Saturday, 7 November 2015

Greens political party leaves Liberal option open

Media Release


Anthony Albanese MP

Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport
 Shadow Minister for Tourism, Shadow Minister for Cities



Comments yesterday from Greens political party Leader Richard Di Natale suggesting that the Greens would consider entering into government with the Liberal and National Parties are deeply concerning for progressive voters.
When asked about supporting major parties in an interview yesterday, Senator Di Natale said:
You have to make these decisions election by election. You work out whether you can strike a formal agreement with one side of politics or the other.
At precisely the time when Malcolm Turnbull must be held to account for his abandonment of principle on climate change, marriage equality and other issues, the Greens Party Leader is leaving open the option of supporting a Liberal Government.
While progressives should be scrutinising Malcolm Turnbull, Senator Di Natale is flirting with him instead.
 The Coalition has abolished the carbon price, attacked renewable energy, savagely slashed health and education funding and is now planning to increase the GST to 15%.
 Despite this, the Greens political party is clearly leaving open the option of forming a government with them after the election.
Pragmatism on policy is one thing, but for the Greens political party to support the re-election of a government that is against carbon pricing and environmental protection would be a betrayal of those who vote for them.

One wonders what the local supporters of the Greens political party in the inner west of Sydney think about their federal leader considering the option of supporting an ongoing coalition government.

Julie Bishop’s $140 Million InnovationXchange Debacle, Thursday 5 November 2015

MEDIA RELEASE



commonwealthcoatofarms.png



THE HON TANYA PLIBERSEK MP
DEPUTY LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
SHADOW MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRSAND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTMEMBER FOR SYDNEY
 

Thursday 5 November 2015


JULIE BISHOP’S $140 MILLION InnovationXchange DEBACLE
The Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop, must explain why she’s spending $140 million of taxpayer funds on her pet ‘InnovationXchange’ program in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, when it’s coming up with ideas like ‘saving a lot of paper’, ‘simple ways to manage your mailbox’, and ‘backing ourselves more’.
After cutting $11.3 billion in overseas aid from some of the poorest countries on earth, Ms Bishop needs to seriously rethink her priorities.
Julie Bishop billed the InnovationXchange as an overseas aid program aimed at improving how Australia delivers its official development assistance.  But many of the ideas coming out of the InnovationXchange, have nothing to do with overseas aid at all.
Ms Bishop has previously described her InnovationXchange as a “gorgeous little funky, hipster, Googly, Facebooky-type” program.
So far, some of the ideas produced by the InnovationXchange include:
  • Saving a lot of paper
  • Stationery allowance
  • Improving business processes
  • Simple way to manage your mailbox
  • Establishing useable travel advisories
  • Single approach core business
  • Competency based framework
  • Leadership development
  • Benefitting from talents
  • Format controlled templates
  • Backing ourselves more
  • Reality TV shows
  • Fashion statement
Julie Bishop presides over the weakest overseas aid program in Australian history.  Because of Ms Bishop’s cuts, by 2016 Australia will spend just 22 cents in every $100 of our national income on overseas aid – our lowest spend ever. Over the next decade, that is set to fall further to 17 cents in every $100.
Ms Bishop claimed her InnovationXchange was about improving the use of the depleted overseas aid budget.  Instead it is investigating changes to departmental operations which should simply be part of the day-to-day business of running DFAT.

Bill Shorten, ADDRESS TO 2015 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL OUTLOOK CONFERENCE

‘REFORM WITH PURPOSE’ 

GRAND HYATT, MELBOURNE

FRIDAY, 6 NOVEMBER 2015
  
I acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we meet, and I pay my respects to elders past and present.
Australia is coming of age.
  • Our climate is changing.
  • Our population is growing older.
  • Our region is growing fast.
  • Women are on the march to true equality
  • Digital disruption is re-defining everything we do.
  • And our economy is undergoing a step-change, as investment in mining wanes and our services industry in particular surges.
Identifying these trends – talking about the change occurring around us is the easy bit.
Any parrot in any pet shop can do that.
But when we look at these, the defining changes and challenges of our generation.
So often it gets boiled down to one word – reform.
And too often, the word ‘reform’ is co-opted to add a veneer of credibility to lazy thinking and bad ideas.
Reform must be more than a password politicians whisper in search of approval.
Or a buzzword tacked-on to a poorly-crafted policy.
True reform isn’t a test of rhetoric, or salesmanship, or spin.
It’s not just a conversation sitting around the table at a dinner party, solving the problems of the world with a glass of wine in hand, moving the salt and pepper shakers around to make our point.
Anyone can talk the talk – and lord knows we’ve seen a bit of that in recent weeks – it’s walking the walk that matters.
Reform depends on values and it is measured by progress.
So when we pay respect to reform today, let it be reform with purpose.
Let us say what we mean and mean what we say.
For me, the core purpose of reform is this:
  • lifting Australia’s output of goods and services with greater productivity
  • improving fairness in our society
  • and delivering stronger, better-quality economic growth.
From my very first days as Labor Leader, I’ve said I wanted the 2016 election to be a battle of ideas.
A contest of competing visions for Australia’s future.
I’m proud to lead a Labor party that has released more positive policies than any Opposition in a generation.
Not rhetorical flights of fancy – substantial, practical plans.
Policies to fit the times.
Smart investments and necessary efficiencies.
Real plans for greater productivity, fairness and growth.
Infrastructure reform – moving beyond traditional grant funding, and utilising innovative financing to get new projects up and running.
Empowering Infrastructure Australia to create a pipeline for investment, replacing petty political partisanship with businesslike rigour and generational decision-making.
And creating a stronger, more diverse infrastructure market for productivity-enhancing projects, to attract investment from a superannuation pool worth $4 trillion by 2025.
Higher education reform – restoring funding certainty to our universities while preserving and promoting accessibility and affordability .
Building better partnerships between the Commonwealth and universities.
And bringing a new focus on completion – ensuring an extra 20,000 students graduate every year, equipped to compete and succeed in the modern economy.
In Science, Research and Innovation – where we have developed policies for Australians at every age and stage of their education and career.
  • Coding in primary schools, including encouraging girls to code.
  • 100,000 STEM graduates freed from a HECS debt.
Backing-in entrepreneurs with a Startup year and our $500 million Smart Investment Fund.
Attracting great new ideas with new entrepreneurial visas.
More accelerators and incubators in our universities, helping young people with good ideas work with mentors in business – as they do at the University of Melbourne for example.
And an ambitious target, by 2030, of combined national investment in research and development to three per cent of our GDP.
In Climate Change an internationally-linked Emissions Trading Scheme, enabling Australian firms to engage with one of the world’s largest and fastest growing markets.
Using the market to set the signals, not wasting taxpayer money subsiding pollution – a recipe for fiscal recklessness on a grand scale.
And a bold new goal of 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030 to help drive new jobs, new industries and new technologies.
As well as supporting small businesses and home-owners who want to take control of their power bills through advances in household solar technology and battery storage.
These are some of the economic levers we can use to drive growth and productivity – always with fairness at the heart of what we do.
Throughout 2015, Labor has been adding to the substance of our economic and social policy agenda.
One of the reasons we are relatively advanced in our policy development at this stage of the electoral cycle is that we recognise that this is no ordinary moment in our national life.
Our economy is stuck in the mire.
This is not a question of talking our country down, or a partisan attack – lest we be accused of insufficient optimism or not joining in the mood.
It’s about facing up to the hard truths, so we can make the right decisions.
Being honest about the present, so we can plan for the future.
Because our economy is not intrinsically left or right.
It does not necessarily function more efficiently under a particular banner or slogan.
The fact is, in the past two years:
  • Our deficit has doubled.
  • Wages are growing at their slowest rate this century
  • Economic growth is nearly a full percentage point below trend.
  • Annual growth has been below trend, every quarter
  • We’ve tumbled from seventh to 19th in the OECD growth ratings.
And at this very conference, the Secretary of Treasury is flagging a downgrade in the medium-term economic forecasts.
We can’t dismiss this kind of warning, just by telling Mr Fraser to be more ‘bouncy’ and to get with the ‘zeitgeist’.
  • Our terms of trade have fallen 32 per cent from their peak in 2011.
  • Unemployment has had a six in front of it for sixteen straight months.
  • Youth unemployment is far too high, especially in our regions.
  • 770,000 of our fellow Australians are unemployed.
  • There’s another 1 million Australians who are under-employed – seeking more hours and greater job security, but unable to find it.
  • There are 800,000 Australians on the Disability Support Pension – many of whom are willing to participate, but unable to do so.
  • It is tougher than ever before for young people to put together a deposit for a house.
And inequality is at a 75-year high.
One of the central ideas about who we are as Australians and how we have always seen ourselves – as an egalitarian nation where everyone can rise above disadvantage – is out of step with reality, for too many Australians.
Fifteen years ago, Paul Kelly wrote a week-long series for The Australian examining the problem of inequality.
It was a priority for your newspaper then – and it should be a priority for all of us now.
Inequality in all its forms: discrimination, alienation, exclusion and restricted opportunities, exacts a cost on our whole nation.
Tackling inequality would deliver benefits for everyone.
Not just improvements in social justice – but economic dividends.
Consider this: by 2020, it is estimated the consequences of family violence will cost Australia’s economy $15 billion a year.
And of course, the scourge of family violence is merely the most obvious manifestation of gender inequality in our nation.
If Australia can achieve true equality for women – in participation, in pay, in leadership – then we will be the richest country in the world.
Treating women equally is not just the right thing to do, it’s a great economic strategy.
Even if we only increased the participation of women in work by 6 per cent, to the same level as Canada, we would add $25 billion to our GDP.
It’s the same story across the spectrum – ending inequality delivers tangible fiscal savings, and real economic growth.
Take the National Disability Insurance Scheme.
The operating costs of the full scheme are estimated at $22 billion a year.
PricewaterhouseCoopers found that, without the NDIS, government spending on disability would be between two to three times that sum.
The Productivity Commission also found that by 2050, the NDIS will empower an additional 320,000 people with a disability and 80,000 carers to find work.
Adding one full percentage point to Australia’s GDP.
If we could close the gap in Aboriginal disadvantage: in education, jobs, health, housing and justice – we would not only save vast amounts currently spent on welfare and essential services.
We would deliver a $16 billion boost to the regional economies of Australia with new jobs, industries and improved output.
So when we talk about economic and social reform, when we talk about boosting productivity, growing the economy and lifting our national output – we need to need to understand the central role of fairness.
Fairness is not a consequence of prosperity– it is a precondition for it.
Fairness is not merely in the eye of the beholder.
We can measure its presence, and we can measure its absence.
Which brings us to the GST.
I’ve heard some people say that opposing an increase in the GST means Labor is unwilling to participate in the tax debate.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The Labor Party I lead are ready, willing and vocal participants in any debate about the GST.
We are being upfront and honest about where we stand.
Labor is resolutely opposed to making Australians pay more for what they need most.
We will not support increasing a regressive GST that inflicts the heaviest punishment upon those least able to afford it.
Let’s be really clear on this point.
Jacking up the GST to 15 per cent is not innovative, not agile or creative.
Increasing the GST is not tax reform.
Especially not when the extra revenue is already being spent five different ways.
  • Solving the funding crisis the Liberals created in our schools
  • And the funding crisis in hospitals
  • Compensating pensioners and low-income earners for increasing the cost of everything.
  • Cutting income tax
  • And cutting company tax
That’s the problem the Liberals have had since the day they got elected – they think increasing the GST is the solution, but they still haven’t decided what the problem is.
This government’s fixation with increasing the GST proves that when all you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Increasing the GST can’t fix the deficit and save schools and hospitals and cut taxes and fund compensation.
It’s not a magic pudding.
NATSEM modelling shows that even if an increase in the GST was paired with a 5 per cent reduction in every tax rate, this would actually make our tax system more regressive than a simple increase in the GST.
This scenario would see almost two-thirds of households worse off.
Increasing the GST is not the answer, and neither is broadening the base to include more essential goods and services.
Whether it’s increasing the rate or broadening the base, the outcome is the same: Australia’s lowest income households will bear the brunt.
The most well-off families in Australia spend around 75 per cent of their income.
Low income families consume 125 per cent of theirs.
A far greater share of their family budget goes toward essentials such as fresh food and health care.
And it is the percentage of the household budget that really tells the tale of unfairness.
Extending the GST to cover these items would see the GST bill for Australia’s poorest households take up 17.9 per cent of their income – compared to just 7.6 per cent for Australia’s wealthiest households.
Australians who are working hard to make ends meet don’t need another lecture in another form about doing more of the ‘heavy lifting’.
And if increasing the GST is just a disguise for making working people pay more for everything, then Malcolm Turnbull’s idea of ‘fairness’ will turn out to be a nightmare for everyday Australians.
When it comes to tax, Australia needs to have a bigger conversation.
Because if everything is really on the table, then we should be talking about:
  • Labor’s plan to make multinational companies pay their fair share of tax, delivering $7 billion to the Budget bottom line.
  • And our plan to close loopholes on excessively generous superannuation tax concessions for the very wealthy, delivering $14 billion in revenue.
These policies have got nothing to do with the politics of envy.
The principles are simple:
If you earn money in Australia – you should pay tax in Australia.
And if you’ve worked hard and accumulated millions of dollars in retirement savings – good luck to you.
But you don’t need an ongoing hand-up from Australian taxpayers.
Especially not when our superannuation system currently disadvantages low income earners and women in particular.
Superannuation is a great Labor idea, a reform with purpose.
A promise that Australians wouldn’t work hard all their lives, only to retire poor.
And a plan to ensure fewer Australians would rely on a taxpayer-funded pension in retirement.
Superannuation was not designed as a tax haven.
The excessively generous tax concessions only came in under Howard and Costello – they weren’t carved in stone, and handed down by Moses from Mt Sinai.
Superannuation shouldn’t operate as a tax haven now.
Real tax reform also demands we look at the efficiency and fairness of our entire tax system.
A couple of weeks ago, I described our tax system as a leaky bucket, riddled with holes.
That image accurately captures the complexity and inefficiency – but perhaps not the unfairness.
Because lost taxation through income-privileged arrangements isn’t a matter of random flaws with water pouring every which-way.
It’s the same revenue stream, from the same group of Australians, flowing through the same loopholes every year.
The holes in our taxation bucket are two and a half times more likely to be used by the top 2.7 per cent of income earners.
And as Saul Eslake revealed, in 2012/13 fifty-five Australians who earned more than a million dollars, paid no tax at all – not even the Medicare levy.
Through a combination of sophisticated practices they managed to write down an income in excess of one million dollars – to below the tax free threshold.
Let me be clear, I’m not suggesting these people have done anything illegal – that’s the problem with our system.
Gaming our system doesn’t require any illegal behaviour, just a well-paid tax agent.
Other than Italy, a greater percentage of Australians rely on a tax agent to do their taxation than any other nation in the OECD.
My concern is that most of these options aren’t available to the vast bulk of Australians, the pay-as-you-go earners whose taxes are subsidising the minimisation practices of others.
If we’re going to talk tax reform, this should be on the table.
The same holds true for Workplace Relations.
If we’re going to have a debate about workplace relations in this country – then let’s move beyond empty union-bashing.
If we live in a class warfare world waged either by ideological governments, or unions – we will be the poorer for it.
Instead of deciding cutting penalty rates is the solution and casting around for evidence of a problem, let’s talk about how we can ensure the minimum wage remains a living wage for hard-working Australians.
Because a strong minimum wage remains the best defence against an Australian underclass, working people trapped on a treadmill where longer and longer hours don’t help them get ahead.
Let’s have a serious conversation about reducing injuries and fatalities at work.
Including meaningful action on dreadful, people-killing industrial diseases like asbestosis and mesothelioma.
If we’re going to talk about boosting productivity, we need to focus on the growing scourge of workplace bullying.
And the thousands of Australians robbed of the most fundamental workplace right of all, the right to come home safely to the people they love.
We should acknowledge our current system of enterprise bargaining and low-paid bargaining isn’t setting the right standards in competitive contracting industries like security and cleaning.
The spread of sham contracting arrangements, subcontracting scams where people are employed on half of the minimum wage – as we saw most recently with 7-11 – that should be a priority in workplace relations.
So too should be the fact that at a time of high and growing unemployment, 800,000 people are here in Australia with temporary work rights, many of whom are being exploited.
It all comes back to that central idea of reform with purpose.
  • Increasing productivity with better safety and job security.
  • Growing the economy with a wages system that gives everyone the chance to be a consumer.
  • And promoting jobs and fairness by eliminating exploitation at work.
Friends, true reform doesn’t come from tired orthodoxy, or the special pleading of one sector.
It depends on a thorough examination of the debate from all sides, with every piece of evidence carefully considered.
The Labor Party I lead will always be up for a debate about the economic and social future of Australia.
I’m proud that this year we have set the economic and social agenda on:
  • Infrastructure
  • Higher Education and TAFE
  • Science and Innovation
  • Climate Change
  • Equality for Women, including Family Violence
There will be much, much more.
Whenever the next election is, Labor is excited for the upcoming battle of ideas.
We will campaign on our positive plans to advance Australia beyond the mining boom.
Our plans to build the productivity, prosperity and jobs of the future, with fairness at the centre.
Our plans for reform with purpose.

ENDS

Thursday, 5 November 2015

Bill Shorten, Subject/s: Labor’s commitment to needs-based school funding; Liberals cuts to school funding; Dodgy training providers; Labor Party reform; Cuts to ABC funding; GST; Nuclear waste; Media laws

E&OE TRANSCRIPT

DOORSTOP INTERVIEW
MELBOURNE
FRIDAY, 30 OCTOBER 2015


BILL SHORTEN, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Good morning everyone, it’s great to be at Roxburgh Park Secondary College with Maria Vamvakinou our Member for Calwell. We’re here today talking to teachers and students about the importance of needs-based funding for all schools across Australia.

Labor’s the only political party committed to needs-based funding. We believe fundamentally, that schools should be funded according to the needs of their students and the school resources, and all of the diverse backgrounds of the students which come to schools.

The Liberal Party for the last two years has cut funding to schools; only Labor will make sure that all of the schools are funded properly. Only Labor will make sure that all our students regardless of their postcode or their background will get the quality education to give them the best start in life.
As I said to the teachers today, my mum was a teacher and then she taught other teachers in the education faculties of universities. She taught me that the status of education and the status of teaching in this country has slipped backwards over the last three decades. Labor can reverse the decline in the respect which teaching is held. We want to see young teachers enter the profession knowing that they’re able to carry out their vocation, their passion for bringing education to the next generation of Australians. We want to make sure that older teachers and experienced teachers don’t experience the burnout which comes with insufficient resources and being asked to do much with too little.

Labor supports need based funding across our schools full stop. Happy to take any questions.

JOURNALIST: Is this a chance for you to get back some of the ground you’ve lost in the polls?

SHORTEN: This is a chance to make sure that Australian schools are properly funded. This is a chance to make sure that our young people; the next generation of adult Australians get the best start in life. The fact of the matter – I was going to say – is that for many students when they finish school, their last teacher will be their last career advisor. That’s why it’s important to give them the best start and we call upon Malcolm Turnbull to stop having thought bubbles about education, nice pleasant after dinner conversations, and instead get on with the business of keeping the promise that was made at the last election so that all kids in all schools can know that they will be funded according to their needs and teachers are able to do the best they can possibly do, giving our kids the best start in life.

JOURNALIST:
 We’ve seen reports emerge today that training colleges are gorging tuition fees and lumping taxpayers with a $3 billion bill for student loans thanks to the previous Labor government’s VET-Fee HELP scheme. If you’re elected would you do anything to ensure colleges don’t take advantage of the students?

SHORTEN: 
There’s no doubt that under the Liberals in the last 2 years, the private training sector in Australia is in crisis. A lot of Australians are being concerned to find out that taxpayer money is being used to rip off vulnerable students for no gain for those students. Labor believes that the pendulum has swung too far against the TAFE sector in Australia. We say to Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberals, let’s back in the TAFE sector. It’s been going strong for a very long time, let’s turn our back on that right-wing thinking, that ideology of just ‘leave it all to the private providers’. There’s a crisis in private training in Australia. Labor’s been calling this out for the last 2 years, it’s now time the Liberal Party acted.

JOURNALIST:
 You were talking about teacher’s pay before, what can the Commonwealth do about teacher’s pay when that’s a state issue?

SHORTEN: 
There’s no doubt that states are involved in the administration, responsible for the administration of our schools. But for the last 2 years the Liberal Party has been misleading Australia when they’ve said that there’s no Commonwealth role for schools – for the Commonwealth in schools. We believe in a good education for all kids and the Commonwealth provides some of that money to the states so that the states can run their schools to best possible effect. Taxpayers want to make sure that their hard earned taxes are going to make sure that kids get the best start in life. The Liberal Party should keep its election promise from 2013 and make sure that children regardless of their postcode, regardless of how well off their parents are, regardless of where they live, their ethnicity, that they all get the same chance in life across Australia’s quality schools.

JOURNALIST:
 Mr Shorten, Anthony Albanese today didn’t rule out making another pass for Labor leadership, are you confident the party’s reforms on the leadership put in place under the Rudd Government will stay in place?

SHORTEN: 
Thanks for that. I just want to put on record that the Labor Party’s given me tremendous support and we’re very unified. If we want to look at disunity in the last 2 years, we have to say what happened to Tony Abbott? It’s the Liberal party who’s been engaging in civil warfare; that’s a matter for them. But Labor under my leadership has been united; we’ve been focusing on the issues that matter. We want to make sure that hospitals are properly funded; we want to make sure that your Medicare card not your credit card which gets you the health care you deserve in this country. I want every school to be a good school and well-funded. We want to make sure that jobs are kept in Australia and that we’re making sure that we’re training our young people for the jobs of the future. We want to end the scandal and crisis in private training in Australia which the Liberals have presided over for the last 2 years and the Labor party’s completely committed to these goals.

JOURNALIST: Just on the ABC Mr Shorten, do you share the concerns of the Nationals MPs about the changes to regional programing for next year?

SHORTEN: What an audacious bunch this government are. They’re now complaining about cuts to the ABC but they all voted for it in the last two Budgets. Before the last election the Liberal and National party’s promised there’d be no cuts to the ABC. Since then they’ve folded their arms and whistled, whilst $250 million has been cut from public broadcasting. Now what’s happened is the National Party MPs are realising that the city based government is ignoring the regions of Australia, they’ve broken their promise, they’ve cut funding to the public broadcaster. We call upon the Government, the Liberal Government and Malcolm Turnbull – he was the minister in charge of these cuts – to actually make sure to reverse the cuts. If the National Party want to look for someone to blame, stop blaming the ABC and blame the people who pay for the ABC’s budget which is the Liberal Government of Australia.

JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten, Malcolm Turnbull has come out saying that increasing the GST is a possibility. Do you except that by increasing the GST it could be a good way to fix the Budget bottom line?

SHORTEN: No. See this is the problem with the Liberals. Whenever they see a problem they just think that working people should pay more. They want to make it harder for working people’s kids to go to university by pushing up the price of going to university. They want to make it more expensive to go to the doctor with their GP taxes. And really they just want to increase the price of the GST to avoid making harder decisions. I think if the Liberal Party want to tackle their ballooning budget deficit they should stop giving a leave pass to multinationals who are not paying their fair share of tax in Australia. They should go after some of the superannuation tax concessions which see people with millions of dollars getting extra help from taxpayers when these people with millions of dollars don’t need it. Why is it that Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberals would always rather pick on families than pick on the big end of town? It’s not good enough.

JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten are you open to talking about the economic opportunities for states like South Australia in repatriating and storing the uranium exports?

SHORTEN: Well I was very disturbed to realise that the Liberals have been sitting on a report listing seven different communities as possible recipients of nuclear waste. I think the Liberal Party needs to get over its addiction to secrecy and just level with Australians. Who’s on their list, which communities are going to have nuclear stock piles, nuclear waste stock piles, targeted for those areas? I think that’s what we need to see, what’s really happening and the Liberals just need to tell us rather than sitting on bad news. They need to put it out there and be straight with the Australian people.

JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten, Deb O’Neill once said that education funding is too important to just be left up to the states. Do you agree with that?

SHORTEN: There’s no doubt in our federation, we’ve got state – we’ve got three levels of government. States traditionally were responsible for education but in the last 50 years we’ve seen parties of both sides from Robert Menzies on, Gough Whitlam on, putting more and more money aside for education funding. I do believe that the Commonwealth has a responsibility to make sure that, working with the states, we’re making sure that every child gets a quality education. There are millions of parents who trust the teachers to do a good job. There’s hundreds of thousands of teachers who trust governments to have their back. There are literally millions of kids who go to school every day – we want to make sure that the adults in the world are as optimist and brave as they are. All of that means that the Commonwealth Government and the Liberals need to stop letting Australian children, Australian teachers and Australian parents down. Last question if there is one, thanks.

JOURNALIST: Will Labor support changes to the regionals, for regional broadcasters and what about the two of three ownership laws?

SHORTEN: There’s no doubt we’re seeing the disruptive effects of technology challenging existing laws and raising questions about whether existing laws are obsolete. So Labor’s up for that discussion. Although I’ve got to say, you know, if we are paying this government by outcomes they wouldn’t get much for the way they’ve handled media law reform. For two years they’ve kicked the can down the road as technology, you know, really exponentially changes the media landscape. What I can promise Australians is that whatever the media law reforms are considered, including the two you mention, Labor will also make sure that top of the list we maintain media diversity and we make sure the regions of Australia are getting the same quality media that the cities get. Thanks everyone.


ENDS

Bill Shorten, Subject/s: Malcolm Turnbull scrapping knights and dames; Liberals’ proposal to increase the GST to 15 per cent.

E&OE TRANSCRIPT

DOORSTOP INTERVIEW
MARSHALL ISLANDS

MONDAY, 2 NOVEMBER 2015


JOURNALIST: There was an announcement by Prime Minister Turnbull about knights and dames, he’s going to scrap them. What do you make of this announcement?

BILL SHORTEN, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Labor never supported Tony Abbott’s proposal to create knights and dames in Australia. So it’s good that it’s being scrapped but we want Malcolm Turnbull to do something serious – I mean, everyone knew knights and dames was a silly idea. I think Australians now want Malcolm Turnbull to make some real decisions. Why doesn’t Malcolm Turnbull scrap his cuts to schools, scrap his cut to hospitals, and while he’s at it, Malcolm Turnbull shouldn’t go ahead with his proposed cuts to family payments..

JOURNALIST: Do you think it’s a distraction from his GST announcement [inaudible] that was happening yesterday?

SHORTEN: It was important to rid of knights and dames, it was a bad idea. Malcolm Turnbull now needs to come off the honeymoon and do some real work, stop the cuts to hospitals, stop the cuts to schools, stop the family payments cuts and stop trying to distract people from his proposals on the GST. Let’s have a good look at how that’s going to slug ordinary people.

JOURNALIST: There’s been some suggestion the Government might be backing away slightly from that 15 per cent GST proposal. Do you think that they are backing away or they will eventually back away?

SHORTEN: Why is it that the Liberals when they talk about tax reform always give very high income earners a leave pass but will attack ordinary people, people working hard to make ends meet. Increasing the GST will be a 15 per cent tax on going to the doctor, it’s a tax on going to the hospital, it’s a tax on education costs, it’s a tax on ordinary people. Malcolm Turnbull and his Liberals should stop with the cuts to schools and hospitals and taxes on ordinary people and instead make multinationals pay their fair share.

JOURNALIST: Do you think they think they might have made a mistake [inaudible].

SHORTEN: Well Malcolm Turnbull knows that  knights and dames was consigned to the dust bin of history anyway, it was a bad idea. But Malcolm Turnbull now needs to stop flirting with a 15 per cent GST, stop with the cuts to family payments. He’s making decisions now which hurt ordinary Australians, that’s what people really want to see action on.
Knights and dames, that’s just a matter of history now.
ENDS

Bill Shorten, Subject/s: Malcolm Turnbull’s GST hike; visit to the Pacific Islands; Climate change

E&OE TRANSCRIPT

RADIO INTERVIEW
ABC AM
MONDAY, 2 NOVEMBER 2015 


MICHAEL BRISSENDEN: The impacts of climate change will be top of the agenda during talks between Bill Shorten and Pacific Island leaders this week. The Opposition Leader will meet with Papua New Guinean Prime Minister Peter O’Neill and other foreign dignitaries, ahead of the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris later this year. Well Bill Shorten joins me live on the line now from Port Moresby, Mr Shorten good morning.

BILL SHORTEN, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Good morning Michael.

BRISSENDEN: We’ll get to climate change in the region shortly, but first on tax. Now you’ve ruled out an increase in the GST and broadening the base, something that would give the Government, under the 15 per cent that’s been modelled by the PBO, an extra $65 billion in revenue. Why rule something like that out?

SHORTEN: Because where does this money come from? It comes from the pockets of working people.15 per cent every time you go to the supermarket or you pay the doctor’s bill or you go to hospital. The people who pay this are the people who are going to work every day and battling to make ends meet. I don’t believe that reforming this country should have to be paid for by people paying extra in their GST. I think there are other ways to do the business of making this nation function better, without putting the bill on a lot of Australians who already don’t have a lot of spare money to put into savings. And so once you increase the amount of money that is being paid for the costs of living and the ordinary items of life, it just puts greater strain on them.

BRISSENDEN: This 15 per cent as modelled by the Parliamentary Budget Office though will provide compensation and income tax cuts to people.

SHORTEN: Let’s see the detail of that Michael, I’m not about to fall for a bit of froth and hype. The truth of the matter is if the Government were serious about increasing revenue – and remember for two years the Liberals have said there’s not a revenue problem – but if they were serious about doing it why not make multinationals pay their fair share? Why not tackle some of the unfair concessions which the very top earners in society get? I mean at the moment in Australia we have a system where if you’re in the top 2 or 3 per cent of tax earners you can put a lot of your income into tax privileged categories and actually pay less tax proportionately than a lot of other people.

BRISSENDEN: Under this plan though would raise $65 billion. Getting tough on corporate tax avoidance won’t go anywhere near that, will it?

SHORTEN: Michael, it’s all about priorities isn’t it? What I don’t understand is why the Government simply hasn’t bothered to articulate a proper plan for multinational tax reform. I don’t understand – and I’m happy for you or anyone else to explain – why the Government wants to maintain unfair taxation concession loopholes for the very top income earners. Also I don’t understand when the Government makes all these promises about the GST what they say is we’re going to pay for hospitals and schools, we’re also going to hand back income tax cuts and we’re also going to compensate people. You’ll find that this money doesn’t stretch very far with all those marvellous promises being made by the Government. No, I think instead the Government should focus on income tax, focus on income tax concessions at the top end for superannuation. I think they should focus upon multinational taxation, people paying their fair share. And I think they can probably go to, the trifecta would be to stop paying large polluters to pollute through their discredited Direct Action plan.

BRISSENDEN: Okay if they take this to the election as an issue you’re prepared to fight them on it?

SHORTEN: Absolutely. I think the Government should be very upfront. I think the big test for Malcolm Turnbull and his team is how will it handle the Budget. I think they need to articulate all of that detail because I think that Australians, when there was a change of leader from Abbott to Turnbull, Mr Turnbull said, oh well, we’re going to do economics differently. Actually we haven’t seen a lot of detail about what’s different. I think that in fact with this Government we’ll still see the same thing, which is that they want to increase taxes for people on ordinary incomes.

BRISSENDEN: Okay well I guess we’ll see in the coming months whether there is new detail from the Government. But you’re in the region at the moment talking to those countries that will be affected by climate change most. What do you hope to learn on this trip that you don’t already know?

SHORTEN: Well I do think it’s important to highlight the drastic consequences of climate change. Remember the Liberal Government famously made, when their ministers last visited the region they were making jokes about water lapping at the doors of people living in houses in the Pacific Islands. The fact of the matter is the Pacific Islands are at the front line of the harmful consequences of climate change. In Papua New Guinea alone they are experiencing terrible drought, widespread drought, 90 per cent, 80 to 90 per cent of the citizens of Papua New Guinea live in rural and remote areas so they rely a lot on food supplies and they’re seeing pressure being put on their food supply system because of global warming.

In addition we’re visiting the Marshall Islands and Kiribati over the next two days, three days. Rising water levels mean that these people not only lose their food security and have economic pressure; they may well indeed lose where they live. So what the Pacific Islands have been saying to my delegation of Richard Marles, Tanya Plibersek and myself is that they look for Australia as a large Pacific nation to give leadership to the rest of the world in climate change and they are distinctly disappointed with Australia’s actions.

BRISSENDEN: Okay this trip presumably was set up when Tony Abbott was prime minister to make a point of difference with his government, but signs are that that point of difference won’t be quite as stark with Malcolm Turnbull, isn’t it?

SHORTEN: Oh Michael what do you think practically the difference is on climate change with the change of leader? There is no – let’s not fall for this sort of message that because we’ve changed the salesman somehow the product has changed. When it comes to climate change what different policies has Malcolm Turnbull introduced? They have stuck with Direct Action, they’ve got the same low targets for reduction of carbon emissions. There has been no change Michael –

BRISSENDEN: Well there’s certainly been a change of emphasis on renewable, hasn’t there?

SHORTEN: Well what actual change has happened on renewables? I mean what Labor says is that we want 50 per cent of our energy mix to come from renewable energy by 2030 and Malcolm Turnbull has attacked that as ‘reckless’. The Government, some of their rhetoric has changed, Michael. You know, they’re not saying that wind turbines make them feel sick. But, Michael, this nation needs more than a change in terms of just hot air and rhetoric. Substance matters. And to be fair, people like yourself have, it’s the role of you and me and our chats to help draw out what has actually changed. There is no change in Direct Action, there is no change in their low emissions targets reductions, there’s certainly no change in their plans for climate change which aren’t going to do enough according to the Pacific Islands to stop the dreadful consequences of climate change.

BRISSENDEN: Just quickly we still don’t know your figures on emissions reduction targets. Are we likely to get them this week?

SHORTEN: You won’t get them this week no, Michael, I’m in the Pacific. But what I can tell you is that we’ve said that we’re committed to 50 per cent of our energy mix coming from renewable energy by 2030. We don’t believe that the Government’s Direct Action plans whereby they’re paying large polluters to keep putting out large amounts of carbon pollution, that doesn’t change anything either. We want to see and at the end of this week we’ll have a clearer picture, having travelled through the Pacific Islands, of some of the direct consequences of climate change. The rest of the world but certainly in the Pacific doesn’t understand why Australia, which is a leader in the Pacific, is following the rest of the world when it comes to climate change.

BRISSENDEN: Okay, Bill Shorten, we’ll have to leave it there, thanks very much for joining us.

SHORTEN: Thanks Michael, bye.


ENDS

Bill Shorten, Subject/s: Labor’s commitment to climate change in the Pacific; Peter Dutton’s joke about the Pacific; Australia’s AID funding; resettlement of refugees in PNG.

DOORSTOP INTERVIEW

PORT MORESBY
SUNDAY, 1 NOVEMBER 2015


BILL SHORTEN, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Labor takes our nearest neighbours very seriously. Labor takes the challenge of climate change very seriously. Nowhere is the challenge of climate change more acute than in the South Pacific and our near neighbours. Papua New Guinea’s experiencing extreme draught, changes in weather conditions and we’re going to be subsequently visiting Kiribati and the Marshall Islands where people there are experiencing, because of rising sea levels, not just challenges to their economic security but indeed to where they live. So Labor takes our nearest neighbours very seriously. That’s why I’ve got senior members of my team including my Deputy Leader and foreign affairs spokesperson and my spokesperson for immigration because for us foreign policy starts in our nearest neighbours, Papua New Guinea is one of the most important relationships Australia has forged in times of terrible conflict but it remains a key part of Australia’s foreign policy.

JOURNALIST: Not to diminish the importance of the climate change issue but did this seem like an even better idea after Peter Dutton made that joke?

SHORTEN: I think having Liberal Ministers making a joke about climate change, especially when rising sea levels are threatening the livelihood and homes of our neighbours was incredibly poor taste but Labor doesn’t get distracted by Liberal gaffes. We’ve got a strong commitment to improving our relations with our nearest neighbours. We recognise that PNG has lots of challenges but also under Prime Minister O’Neill it’s been making practical steps forward. Labor wants a partnership between Australia and Papua New Guinea. Tonight for instance we’re catching up with the Minister for Environment so we can talk about climate change. One thing is for sure though, the message I’m already getting loud and clear is that climate change is a first order issue for our neighbours and we need in Australia to have serious policies, credible policies which will help to contribute to mitigating the effects of climate change in our region.

JOURNALIST: How up to speed are you on some of the recent political issues in Papua New Guinea?

SHORTEN: Well we’ve had good briefings and both Tanya and Richard are across a lot of what’s happening in PNG.  We follow some of the matters very closely. We’re looking forward to meeting with the Prime Minister of PNG tomorrow. Labor’s sending a senior team of representatives because the sort of government we would be if we were elected at the election next year is one that is focused upon close ties with our neighbours but happens in PNG and our region from climate change and their economic growth is important to our national security and our place in the world. I’ll hand it over to Richard and Tanya.

TANYA PLIBERSEK, DEPUTY LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Well I’ll just make a brief comment; it’s fantastic to be here at the university to see wonderful work the university is doing in educating the next generation of scientist, entrpreneaurs, and particular nursing and midwifery students, the students we have spent most time with today. We’re here in the dormitories that where expanded to allow the expansion of the nursing and midwifery course here. We’ve seen the new education facilities, the new lecture theatres and that Australian aid also help build. We know that PNG is a country that’s got extraordinary health challenges, so many woman giving birth with no skilled birth attendant, high rates of child mortality, high rates of perinatal maternal death and being able to help PNG help its self but training more nursing and midwifery students is exactly what our aid dollars should be doing and we also know that these young women will go back to their communities and be an inspiration to another generation of girls to do well at school and to dream about going to university, being economically self-sufficient bringing money into their families and their communities. It’s a real honour to see the work that began under a Labor government completed so well.

JOURNALIST: In the foreign portfolio how concerned are you about some of the recent political instability that we’re seeing here in PNG, some of the accusation that are being made and also PNG’s financial state?

PLIBERSEK: Well we’re certainly not here to make comments about PNG domestic politics, we’re looking forward to productive meetings with the Government – number of government ministers.

JOURNALIST: But instability is a concern for Australia isn’t it?

PLIBERSEK: Well we’re here to have productive meetings with a number of ministers, I’m confident that’s what will happen over the next couple of days. Of course we hope for all of our neighbours that their political situations are stable and friendly. We don’t always have that in Australia.

JOURNALIST: With the Manus Island issues and the resettlement, how confident are you that this process is actually going to be done properly and/or be some meaningful outcomes for those people who’ve been found to be refugees on Manus Island?

RICHARD MARLES, SHADOW MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION: Well we welcome the announcement from the PNG immigration minister that the resettlement program has gone through the National Executive Council here. That is a good step forward in terms of seeing resettlement in PNG, obviously that’s what needs to occur so that the numbers of people within the facility can start to decline but what we really need is for the Australian Government to be working as cooperatively as they can with the PNG Government to help facilitate this. From our perspective is very important that that occur with dignity and acknowledging that PNG comes to this really having done Australia a service, helping Australia out with an initiative in relation to what is a region problem but coming up with a regional solution. So it’s important that we as a country work with PNG with respect in this relationship and that’s how we would go about things

JOURNALIST: I’ve been talking the guys on Manus who are now in line to be resettled probably in Port Moresby, they’re really concerned about their personal safety, about their living standards, some of them have already been assaulted, you know, and suffered on Manus Island. What sort of reassurance can we offer them about their resentment in PNG?

MARLES: Ultimately that is a matter for PNG to develop a resettlement program for people here but we do think that there are opportunities in this country with a growing economy for many who are qualified to pursue their livelihood here, of course many Australians have done exactly that. People’s safety and wellbeing obviously critical to whatever program is put in place and it’s important that the Australian Government works with the Papuan New Guinea Government to help assure that.

JOURNALIST: Do you think the Australian Government should be doing anything more on that front though?

MARLES: I think it’s really important that the Australian Government works very closely with PNG to make sure that resettlement happens. It’s to state the obvious that we are concerned on the part of the way in which the Australian Government has engaged with PNG that it’s more than two years past the signing of the resettlement arrangement and we are, only now, we are starting to see people resettled in PNG. Now I don’t blame PNG for that, from our point of view it was simply not good enough that when this government, the Abbott Government, was elected it was months before we saw a minister come to PNG and engage with this government about the question of resettlement. So we do need to see an actively engaged Australian government at a political level with the PNG Government to make this policy work and we shouldn’t forget this was an Australian initiative and PNG came to our aid in respect of this. It’s important that the Australian Government treats PNG with dignity and respect in relation to this.


ENDS