Interview with Peter Stefanovic, Sky News
PETER STEFANOVIC:
The Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers speaking to us, thanks for waiting for us, Jim standing in the heat there in Logan. How confident are you about your chances of victory today? How do you rate your chances today?
JIM CHALMERS:
Obviously we are hopeful. This is a really important day in the history of our country. We're asking Australians to do a very Australian thing: to listen to each other, to want the best for each other, and to move forward together into a better future. And so it's an important day, we're under no illusions about how hard it is to change our Constitution, but this is a simple but profound change. It's all about better listening and getting those better outcomes for the first of us in a way that could lift all of us up.
STEFANOVIC:
If as polls predict, it goes down, though, how does the country heal because it's been about as divisive as it gets?
CHALMERS:
Unfortunately, the elements of the No campaign have deliberately fostered and let fester that division that you refer to. A yes vote can actually be a unifying moment for our country, it can be an opportunity for all of us to say to the First Australians that we need to listen better and we need different and better outcomes because the way that we have been doing this has been a mess for too long. And a no vote is really just a cul-de-sac of division and disappointment and decades more of failure. And so a yes vote can bring the country together, it can be a unifying moment, the Prime Minister said a moment ago on your show that this can be an opportunity to be positive and optimistic about the future of the greatest country on earth. This can be an act of patriotism, to say to each other, we will listen to you better, we will get better outcomes, and we will move forward together.
STEFANOVIC:
There have been divisions on the yes side, though. I mean we've seen evidence of yes supporters spitting on people in public. Back to my point, it has been divisive on both sides. It can't be just one side.
CHALMERS:
Well, unfortunately, I think the side of the argument that benefits most from that division – that people really from Peter Dutton all the way down have tried to foster in our community – is the No campaign. It's the easiest thing in the world to try and trash something, to try and tear something down. But what a yes vote means is to build something up, to build something positive and optimistic. Not this cul-de-sac of division and disappointment, but a better future. And so we have done our best to be as positive as we can. The No campaign has taken a completely different approach, unfortunately, and I think that has sold our communities and our country short.
STEFANOVIC:
We saw yesterday a poll indicating that the Voice was the 17th most important priority for people in the country at the moment. You're the Federal Treasurer, you know cost of living is at the top of that list. Do you concede voters’ minds are elsewhere?
CHALMERS:
Two things about that, Pete. First of all, it's not the highest order issue for everyone but it is the highest order issue for some of us and it costs the rest of us nothing to take this important step forward on behalf of First Nations people. So we have nothing to lose and everything to gain. For part of our community, this is incredibly important, and we recognise that. But secondly, our focus on the right outcome here with the Voice has not come at the expense of our primary focus on the cost-of-living pressures that people are under. The No campaign wants to pretend that we can have a yes vote or we can do something about the cost of living. We are literally rolling out billions of dollars in cost-of-living assistance. We made medicines cheaper, we're providing energy bill relief, we released our vision for jobs and skills and opportunities with our Employment White Paper. Really right across the board, our first priority, our overwhelming priority is to take some of the sting out of these costs-of-living pressures that people are confronting without making the inflation challenge in our economy worse. It hasn't been either-or. We've maintained a primary focus on the bread-and-butter issues that people are facing right around the country. The Voice hasn't come at the expense of that focus.
STEFANOVIC:
If you lose tonight, what do you do tomorrow?
CHALMERS:
First of all, the votes haven't been counted yet, Pete, so we're not going to pre-empt an outcome – I heard Penny Wong say that a moment ago and she's right. Millions of Australians wouldn't have voted yet and they've got a chance here to vote for that better listening and those better outcomes through constitutional recognition. So that's the first point. Secondly, no matter what the outcome is tonight, I think it will be really clear, we've got a Prime Minister who looks forward to the future with positivity and optimism and tries to bring people together. We've got an Opposition Leader who's always trying to divide people with his nasty and negative politics. He has absolutely nothing positive to say about the future of this country. So no matter what the results tonight, I think the contrast between the two leaders in particular will be really clear.
STEFANOVIC:
If it's a defeat, though and you look back on things – and I know you're probably going to say, let's wait to see how the vote goes – but what would you put it down to? Is it an effective line and a reasonable question to ask from the Opposition that more details needed to be worked out for people to vote for something that would change our most sacred document?
CHALMERS:
There'll be lots of time, Pete, to do all of that kind of analysis. Our focus for the rest of today is trying to get this important proposition over the line, the simple proposition about better listening and better outcomes and constitutional recognition. There will be plenty of time after six o'clock to go through what's happened here, whether we win or whether we lose tonight, people will have that opportunity. Inevitably, when you're making a big important change like this, a profound change, but a simple change, there'll be different views about how we should have gone about it. I accept that. But I think what we can be really proud of on the yes side is the way that we've prosecuted these arguments in a positive and optimistic and forward-looking way. You can't say the same thing about the no camp.
STEFANOVIC:
Jim Chalmers, we'll leave it there. Thank you for your time.
