E&OE TRANSCRIPT
DOORSTOP
CANBERRA
TUESDAY, 16 APRIL 2019
 

SUBJECT/S: Liberals’ secret cuts to pay for tax handouts for top end of town; Tony Abbott wanting Liberals’ leadership; Liberal candidate’s toxic comments about Chinese community; income tax; Liberals’ cuts to hospitals; Labor’s plan to properly fund healthcare; Labor’s priorities for better hospitals and schools
 
JIM CHALMERS, LABOR CAMPAIGN SPOKESPERSON: There's a story on the front of the Financial Review today which reveals that the Morrison Government will need to cut $40 billion a year to pay for their tax handouts for the top end of town. Scott Morrison needs to come clean on his secret plan to cut hospitals and schools to pay for his tax cuts for multinationals and millionaires. The only way that Scott Morrison can pay for his plan to give big tax breaks to the top end of town is by making more devastating cuts to hospitals and schools. He needs to come clean today on his secret agenda to cut hospitals and schools to pay for these tax cuts for the wealthiest Australians. He needs to account for this $40 billion a year in savings. Will it come from hospitals or schools? Will it come from the NDIS or aged care? Will it come from TAFEs and universities? He cannot hide from this story on the front page today. He has a secret plan for $40 billion in cuts to pay for tax breaks for the top end of town. The Australian people deserve answers on this. They need to know before the election what does he intend to cut? What services that people rely on will he cut to make up this $40 billion to pay for his tax cut plan?
 
This election is about choices. The choice in this election is between Labor investing in hospitals and schools, or the Liberals giving more and more money to the top end of town, with more and more generous tax loopholes. As this election goes on, the choice crystallises for the Australian people - better hospitals and schools, or bigger tax loopholes for the top end of town. More of the cuts and chaos that we've seen for the last six years under the Liberals, or a steady and stable and united and experienced Labor team ready to deliver a fair go for more Australians.
 
We've seen more of the chaos in the Liberal Party again overnight. Tony Abbott has said that he is prepared to come back to the leadership. This is what Australians are sick of. Tony Abbott, Scott Morrison, Malcolm Turnbull, Peter Dutton, the revolving door of Liberal leaders. All of the cuts and chaos and internal division and dysfunction which has poisoned the last six years of politics in this country. People have had enough of the cuts and chaos. They want a steady and stable and united and experienced team and Labor is ready to provide that, ready to provide a fair go for all Australians. 
 
We've also seen in Melbourne that Scott Morrison's candidate for Chisholm has been caught out using some horrible language about the Chinese community. This is a test for Scott Morrison, whether or not he will repudiate the toxic comments made by his candidate for Chisholm about the Chinese community is a test of leadership and values and character. Scott Morrison has already failed the test when it came to Peter Dutton's disgraceful and despicable commentary about Australians with a disability. This is another leadership test for Scott Morrison. Will he repudiate those toxic comments by his candidate for Chisholm? And will he rule out another dirty tricks campaign similar to the one that this candidate ran in the last election in 2016?
 
These are the choices that people have. As we get closer to election day, the choices will crystallise. The choice is between better investment in hospitals and schools under Labor, or bigger tax loopholes for the top end of town under the Liberals. More cuts and chaos under the Liberals, or a steady, stable, united and experienced Labor team ready to deliver a fair go for all Australians.
 
JOURNALIST: Jim Chalmers, you've disputed figures from the Coalition today about the tax plan, saying that they're off in the never never because they come in 2025. But the figures you're pointing to there are modelled on the impact in 2029. Aren't you guilty of the same standard that you're accusing the Coalition of?
 
CHALMERS: It's a fact that Scott Morrison would need to be re-elected two more times to deliver this tax plan for the top end of town. The central defining feature of his tax cuts are that the lion's share goes to the wealthiest Australians. What we are pointing out today is that he has announced these tax cuts for the top end of town without coming clean to the Australian people what these $40 billion a year in cuts to hospitals and schools and other areas will mean for the Australian community. It's entirely within our rights to point out that there is no way that he can implement these tax cuts for the top end of town without further cuts to hospitals and schools and other areas.
 
JOURNALIST: But isn't that $40 billion figure in the never never, as you said? That's 10 years away. 
 
CHALMERS: The $40 billion figure uses the same trajectory as the Government's own tax cuts policy for the top end of town. So it's entirely within our rights to point out that at the end of that period, Scott Morrison's tax cuts will cost the Budget something like $50 billion a year and $40 billion of that on the Grattan Institute's modelling comes from further cuts to spending, whether that be in hospitals or schools or other areas.
 
JOURNALIST: Of people earning over $45,000 a year, who will be better off when it comes to tax time? Will it be people under a Coalition Government or under a Labor Government?
 
CHALMERS: In the life of the next Parliament, Australians earning up to $125,000 a year would be better off or the same under Labor. Whoever wins the election will put through the Parliament tax cuts for low- and middle-income earners. The only difference on 1 July this year will be that Labor can do better for low-income earners, something like 3.6 million Australians earning up to $48,000 a year will be better off under Labor. So the choice on the 1st of July is between the Government's tax cuts or Labor, which has matched the middle-income tax cuts and will do better for low-income earners. The others are multiple elections away and overwhelmingly favour the top end of town.
 
JOURNALIST: The 50-50 split for health funding with states, that would be two elections away under a Labor Government as well, wouldn't it?
 
CHALMERS: The big difference there is that we're starting immediately. We're starting immediately to restore in our first Budget funding that Scott Morrison has cut from health. Scott Morrison has already cut hundreds of millions of dollars out of health, and in the next five years would see $2.8 billion less invested in our hospitals. And what we've said is that we will start immediately with investment in hospitals to start to restore that funding that Scott Morrison cut, but also right across the board - MRI machines, a blitz on waiting lists, our game-changing investments in cancer treatment and care. Labor is taking to this election a substantial investment in health. We'll sit down with the states and work out the trajectory back to 50-50 funding of their hospitals. But the difference between what we're doing and what the Government's proposing on tax is that we will begin immediately, the work will begin immediately, so that we can give people the healthcare that they need and deserve. And that is the difference at this election. Labor will always prioritise hospitals and schools for that matter and TAFE and universities over more tax cuts for the wealthiest Australians. Elections are about choices and that's the choice available to the Australian people at this one.
 
JOURNALIST: Have you mislead voters into thinking that all cancer treatments will be free under a Labor Government?
 
CHALMERS: Of course not.
 
JOURNALIST: Mr Chalmers, just on that tax plan, is it fair to say then that when the Coalition's plan is fully rolled out in mid-2025 that an average income earner might get more than they would under Labor's plan, but the idea is that there's lots of reasons why you think that shouldn't be carried out, including that it would require those kinds of cuts?
 
CHALMERS: It requires two more election victories for Scott Morrison for those tax cuts to go ahead, that's the first point. The second point is, when you look at the totality of their tax plan if it came into play two elections down the track, overwhelmingly the lion's share of the benefits go to people on very high incomes. The best example I can give you is if, under the Liberal Party, you make $200,000 a year you'll get an $11,000 tax cut. If you make $35,000 a year, you'll get a $255 tax cut, and those are the differences. They've got warped priorities when it comes to tax relief. Our priorities are very clear. We will have a better or the same offerings for low- and middle-income earners on the 1st of July this year and we will prioritise schools and hospitals and investments that are needed in this country over what the Liberals want to do, which is more tax breaks for multinationals and millionaires.
 
JOURNALIST: Do you think your campaign is creating a greater divide between low- and middle-income earners, and that it's pushing those people apart?
 
CHALMERS: No, on the contrary. I think that what this country needs if we are to grow together as a country and as an economy is we need to prioritise assistance and tax cuts and investment to those who need it most.
 
JOURNALIST: Do you think you're pushing away those sort of middle-income to high-income earners that there's not the incentive for them to try and earn a higher wage under a Labor Government?
 
CHALMERS: Not for one second. People are incentivised to earn more for a range of reasons and the offering we take to the Australian people is broader than tax. As I move around the community and as my colleagues do, I think what we appreciate is people, no matter what level of income they're on, want to know that this is a country that properly invests in healthcare and in education and in infrastructure and in dealing with climate change and in getting energy costs down. People will make their decision based on a whole range of factors. The Government's recipe, which is to shower largesse on the top end of town and hope that it trickles down to everybody else, that's been a busted model. We've got slowing growth in this country. Slowing consumption. Wages have been stagnant. And that's been a recipe for division. It's also been a recipe for a slowing economy. We will do things differently. We will always prioritise people on low and middle incomes. We will always prioritise their hospitals and schools. That's how we grow together as a country. That's how we end six years of cuts and chaos and division, which has seen this country grow apart rather than grow together. Thanks very much.
 
ENDS