lots of good ideas. You can't afford to do every one of them and so you've got to work out what your priorities are.

MITCHELL: Sounds like a small target philosophy. I mean, you've already said on petrol excise you think it'll be in the Budget, on the pensioners you won't tell us before the election. What will you tell us before the election?

CHALMERS: We've got an ambitious agenda out there, Neil. We've got a big policy out there on skills because part of that issue we were talking about before, is we've got skills shortages. So we've got free TAFE where there are areas of skills shortages. We've got a big policy out there on getting power bills down with cleaner and cheaper energy. A big policy out there on modernising the NBN, so that people who want to work from home or want to work from places like Geelong or elsewhere in Victoria or around the country...

MITCHELL: Good, good. What about tax? What about tax? Will you at least promise no new taxes in your first term?

CHALMERS: We think that there's an opportunity when it comes to multinational taxes, a lot of your listeners I think would agree with us. There's a big global movement to make sure that multinationals pay their fair share of tax in countries where they make their profit. We've said for some time now that that would be a priority. 

MITCHELL: Ok.

CHALMERS: We might be able to help repair the Budget that way. But I think the overarching thing Neil - and I can sense where you're coming from with this - is there are lots of things you'd like to do but we would be inheriting a trillion dollars in debt. There is an interest bill to be paid on that, that interest bill will be rising because inevitably interest rates will go up in the next little while. So we need to be really careful with every dollar, we can't promise everything.

MITCHELL: True. The only way you can attack that is you either increase taxation or you reduce spending, which will you do?

CHALMERS: I think there's four ways, actually, that you can go about it. I think first of all, if you grow the economy the right way, then you collect more taxes and you pay less in social security. That's important. 

MITCHELL: Yeah.

CHALMERS: Secondly, I think that there is a case to be made that we could get more quality spending in the Budget. It's not just the quantity that matters, it's the quality too, to get real bang for buck and we want to reorient the Budget along those lines. Thirdly, there's a lot of slush funds in the Budget Neil, there's a lot of money spraying around by this Government, a lot of money being wasted and we want to look at addressing that. And then fourthly, there's some issues around multinational tax.

MITCHELL: Okay, slush funds. So that means cut spending somewhere?

CHALMERS: We've made no secret Neil of the fact that we think that these discretionary funds that ministers sit around doling money out for, we're not getting maximum value for that. You'd get more value from investing that money in industries like advanced manufacturing, or the care economy, or in child care, or in TAFE, some of these other high priority areas. 

MITCHELL: So you would cut the discretionary funding that's going out at the moment would you?

CHALMERS: We've said for some time that these funds that spray money around for very little economic benefit, just for a political benefit, are something that needs to be looked at.

MITCHELL: Sometimes they're abused politically, I can't agree more, but at other times the local footy club does need a new toilet block. 

CHALMERS: We're not disputing that Neil.

MITCHELL: So how much are you going to cut it by? How much are you going to cut the spending by?

CHALMERS: What we're saying is you need to have the right processes in place to make sure that this spending delivers a community benefit or an economic benefit, not just a political benefit. We've been really clear about that, Neil. And I think as you go around the country, a lot of people are worried about that trillion dollars in debt and they know that part of the reason we've got it is because we do have a lot of rorts, we do have a lot of waste. Arguably, we have some corruption in the Budget. We want to crack down on that.

MITCHELL: Corruption?

CHALMERS: These processes have been corrupted for a long time. We've seen issues in Angus Taylor's portfolio, we've seen issues in other portfolios, where processes have been corrupted in a way that Australians aren't getting maximum value for their taxpayer dollars. We're not saying that you can't support local communities or support local projects, what we're saying is Australians need and deserve a better process to make those decisions, so there's an economic benefit and a community benefit not just a political benefit.

MITCHELL: So other than the multinationals, no new taxes?

CHALMERS: We'll have a conversation with the states to see if they can come to some kind of agreement on tax reform, but beyond that I think we've made it really clear - I hear my colleagues on your program all the time, and I say the same thing when I'm interviewed - we're not taking the same sorts of policies to this election that we took to the last election.

MITCHELL: But that's not an answer. Other than the multinationals, which I understand, no new taxes?

CHALMERS: Well, there'll be a conversation with the states about state taxes.

MITCHELL: What, the states are going to increase their taxes?

CHALMERS: They're up for a conversation, some of them are talking about swapping out stamp duty for land taxes and the like. We've said that we're prepared to lead a conversation on those sorts of things. That's why, when you get asked a question like the one that you just asked me, we nominate what our priorities are in tax - multinationals, potentially state taxes, but not the things we've taken to elections previously.

MITCHELL: Look at that overall figure, $250 billion. A record number taken in income tax. Will that be lower under you?

CHALMERS: Yes, because there's legislated tax cuts that come into effect in the next year or two.

MITCHELL: So the Liberal tax cuts will make it lower? 

CHALMERS: They were supported by the parliament. They were supported by the parliament. They're legislated. I think people know that they're coming, no matter who wins office.

MITCHELL: What about tax indexation so we don't have to adjust for bracket creep in this way, what about indexing taxes? 

CHALMERS: I know that idea's been floated around. That's not our approach. We don't intend to go down that path. 

MITCHELL: Why? It's greedy, you want to get your hands on the dollars?

CHALMERS: Because you can't isolate one part of the Budget against all of the others. We've got this issue, again, where we would be inheriting more debt from this Government than any government's ever inherited before. There's lots of things you'd like to do if you didn't have these Budget constraints, but you can't do everything. You've got to work out what you care about most. For us, I've run through our priorities a couple of times already.

MITCHELL: Fair enough. You mentioned, a couple of times, the level of debt. You must be concerned by the level of debt the Victorian Government's run up?

CHALMERS: I think every government of any political persuasion is worried about the state of their Budgets, with the possible exception of out west. I think everyone is concerned about it. If you asked my friend Tim Pallas, who's a terrific Treasurer down your way, he'd be worried about it too. Everyone's worried about it. My job is to focus on the federal scene. A trillion dollars in debt - and the big mistake people make, Neil - is they assume that that's all pandemic debt, when in reality the debt had multiplied even before the pandemic.

MITCHELL: Oh, that's right. That's right.

CHALMERS: It is something that we're concerned about, and when interest rates go up, we'll be paying more interest on that debt.

MITCHELL: And a lot of the Victorian debt goes to massive blowouts in their projects, like useless underground rail loops.

CHALMERS: Well, that's for Tim to come on your show, and others to go on his show and talk about.

(LAUGHTER)

MITCHELL: Haven't you heard? They won't. Only federal Labor'll talk to me.

(LAUGHTER)

MITCHELL: OK, just quickly. Is the Great Australian dream - homeownership - dead?

CHALMERS: It's not dead but it's in real strife, isn't it?

MITCHELL: Do people still want to buy their own house? Your mate Daniel Andrews said the other day they were less interested in buying their own house. Do they still want to if they can?

CHALMERS: I think there's an element of what Dan said but overall I think people would like to be in the housing market, they'd like to own a home and have all the security that that brings. It's never been harder than it is right now. We've got the beginnings of a good housing policy when it comes to social housing, I heard you talking about that before. We'll have more to say about housing between now and the election. 

MITCHELL: Now just very quickly, I won't prosecute the whole Kimberley Kitching argument, but you see factional politics around you. It's pretty brutal, isn't it?

CHALMERS: It can be, Neil, yeah. No doubt.

MITCHELL: You ever been bullied yourself?

CHALMERS: No, no I haven't.

MITCHELL: You ever bullied anybody?

CHALMERS: No, Neil.

MITCHELL: You ever told a lie in public?

CHALMERS: Oh, not intentionally but probably.

MITCHELL: Which one? 

(LAUGHTER)

CHALMERS: People asked me are the Broncos going to win the NRL premiership?

MITCHELL: Who?

CHALMERS: Or the Lions going to win the AFL Premiership? I say without doubt that they will. I'm not sure that that's always turned out to be true.

MITCHELL: Thank you so much for your time, I hope we can talk again. Thank you. 

CHALMERS: Appreciate it Neil, thanks.

MITCHELL: Dr Jim Chalmers, the Shadow Treasurer, I found that quite useful and engaging.

ENDS