Browsing articles in "Shadow Ministerial Interview Transcripts"
Apr 27, 2018

Transcript of Television Interview – The Today Show – Friday, 27 April 2018

Subjects: NDIS, tax, negative gearing. 

KARL STEFANOVIC: Welcome back to the show. Plenty going on in politics this morning. Joining me now is Anthony Albanese and Christopher Pyne in Adelaide. Morning guys.

CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Good morning Karl, good morning Anthony.

STEFANOVIC: Let’s start with you, Christopher. Scott Morrison told Today yesterday that we can afford the NDIS now without a Medicare levy. This morning we learned the gap will be larger than $7 billion. Do you know how much that gap will be, Chris?

PYNE: Well the good news Karl, is that we are able to not have to raise the Medicare levy in order to pay for the NDIS because of our good economic management of the country and the Budget.

STEFANOVIC: But do you know how much the gap will be?

PYNE: Well, I think there’s speculation about the gap. The Treasurer has made it quite clear that there is no gap, that we actually have the revenue, that the revenues are growing. We’ve managed the economy well. We’ve managed the Budget well. So the good news is unlike Labor who want to increase or raise six new taxes, we have no plans for increasing taxes. In fact, quite the opposite. We’re trying to reduce the tax burden.

STEFANOVIC: Okay, I’ll get to that in a second but do you know why the costs are blowing out for the NDIS? I’ll tell you. More children than expected are entering the scheme. Fewer than expected are leaving it. The states have to come up with funding. They have to come to the party. Essentially there are no guarantees because you have such little control over costs.

PYNE: No, the truth is the NDIS is a very important reform to support people with disabilities and we are very confident that while of course it is only just beginning, and therefore there’s issues that always need to be worked out, we can fund it. Now, Labor didn’t fund it. We are funding it and we’re doing it without an increase in the Medicare levy which is good news.

STEFANOVIC: Anthony, you blocked the Medicare increase. Are you partly to blame here?

ANTHONY ALBANESE: Christopher argued week after week, year after year, that it wasn’t funded and today with no difference, no policy change, it now is funded. The truth is we always funded the NDIS when we were in government. What show that is true, is the fact that now they say with no changes, it now is fully funded. They can’t have it both ways. This is a Government that is all over the shop.

STEFANOVIC: Christopher, you can’t guarantee the costs aren’t going to blow out. That is the problem and therefore funding can’t be guaranteed.

PYNE: The point is under Labor they did not have the allocation of revenue that is necessary.

STEFANOVIC: But how can you guarantee the funding if you don’t know what the costs are going to be?

PYNE: We manage the Budget and we’ve worked out the cost and we’ve got the revenue. Labor didn’t have the revenue and didn’t know the cost and they were making speculative claims about how much money they had…

ALBANESE: Complete nonsense. Go back to what you were saying last week…

STEFANOVIC: So Christopher just back on your earlier point. You won’t be introducing any new taxes?

PYNE: Well, I don’t know what is absolutely in the Budget of course because we won’t be deciding that until closer to the date.

STEFANOVIC: Oh, come on. You won’t be introducing any new taxes, will you?

PYNE: Well we don’t speculate about the Budget, Karl. You know that so it’s a very, very unfair question.

STEFANOVIC: It’s a pretty easy question, are you going to be increasing…

PYNE: We don’t speculate about the Budget but I can tell you what, we don’t increase taxes. Labor does.


PYNE: Labor has six new taxes…

ALBANESE: Taxes have increased as a proportion of the economy under you.

STEFANOVIC: Alright, alright.

PYNE: We are always reducing income tax, reducing company tax. That’s in our DNA. Labor loves tax. We don’t.

STEFANOVIC: That’s ‘in your DNA’?. What about oil and gas giants? They’ll be forced to pay more tax, won’t they? You’re changing the uplift concessions which determines tax deductions, so they will be paying more. That’s an increase, isn’t it?

PYNE: That’s possibly a good idea, Karl, when you look at it…

STEFANOVIC: But it is an increase, isn’t it?

PYNE: When you look at Qatar, Karl..

STEFANOVIC: You said you don’t increase taxes. You’re doing it!

PYNE: Are you becoming a shock jock, Karl? What’s going on here?

STEFANOVIC: No, I’m becoming a truth jock.

PYNE: You’ve been having your vitamins this morning.

STEFANOVIC: I’m becoming a truth jock and that is the truth, isn’t it? Oil and gas companies will be paying more.

PYNE: We had a review of the PRRT because this country has not been achieving anything like the revenues from gas that a country like Qatar has been…

STEFANOVIC: So you are increasing taxes?

PYNE: …and that suggests to us…

ALBANESE: Of course they are.

PYNE: …that it needs to be reviewed, and it’s not a new company tax cut, not a new income tax, it’s actually making sure we get the most out of our gas reserves.

ALBANESE: Under this mob, taxes are up as a proportion of the economy. Taxes are up, the deficit is up, debt is up to half a trillion dollars under them.

STEFANOVIC: Okay, you’re not of the woods either at this morning. You guys love to make it hard for your own heartland. What about this; you’ve got dramas with almost two thirds of all investors who negatively gear on less income than $80,000 a year. That’s teachers amongst those, with the highest numbers who gear properties. That is your heartland, why do you want to slash it?

ALBANESE: Guess what, Karl? Not one of them will be impacted. There’s no retrospectivity in our proposals. Our proposals will continue to allow negative gearing but for new properties, so you actually get support for the construction sector and for those jobs.

STEFANOVIC: What about all those teachers who have them now?

ALBANESE: They’re not impacted. No one’s existing arrangements are impacted by any of our proposals.

PYNE: It’s only the new people with income under $80,000 dollars who get hurt under your policy.

ALBANESE: They don’t get hurt. What they’ll do is, if they want to negatively gear – you’ve had a good crack this morning, Christopher…

PYNE: Well, I’ve been fighting with Karl, actually.

ALBANESE: If they – well, just stick that. You haven’t gone well there, so don’t pick another fight.

PYNE: You answer the question.

ALBANESE: When it comes to negative gearing, the fact is that people will be able to invest in new construction. That makes sense, Karl. Why would you have existing investors competing with first home buyers for existing property?

STEFANOVIC: Alright, I’ll let you get out and sell that message because it seems a bit hard for me to understand, but I’m no expert.

PYNE: We’ve known all along this would happen.

ALBANESE: No impact on existing properties. Zero. Really easy.

STEFANOVIC: We’ve got to go. KFC is celebrating 50 years.


Apr 25, 2018

Transcript of Television Interview – Richo Program, SKY News – Wednesday, 25 April 2018

Subjects: Medicare Levy, tax cuts, Banking Royal Commission, infrastructure, immigration

GRAHAM RICHARDSON:  On my right is Anthony Albanese. Actually, he should be on my right the way he goes on these days. But there he is. Anthony, welcome to the program.

ANTHONY ALBANESE: I don’t know about that Graham, but good to be here.

RICHARDSON:  Well I worry about it. Maybe if have gone further to the Left though? That may be the case.

ALBANESE: That can happen.

RICHARDSON: You may not have moved, but I may have.

ALBANESE: Eventually you realise the correctness of the Left position.

RICHARDSON: I’ve seen the light. Well, I’m not quite there yet, but we will see. Look, just minutes before we came into the studio, literally I think about 10 minutes before, I was told that the Government has just announced that they are abolishing the Medicare Levy, which of course I think you have been asking them to do for quite some time.

ALBANESE: Well we have for some time. It’s quite absurd and untenable for a Government that is going to a Budget where we know they are going to be saying we want some income tax cuts at the same time as they were putting this Medicare Levy on for the NDIS but across all income levels. What Labor has said is that we are happy to look at the levels of $87,000 and above. We are also of course happy to look at maintaining, or putting back, what was called the Deficit Levy because the deficit has actually got worse under this mob.

RICHARDSON: Much worse.

ALBANESE: The level of debt has just about doubled. It’s now over half a trillion dollars and for those people on above $180,000, we think they could afford to pay that until such time as the Budget returns to surplus.

RICHARDSON: Well, I don’t care whether I pay it or not but I know that if you are going to have an income tax cut, you can’t give a two cent cut. You are going to have to give something decent to make it worthwhile then one would imagine that Scott Morrison was going to get rid of this anyway. I mean as soon as they announced they were going to have tax cuts I assumed this would go.

ALBANESE: Well you can’t give with one hand and take back with another.

RICHARDSON: Some people can.

ALBANESE: You can try. But the truth is they haven’t got away with it, like they haven’t got away with theirbig end tax cuts of $65 billion for companies. People again this week we have seen surveys that show that what people want is investment in education, investment in health, investment in early childhood …

RICHARDSON: Health was way in front actually.

ALBANESE: Investment in infrastructure. And that usually is the case. People know that there are massive pressures on their own Budget and what they have now, I mean it is going to be interesting to see, in a Kelly O’Dwyer-type way, them argue that the banks, the Big Four, should be entitled to this company tax cut. I mean, how do you do that?

RICHARDSON: It’s going to be very difficult. I have been arguing against you up until the last ten days. My view was you couldn’t gouge out any particular sector. But now I think the banks have earned our wrath. They have earned our ire and they have not earned a tax cut. That’s for sure.

ALBANESE: Well they have had a shocker. But the truth is if the Government was smart, what they would do is to take the company tax cuts off the table and they would do it at the Budget, because I can’t see how it is going to get through the Senate. I think in spite of the fact that Pauline Hanson has betrayed once again her own battler base in favour of the big end of town, I can’t see it getting through.

RICHARDSON: It’s interesting you said that because I interviewed Scott Morrison on this show two weeks ago and put that to him directly and said why don’t you get the numbers out of the Budget because it is pretty obvious it’s not going to happen? But  his view was that Malcolm Turnbull says you never know what will turn up with the Senate numbers. That was his great saying. I said to him then that he had another saying which is that the trajectory is clear, but he didn’t seem to like that part of it so I moved on. But it is obvious that the tax cuts are coming. But it is not obvious to me how you pay for them and I am still wondering. I note as, you probably have, that tonight Scott Morrison has said that receipts, I think he said revenue is $4.8 billion up because you’ve got more jobs and more people paying and I suppose less unemployment payments.

ALBANESE: And you have had a turnaround in some of the commodity payments as well.

RICHARDSON: Yes. Coal has gone up, iron ore has gone up.

ALBANESE: Yes. That has produced more revenue for the Government.

RICHARDSON: Does that mean they can afford the tax cuts?

ALBANESE: Well we will wait and see what the Budget numbers show. But what they can’t afford to do Graham is to continue to stand for the top end at the same time as working people out there, the people I seek to represent, are really struggling. They are struggling with their electricity bills. They are struggling with paying fees for their kids.

RICHARDSON: They are struggling with no wage increases.

ALBANESE: They are struggling with everyday costs of living. And at the same time as you have these companies doing quite well many of them in terms of record profits, you have remuneration to the top end being pretty good – a lot of largesse, ordinary people out there are suffering effectively a real wage cut.

RICHARDSON: Well that bloke Mellor, who AMP have just sacked. I mean they had already sacked him. He has been sacked twice the poor bugger.

ALBANESE: I wouldn’t feel too sorry for him.

RICHARDSON: While the share price was plummeting last year, so before these revelations remember, the share price has only had on direction – south  – and he got paid $8.1 million for presiding over that last year – $8.1 million for failing. It’s not bad, is it?

ALBANESE: Yes it’s not a bad wicket and I think that people see that and they know themselves that they are not getting wage increases to keep up with inflation and they know that Scott Morrison is relying upon the trickle-down effect – if we just look after the big end, somehow it will all flow down and the average worker out there, struggling, will be better off. Well the average worker doesn’t buy it. That is why this Government is in real strife I think frankly. This Budget is the last Budget before an election. I think the election will be next year, but his will be the last Budget regardless of what the timing is, whether it is later this year or early 2019 and the Government has to turn around its fortunes. That Kelly O’Dwyer interview I think will be one of those totemic things that you will keep seeing. I notice it was on Sunday and I’ve seen it three of four times now.

RICHARDSON: Well I had to play it.

ALBANESE: Of course you had to.

RICHARDSON: It was fascinating television really.

ALBANESE: Of course you had to.

RICHARDSON: How anyone could be that stupid is beyond me.

ALBANESE: It was a train wreck. I have seen a lot of Insider interviews. That was the worst I have seen. But it was so bad because of what in represented, because of what it told people – that she just couldn’t bring herself to say one, that she was wrong, but secondly, also to acknowledge as Mathias Cormann did then, that actually the behaviour that we have seen come out is just quite extraordinary. The fellow who was giving financial advice to the former Labor Council official Donna McKenna, you know, people ringing up impersonating her is just beyond belief.

RICHARDSON: Yes, well at the end of the show I do a review of the week and I’ve got that included because it’s quite extraordinary the lengths to which they have gone. But also, I think, as I’ve remarked in other places, it was the way in which this evidence has been delivered. There was never any, ‘I’m really sorry that we did this’. I didn’t get any sense with these witnesses of saying that: ‘Gee I know this is terrible, for any role I had in it I’m truly sorry’. They seem to say: ‘Yes so what?’

ALBANESE: Well I tell you what Graham, if a working class kid I grew up with went into a dock with former High Court Judge and said: ‘Yes, I knocked off this and I got someone to impersonate this person and we did this’, they wouldn’t leave through the front door.

RICHARDSON: No, they would leave in handcuffs out the back.

ALBANESE: They’d leave in a paddy wagon. That’s what would happen.

RICHARDSON: This is the problem though. It just seems to me that because ASIC, and Tony Abbott has suggested they should be abolished, I’m not sure they need to be abolished, but they need to be fixed, because obviously they have failed dismally in their role…

ALBANESE: He did cut their funds substantially in his first Budget. He ripped the guts out of it. So he in part is responsible for the position that ASIC find themselves in.

RICHARDSON: But ASIC have been really soft and they have used enforceable undertakings rather than taking anyone seriously. And enforceable undertakings are just ignored by all and sundry. They’re a joke. They were never enforced by ASIC and they were always ignored by the other party that signed them. But it just seems to me that there’s no sorrow and people just seem to plough on as if this is just an inconvenience, this Commission. It’s in the road for a while, it will go. I think some of them will go with it. Now getting back to your portfolio, which I haven’t even asked you about yet, it seems amazing to me the way the Government is handling infrastructure. It seems to me that you throw these massive amounts of money around as if they’re like confetti. So rather than have it as some sort of great structured thing, I think it was last week, there’s an offer, bang, for transport to Tullamarine. A couple of billion, just bang.


RICHARDSON: Five. Now how do you get that much to be able to throw around?

ALBANESE: There’s a problem with the Government’s approach to infrastructure. They’ve sidelined Infrastructure Australia. They say, Tony Abbott said, he wanted to be the infrastructure Prime Minister, but the first thing he did was to stop funding of all public transport projects that weren’t under construction. Infrastructure funding is due to fall off a cliff. In 2016-17 it was meant to be, they were meant to spend, $9.2 billion. They only spent $7.5 billion. But that falls to $4.2 billion over the forward estimates. So it gets cut in half. And over the next decade, as a proportion of the economy, it falls from 0.4 per cent to 0.2 percent according to the Parliamentary Budget Office. Now that’s cutting it in half.

What that means is that their rhetoric about growth and jobs – how do you get future growth? You invest in infrastructure. So what we’re seeing now is, because they’ve fallen behind, they haven’t worked with Infrastructure Australia, they don’t have a pipeline of projects coming out. You have these statements being made without anything to back them up. And what was extraordinary about the Melbourne Airport decision, I certainly think Melbourne Airport needs a rail link, and I know the Victorian Government have been working on that, but Malcolm Turnbull, when he announced $5 billion, said it was an equity injection, rather than a grant. And we’re not sure what that means. Nor does the Victorian Government know what that means. Because we all know that public transport projects don’t produce a return on capital in themselves …

RICHARDSON: No, you don’t make money out of them.

ALBANESE: That’s right. But they boost the economy, which can make money and grow out of it.

RICHARDSON: Of course, and isn’t it the case that we’ve been falling behind badly on this. It seems to me that obviously while we’re not China, we don’t have a billion people and all the rest of it, they are building infrastructure all the time because they know that’s the only way that they’ve got a future. We just seem to take it for granted that things will be okay. I don’t think they are okay.

ALBANESE: Well they are not okay, which is why there is pressure in our cities. There’s congestion. People are worried about population growth – that whole debate is in the context of infrastructure fails. Fortunately we’ve seen the Government move to Labor’s position of saying with the second Sydney Airport, you’ve got to have rail there from day one. Let’s not repeat the mistakes that have been made in the past. And you need links in a city like Sydney that go north-south in Western Sydney. This Government has now announced half the line, rather than the whole line through to the Macarthur region to give support to people around Campbelltown.

RICHARDSON: Well you can take the train half way and hitch the rest. There’s always that.

ALBANESE: That’s right. People need access to those high-value jobs. Now some of the work that Lucy Turnbull is involved with, the Greater Sydney Commission, there’s been some good work done there. You do need to address the fact that we have drive-in, drive-out suburbs where people spend more time going to and from work in their cars than they do at home with their kids. That means a number of things. One, it means better public transport. It also means creating jobs close to where people live. And that’s the sort of vision that we have. That’s why outer suburbs need to be a concentration and that’s why as well you need to concentrate on public transport because in the big cities you can’t solve urban congestion with roads. You do need roads, but you need…

RICHARDSON: Without rail, you can’t solve anything. Mind you, if you look at New South Wales and what’s happened with the light rail here, I wonder about that as a solution because if you look at that it’s just a mess beyond belief.

ALBANESE: But isn’t that an example of just bad planning? When people realise as well that you’ve got a section of light rail that now operates, this new section that’s being built is a different gauge. They won’t be able to work together.

RICHARDSON: So the Dulwich Hill line can’t work together? I didn’t realise that.

ALBANESE: No. So if you want to go from Dulwich Hill to the footy, you’re going to have to get off one tram and get on another tram because they don’t work together.

RICHARDSON: That’s crazy.

ALBANESE: And that in part is because, just like the trains that the Berejiklian Government have ordered don’t fit the stations in the Blue Mountains, they’re going to have to change the tunnels, fix the stations. Just like in Queensland, the trains that were ordered by Campbell Newman’s Government don’t fit the model as well that’s there. That’s why we need in this country, one of the things that we can do that would create jobs here, is have a manufacturing plan that supports a national rail manufacturing strategy and that’s something that’s been – there’s been a Senate committee report. Kim Carr’s been very active on that and has done some really good work on that. The unions support it. The Australasian Railway Association supports it, the industry, and it would be a very good step forward.

RICHARDSON: I think it would be a great step forward given the decline of manufacturing. Now, they keep telling me I have to give up on you, but I won’t just yet, because there’s one question, a little more difficult than some of the others that I want to ask you. Both sides of politics, seem to me want to shut down a real debate on immigration. But the punters out there, they see it as a problem. Newspoll this week’s got 56 per cent saying it’s too high, 28 per cent saying it’s just right, and 10 per cent, mainly the Green voters, one would assume, saying not enough. Now, a majority of Labor voters unquestionably think that, yet you do have great ethnic support and it’s pretty risky for Labor to stand up and say we want to cut the numbers. Where does this debate go in the Labor Party?

ALBANESE: What you’ve got to do is have a sensible debate that debates the issues rather than debates – quite often it can be derailed by talking about a particular race or a particular group. So we need to avoid that.

RICHARDSON: We’ve got to talk about Budgets, jobs.

ALBANESE: Non-discrimination. The second thing is, how do we grow? The fact is that we need migration in this country because of the nature of the population. The ageing of the population means we need to have younger people in the workforce or simply we won’t be able to manage the economy. That balance needs to be made. So migrants contribute to the economy and there was an important study that showed that last week.

But that doesn’t mean that we can’t have a debate about the fact that the migrants are all settling in Sydney and Melbourne, that that’s producing real pressure on infrastructure in the suburbs. It doesn’t mean that we can’t have a debate about proper planning. One of the things I’m concerned about is that in our outer suburbs of course we had growth whereby suburbs, housing had been built without thinking where people would work, where their kids would go to school, where they will play on the weekend, where the hospitals are – all those facilities.

There’s a similar thing happening in the inner and middle rings now whereby you have – go and have a look at Wolli Creek, close to the airport there. All of that development – not one new oval for a kid to kick a footy, not one new public school, not one new private school, for that matter, in that area. How’s it going to work? That creates real pressure and that will, I think, make it susceptible to politicians who come up with easy answers, which is just, you know, ‘stop the world, we want to get off’. So we can’t go down that way, but we can’t also avoid having a proper debate about growth, about where people are living and about quality of life and we should be able to do that in a way that’s respectful.

RICHARDSON: Let’s hope we can. I have to say, you’re a very convincing person sometimes. It worries me. Anthony Albanese.

Apr 24, 2018

Transcript of Radio Interview – ABC Mid North Coast – Monday, 23 April 2018

Subjects: Pacific Highway, Coffs Harbour Bypass, Federal election, Banking Royal Commission.

CAMERON MARSHALL: I spoke earlier to Anthony Albanese.

ANTHONY ALBANESE: Andrew Woodward is a very good candidate I think, our Federal candidate for Cowper. He is a serious candidate. It remains to be seen whether Rob Oakshott will have another crack as an Independent or what will happen in this seat. But I think people in Coffs and Port Macquarie are sick of being taken for granted frankly. If they compare what we did when we were last in office for this region, particularly the work we did on the Pacific Highway where virtually the entire area covered by your listening audience was funded, the duplication and the construction, either completed or at least begun when we were in office during that six years.

The Howard Government spent $1.3 billion over 12 years. We spent $7.6 billion over half that time. And people know that. The Pacific Highway is an area that was dear to my heart. I was named Anthony after my young cousin who died just before I was born at Halfway Creek so I was always very conscious about the Pacific Highway. I had relatives at Halfway Creek and used to go up there for school holidays, catch the train, or go up if one of my cousins was driving up I would go up on the highway. And it was as shocking road. I well remember Tony Abbott before he became Prime Minister coming up here and promising the Coffs Harbour Bypass. During the first term it was going to be underway and of course it hasn’t happened.

MARSHALL: Is that going to be a priority if Labor were elected, to get that job done?

ALBANESE: Well what we want is for the Government to actually deliver on its own commitments. We’ve got a Budget coming up in just a few weeks and we will wait and see what is in the Budget. But frankly they have done very little for this community. There has been no advance on issues like High Speed Rail where we did the study that showed that these communities would be transformed by having stations at places like Taree, Port Macquarie and Coffs Harbour. The study was done. The High Speed Rail between Sydney and Brisbane would transform the regional communities along the route.

MARSHALL: Now you represent business as well. What about small business? Is there anything on the table for small business? What do you think needs to change to improve or help small business?

ALBANESE:  Well there is a range of things. Firstly, in terms of the policy that we have allowing for greater depreciation of any capital investment and allowing that instant write-off of 20 per cent of any new investment would make a huge difference. One, it would encourage that investment which would tend to be from local suppliers as well, so it has a multiplier effect. I think small business would really benefit from that change that we have announced.

Secondly, the ongoing issue of the National Broadband Network – making sure that business can be connected up and can have access to those markets is critical. And thirdly, in terms of our overall approach to the economy, one of the reasons why I think the economy is going slower than it should be is the decline in real wages. When you have effectively wages not being able to keep up with inflation, what that means is there are less people spending money in local shops, in retail, in hospitality, in all of those areas which are critical.

My area of tourism as well is I think an area where you could see substantial employment growth here on the coast. This presents a wonderful opportunity to attract visitors from all over the world, but particularly from our region, where you have this explosion in the middle class. People want to visit Sydney and they want to visit the big capitals. But they also I think want to have access to areas that are very different than the crowded Asian cities where they are from and a place like Port Macquarie or Coffs Harbour or some of the smaller places – Urunga – would provide I think very attractive destinations.

MARSHALL: The Banking Royal Commission underway at the moment – you are somebody that advocated for that. Are you surprised by the revelations that are coming out daily?

ALBANESE: No I am not. This is why we wanted a Royal Commission – precisely this. Good policy comes from evidence and what we are seeing here is the evidence of the abuse of their market power of the big financial institutions whether it be the big banks or institutions like AMP where we have seen the CEO resign and fall on their sword. Now we had more than 20 attempts to have a Royal Commission that were voted against by Malcolm Turnbull and by all of the Coalition. We kept the pressure on. We campaigned on it in the lead up to the last Federal election and since then we kept the pressure on because we knew that market power was being abused, that consumers were suffering. And what we have seen are reports about consumers being charged for products that they never received, consumers being charged and losing money after they had died – just breathtaking really the activity. And one by one we have had these financial institutions in the dock having to be accountable for their actions. What we haven’t heard from as much yet is from the victims and when that happens, I think people will be truly shocked.

I just know that over a period of time I have got more and more local people coming in who were victims of scams but  also just victims of what seems to be everyday practice of these financial institutions. It is not good enough and it is extraordinary that they have had to admit lying to ASIC. That is a breach of the law and now we have the same people who said it was a waste of time, it was a stunt, doing press conferences – Scott Morrison and Kelly O’Dwyer and the rest of them – described it as reckless, our support for a Royal Commission. What was reckless was pretending that a Royal Commission wasn’t needed. Out of this will come real change and these institutions being held to account for the first time in a long while.

MARSHALL: The next Federal election – what do you think it will be decided on and what role do you think this Mid North Coast region might play in the outcome?

ALBANESE: Elections are always decided on the economy and in part the next election will be about: Is your priority for tax cuts for big corporations which will benefit shareholders, many of which are sitting in Washington or London or Rome or Beijing or whether it is about a priority of education, health, child care. Aged care will be a big issue. We have seen essentially increasing reports of mistreatment. Issues like nurse to patient ratios in aged care – an issue that needs to be dealt with, an issue though that costs money. So the next election will be about priorities, whether if you give tax cuts – $65 billion – to the big end of town, it will trickle down and people will be better off, or whether you are better off saying: No, that won’t work, we need to properly fund education. We need to properly fund health care and aged care. We need to properly fund child care and early childhood education. We need to fund infrastructure that builds the economy for the future. That will be, I think, will be the fundamental divide that we are seeing take shape now.

The Mid North Coast will be very important. Luke Hartsuyker has represented Cowper for a very long time. I think people are entitled to say: What has he achieved during that period of time? Could we do better? I think people are entitled to have a look at what happened when the seat of Lyne wasn’t held by the National Party. Was there more focus on the seat then than there is now? Were more resources given to schools, hospitals, infrastructure, the airport? I think the answer to that is yes and there is a message there which is that if the region just elects a National Party people because they think that is what is best for the region, then they need to actually look at the experience and think about those issues and I know that is something that Andrew Woodward will be campaigning very strongly on as the Labor candidate for Cowper.

Apr 24, 2018

Transcript of Doorstop – Sydney – Tuesday, 24 April 2018

Subjects; The Coalition’s abysmal record on infrastructure investment, World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Ranking 2017-18, banking Royal Commission, foreign investment

ANTHONY ALBANESE: The Government is talking big on infrastructure prior to next month’s Federal Budget. But the fact is it is coming off a disastrously low base whereby they have cut infrastructure funding, which is due to fall from $9.2 billion that they predicted they would spend in 2016-17. It drops off to $4.2 billion in 2020-21. The Parliamentary Budget Office has estimated that infrastructure investment will halve from 0.4 to 0.2 percent of GDP over the next decade. And the World Economic Forum has found that Australia’s position, in terms of infrastructure ranking around the globe, has fallen from 18th to 28th under this Government’s watch.

That stands in stark contrast to when the former Government was in office. When we came to office in 2007, Australia was ranked 20th in the OECD for investment in infrastructure as a proportion of the national economy. When we left office, Australia was ranked first.

So they inherited this work, but they haven’t built on it. They cut all funding from all public transport projects that weren’t under construction when they came into office. And they simply haven’t done the work to create a pipeline of projects. So there is a lot of work to be done in next month’s Budget, but the Government should be fair dinkum about the low base in which they find themselves.

The other thing they should be honest about is that they haven’t even invested what they themselves said they would. Some $5 billion of underspends in their first four years in office. That is they said, on Budget night in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017, they would spend a certain amount, but they haven’t done it. That’s meant a slowdown in road projects. That’s meant underspends in projects like the Black Spot Program and Roads to Recovery: local road programs that improve road safety. This is a Government that has a terrible record, that’s been through a range of infrastructure ministers and is looking for ways to pretend they’re doing things when they’re not really.

That’s why we’ll examine also very closely statements such as that $5 billion will be available for the airport link in Melbourne, that it would somehow be an equity investment – that is one that produces a return to Government. If that’s the case, it won’t be real investment because the truth is that public transport doesn’t produce an economic return on its investment directly. What it does do, is produce a return to the national economy by boosting productivity and boosting overall economic activity. Happy to take questions.

JOURNALIST: Pauline Hanson says she doesn’t think a company tax cut will boost wages but will lead to an increase in jobs. Do you agree?

ALBANESE: Pauline Hanson, of course, has once again shown that in spite of her rhetoric she doesn’t stand up for working people or low and middle income earners. Low and middle income earners have been watching the banking Royal Commission with some horror in the last week. What they know is that this is a Government that’s determined to give a tax cut to the big end of town, including to the big banks, unlike Labor that has a plan to actually invest in education or to invest in health, invest in infrastructure, invest in early childhood education. Pauline Hanson betrays the people who voted for her time and time again by siding with the Coalition Government.

JOURNALIST: Do you support foreign owned companies like Chinese Westside Corporation getting Federal Government grants to develop domestic gas supplies?

ALBANESE: These are matters that are dealt with appropriately by the Foreign Investment Review Board. And when the FIRB deals with, and other regulatory bodies deal with, these issues what they do is look at the Australian national interest and we should always look to the Australian national interest. We do need foreign investment in this country, but it shouldn’t be at the expense of the national interest.

JOURNALIST: There are concerns Chinese Westside Corporation has links to the Chinese Communist Party. Is that a worry?

ALBANESE: When you look at Chinese based companies, the fact is that due to their political system every company in China would have some links to the Chinese Government, which is the Chinese Communist Party. That’s almost a tautology to suggest there is a big distinction by the very definition of their political system.


Apr 20, 2018

Transcript of Television Interview – Nine Network – The Today Show – Friday 20 April 2018

Subjects; Banking Royal Commission; Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission; Record Store Day

GEORGIE GARDNER: Joining me now to discuss that and other issues is Christopher Pyne in Adelaide and Anthony Albanese who joins us from Sydney Airport this morning. Good morning to you both.

CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Good morning Georgie. Nice to be with you.

GARDNER: Lovely to have you.


GARDNER: Now Christopher, obviously deeply disturbing stories of banking misconduct and yet you didn’t think the Royal Commission was necessary. Why did the PM resist this Commission for so long?

PYNE: Well Georgie, we’re seeing a lot of evidence being presented in the Royal Commission which is very disturbing and that’s why the Government is taking action to strengthen ASIC’s powers even more than we already have. We’ve already given ASIC $100 million more money to pursue bad practices and we’re changing the laws to give them the power that they need to be able to pursue bad banking practices.

GARDNER: But why did it take so long, Christopher?

PYNE: Well, because we were acting without the Royal Commission anyway but the Royal Commission is providing more information to the government and the public. But we certainly weren’t waiting for the Royal Commission to take action in the banking sector. Banking is a big part of our economy. And so these stories are going to come out and that’s a good thing that they are. And that’s why the Government was acting well before the Royal Commission. Labor by contrast voted against taxation changes for foreign multinationals. We still got them through but Labor does a lot of arm waving and hand wringing and huffing and puffing but they didn’t actually do anything about it. We are.

GARDNER: But can you understand why this sort of leads people to think that a Liberal Government is in bed with big business? I mean it doesn’t help your case for getting corporate tax cuts through the Senate, does it?

PYNE: Well, I don’t think anybody thinks that the Liberals and the National Party support some of the practices that have been exposed in the Royal Commission. I mean, the good thing about Royal Commissions is they give people the opportunity to air some of these issues and for the Royal Commissioner to make recommendations. And we will follow that. We’ll wait for those recommendations before we act hastily. But as I reiterate, we have been taking the necessary action, taking tough action and we’ll continue to do so because we want to stand up for consumers and small businesses. We’re not interested in standing up for bad practices.

GARDNER: Anthony, it is such a protected industry. Are these penalties too little too late?

ALBANESE: They are, and this is a Government that ran a protection racket for the banks and finance sector. They voted against the Royal Commission on more than 20 occasions, even when members of their own backbench were crying out for this Royal Commission they were describing it as a stunt; as reckless; as something that wouldn’t achieve anything; as just populist nonsense, according to Scott Morrison and Malcolm Turnbull and indeed Kelly O’Dwyer. What we see now is vindication of Labor’s strong stance. We took a Royal Commission to the last federal election. We’ve campaigned on it ever since. And what we’re seeing now is the evidence out there for all to see. Good policy comes from the evidence. We haven’t heard yet from many of the victims of these practices. But what we’ve heard is senior executives fessing up to what are extraordinary rip offs of ordinary Australians and their savings.

GARDNER: Yeah, and sadly I think there is plenty more to come. Absolutely appalling stories coming out. Let’s move on. All this week we have been covering the aged care crisis here on The Today Show. You’d both be well aware of the countless cases of abuse; of death; of neglect at nursing homes right around this country. It affects everyone and Minister for Aged Care Ken Wyatt unveiled of course on this show the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission. Christopher, Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt told us there is no crisis. Do you agree?

PYNE: Well I saw your interview with Ken this week, Georgie and it was an excellent interview and Ken’s doing a fantastic job. I used to be the Minister for Ageing in the Howard Government. I can tell you it’s a very, very tough area of government policy. What we’re trying to do is bring together all the different agencies into one agency to cover both qualification for licenses and then the oversight of those licenses. The vast majority of nursing homes, aged care facilities – and my mother and mother-in-law are both in aged care facilities – are doing a great job and they’re fantastic. But there are occasions of bad practice and that’s unfortunately human nature and that’s why you have to find out as soon as you can about them, crack down, stay on top of them, investigate, turn up without notice and make sure that people are following the standards. If they’re not, you have to close them down and throw the book at them. And that’s what we’ve been doing, that’s what Ken Wyatt will continue to do. Can we stamp out every single instance of somebody being a bully in a nursing home and hurting people? We probably can’t, in the same way as we can’t stop every single bag snatch that happens in Martin Place or in a Parramatta supermarket but we can try and do our very best and that’s what these laws will do.

GARDNER: Alright, it is a disgraceful situation and Anthony these reforms of course are part of the solution. But what else needs to be done? What about enforcing patient-staff ratios for instance?

ALBANESE: That requires funds, Georgie, and what we’ve seen from this Government is cuts. They’re not prepared to pay nurses and aged care assistants the money that they need. They’re not prepared to enforce proper patient-staff ratios to ensure that patients can get the care that they need. Our older Australians have made this country they deserve dignity in their later years and they deserve better than they’re getting from this Government. There is a crisis in aged care and the Government needs to deal with it.

GARDNER: All right, well we’ll be watching you both very closely on that topic because as you are well aware, we have been absolutely inundated with people with horrific stories on that matter from right around the country. So interested to watch you on that. We are out of time sadly. Enjoy your weekend. And we will see you next week.

ALBANESE: Good to be with you.

PYNE: Look forward to it.

ALBANESE: Hey Georgie, it’s Record Store Day tomorrow so go into your local record store and participate. There’s a free ad for no one in particular.

GARDNER: All right. We love spinning records on this on this program. There’s no doubt about it so thank you for the heads up Anthony Albanese.

KARL STEFANOVIC: I wonder what Christopher will be buying.

PYNE: A bit of Dvořák.

STEFANOVIC: A broken record!

GARDNER: Nothing wrong with a bit of Dvořák on a Sunday afternoon.

PYNE: Nothing wrong with Dvořák, exactly.

STEFANOVIC: I prefer a bit of Jimmy Barnes myself, but anyway. It’s good to see you’re still in touch, Chris.

GARDNER: You can love classical music and be in touch!

STEFANOVIC: Yeah, that’s true. That’s true. Bit of Rachmaninoff early in the morning, eh?



Apr 18, 2018

Transcript of Radio Interview – FIVEaa Adelaide, Two Tribes segment – Wednesday, 18 April 2018

Subjects; Cannabis; Richard Di Natale; Greens Political Party; SA redistribution; ALP National President

HOST: Chris Pyne and Anthony Albanese join us each and every Wednesday morning for Two Tribes. Good morning to you both.

CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Good morning gentlemen.


HOST: We want to kick off today guys by talking about this policy idea floated by Richard Di Natale, the Leader of the Greens. We got a whole bunch of texts about it this morning from our listeners. This is the idea that cannabis should be fully decriminalised in the way it has been in several parts of the United States. Starting with you Chris, in your capacity as the Government spokesman, what do you make of that policy?

PYNE: Well I don’t support legalising cannabis. I think for medicinal purposes we have a regime which I’m glad to see that we put in place, which has been largely bipartisan, I think, to ensure that those people who need to use cannabis for a medicinal purpose have the capacity to do so, but that’s very much a different product. I see cannabis a gateway drug for young people into heavier drugs. I was responsible for drugs in the Howard era, illicits drug that is and we had a tough on drugs policy and it’s always [inaudible] giving up and saying it’s easier to legalise drugs than it is to try and stop people from getting into them, is not the way that we would want to go.

HOST: What about you, Albo? What are your thoughts on this, particularly you know, representing a seat as you do that’s an inner city seat with a fair bit of Green influence? Is it something that the Left faction is a little bit more open to maybe, in the ALP?

ALBANESE: I just think this is yet another ‘look at me’ moment from Richard Di Natale. The Greens are really struggling.  They had a shocking result in Tasmania and in the Batman by-election they went backwards. Richard Di Natale went to the National Press Club two weeks ago and this was his big plan for 2018, to make the Reserve Bank a lending bank, which was frankly a stupid idea. And the other idea of giving welfare to everyone through universal basic income whether you are Gina Rinehart or unemployed, you get the same amount of money. People were laughing at the bloke so now he’s come out with something else, which frankly is a matter for state jurisdictions.  South Australia in the past has looked at this. These are all state matters. This has nothing to do with the Commonwealth. Something that does have something to do with the Commonwealth is what Christopher said, medicinal use of cannabis for people who need it to treat a medical condition. That was bipartisan. It is just still being put in place, those mechanisms. And I would have thought that is the area in which the Commonwealth has responsibility, is acting responsibly, it is bipartisan. Let’s see how that goes rather than something that really is just about the fact that the Greens Party are really struggling, just as Nick Xenophon’s team, whatever they called these days, struggled in South Australia as well.

HOST: The party formerly known as Nick.

PYNE: It is now called something else. They’ve had four different names.

ALBANESE: What is it called?

PYNE: Alliance Central or something. It’s got different names. Before it was No Pokies.

ALBANESE: The ‘Look At Me’ Party. The problem with these minor parties is that they often come out with stuff; I mean it will be something else in a week. There’s no concerted campaign here. There’s no leader to it. It’s just a thought bubble, just like the thought bubble at the National Press Club a couple of weeks ago on a universal basic income, which would cost the Budget an absolute bomb and wouldn’t target welfare to where it’s actually needed. When you look at the detail of the Greens policy, you have big problems. They also have policies on ecstasy and on a whole range of harder drugs as well. Once people actually examine the policies, as they did in the Batman by-election, head to head, they don’t stack up.

HOST: Yeah, we’ll be getting him on at some point, giving him a chance to explain it.

HOST: Albo, you mentioned state matters and Chris Pyne to you, I just wonder how we make sure our state continues to matter given we have had one seat removed on account of the federal redistribution that we just had. One marginal seat as we head into a potential federal election season. How do we make sure South Australia doesn’t slide off the map?

PYNE: Well, we’ve had one seat removed out of 11 because we’ve had stagnant population growth and for the last 16 years we’ve had a State Labor Government that said that they were happy with low population growth and the result of that of course is a stagnant economy, young people leaving the state and you can’t lie with statistics. We’ve lost [inaudible], Western Australia has the same number of seats as South Australia, and you both had 13. Now we’re going to have 10 and Western Australia will have 16. So the numbers tell the story. You need a growing economy, a growing population. You need migration to the state bringing fresh ideas and fresh people to help grow our economy. You won’t lose an enormous amount of influence in South Australia because Tasmania has a lot less members than South Australia. The ACT don’t, but everybody in Australia and in Canberra recognises that every state, every person in our country is important and we get strong results, like the $90 billion submarine and shipbuilding part of the economy that I brought to the state as the Minister for Defence Industry. We’ve got significant investments in infrastructure here, like the North-South Corridor.

HOST: But will that stay, is that going to continue though Chris? Because thinking back to the Howard years, when Mr Howard was PM, Makin, Hindmarsh, Adelaide and Kingston were all very volatile marginal seats. Now, apart from arguably Boothby, there’s not a marginal seat left in South Australia. So if you’re trying to win government, you need to win it in Western Sydney, in Albo’s neck of the woods. You need to win it in regional Victoria; you need to win it in regional Queensland and suburban Brisbane. Where’s the political incentive? Because politics is all about winning the maximum number of seats. Why are you going to fund a South Road upgrade in a seat like Hindmarsh in three or six years’ time when we don’t have any marginal seats up for grabs?

PYNE: Because it’s the right thing to do, if that’s the policy that we settle on as being the right thing to do. I mean, policy is not just driven by population and by who lives where. It’s driven by what’s required for the country, that defence industry infrastructure, the economy, and we’ve got Simon Birmingham here as a Cabinet minister, myself, Anne Ruston as a minister in the Government. At times in South Australia’s history we’ve had one or two ministers, other times we’ve had four and now we have three. These things go up and down, they don’t determine whether a state is important or not.

HOST: Hey Albo, what should become of Mark Butler, the incumbent member for Port Adelaide?

ALBANESE: We had this debate, I remember, when we were talking about Sturt and whether it would disappear, but people don’t disappear.

PYNE: They had me buried, Albo, but don’t worry.

HOST: Didn’t Labor formally propose that Sturt get abolished?

ALBANESE: I was confident you’d still be there, like a cockroach after a nuclear war.

PYNE: That’s not very nice! Crawling out from under the rubble.

ALBANESE: I can assure you that Mark Butler will still be there in the next term.

HOST: Would he make a good National President of the Labor Party too, Albo?

ALBANESE: He will make a good National President, he is the current National President and he’s standing again…

HOST: Better than Wayne Swan?

PYNE: What about this rigging going on?

ALBANESE: …for election and he’s a very strong candidate. We’re not supposed to comment publicly more than that under the rules but…

HOST: Why’s that?

ALBANESE: Because that’s the rules…

PYNE: Marxist-Leninist state.

ALBANESE: …that you’re not supposed to engage in public debate. But I think…
HOST: You’re a ‘rules were made to be broken’ kind of a guy though, aren’t you Albo?

ALBANESE: Well, it’s very clear who I’m supporting in the ballot. I think that Wayne Swan is a good person as well. But Mark Butler’s the incumbent. I did launch his campaign in Sydney a couple of weeks ago.

HOST: It was a dead giveaway in terms of who you were backing.

ALBANESE: That was a bit of a giveaway.

HOST: That’s right, nothing gets past us. Chris Pyne and Anthony Albanese, always great to catch up you. We’ll do it again next week. Thanks guys.

Apr 17, 2018

Transcript of Television Interview – AM Agenda, SKY News – Tuesday, 17 April 2018

Subjects; Infrastructure funding; Cross River Rail; Western Sydney Airport; AdeLINK; National Energy Guarantee; Peta Credlin.

KIERAN GILBERT: With me now the Shadow Transport and Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese. Front page of The Daily Telegraph, I focused on it a bit earlier with Michael Sukkar and Scott Morrison as Santa. He says he’s not Santa, that Christmas isn’t coming in May. But on the serious side of this, you’d welcome their focus on infrastructure with the Melbourne rail link and second Sydney Airport and that sort of focus?

ANTHONY ALBANESE: Well, there’s a bit of rhetoric and there have been a couple of announcements of what they’ll do next decade when they’re in Opposition.  There aren’t actually projects that are ready to go like Cross River Rail where yesterday myself and Bill Shorten announced $2.24 billion dollars for that project that will double the capacity of rail being able to cross the bridge. More than 500,000 private vehicle kilometres will be taken off the road per day as a result of that project.

GILBERT: What about [Western] Sydney Airport? The Sydney Airport process, that’s all happening isn’t it? Sods have been turned so it’s not all next decade.

ALBANESE: Well it is in terms of the the rail project, of when they’ve announced it will commence. We have been arguing for some time that you need rail to be ready on day one across the entire network. What they’ve announced is part of it and that’s good, that’s welcome, that’s a start, but it also needs to connect up to the Macarthur region so that people in Campbelltown and that region, which is a growth region, can get access to that those high value jobs. But they’re working off a very low base, because what we’ve seen is in the announcements that they’ve made, they’ve stopped talking about the forward estimates are now talking about ‘over 10 years’ and so figures that are actually cuts look as though there’s growth. Now, the Parliamentary Budget Office has shown that the infrastructure investment will fall from 0.4 percent of GDP to 0.2. It will halve over the next decade. The forward estimates from last year’s Budget showed in 2016-17 it was anticipated to spend $9.2 billion. Over the forwards that falls to $4.2 billion, by more than half.

GILBERT: Okay, but on some of these projects, your Cross River Rail you spoke of, the criticism from the Government is that this is not one of the top priorities for Queensland as articulated by Infrastructure Australia.

ALBANESE: It’s ready to go.

GILBERT: Aren’t there bigger priorities? That’s what the Government says, for Infrastructure Australia there are bigger priorities.

ALBANESE: In Melbourne and the Western Sydney rail line, for example, the planning of those projects hasn’t been concluded. In Melbourne there’s a range of options. We do need airport rail in Melbourne, but there are a range of options that haven’t been finalised yet. Cross River Rail has actually been finalised. It’s done. The Government has sidelined Infrastructure Australia, has starved it of resources. It isn’t listening to it at all.

GILBERT: So it’s irrelevant now?

ALBANESE: Well, unfortunately it has been made irrelevant to the Government’s decision making processes. Cross River Rail was the number one project by Infrastructure Australia way back in 2012. It was funded in 2013, ready to go, construction to start in 2013-14. It was shelved because of Tony Abbott’s cuts and because Campbell Newman walked away from the agreement that he had with us as a Federal Labor Government.

GILBERT: So it’s not just about marginal seats as the Government would argue?

ALBANESE: Cross River Rail impacts the entire Brisbane network. It impacts the Gold Coast and the Sunshine Coast by improving the capacity of the whole network. It’s a game changer. If you look at where we funded infrastructure when we were in office, when you get off the plane here go to the Majura Parkway, you see that work there. When you look at the Gold Coast Light Rail project on the Gold Coast, that was opposed by Steven Ciobo and the Coalition, state and federal. That was vital. It had more than a million trips during the fortnight of the Commonwealth Games. It was part of the great success story.

GILBERT: Well let’s just look at the country then, the big projects. You’re on the same page as the Government when it comes to the Melbourne rail link and the [Western] Sydney Airport infrastructure around that, although you’d like to see that expedited. The other big projects around the country. What’s your view? I mean, what else needs to be done beyond that Cross River Rail?

ALBANESE: We need AdeLINK in South Australia. We need to expand the light rail network there.

GILBERT: What about the Inland Rail?

ALBANESE: The Inland Rail, we started that project.

GILBERT: So you support that as well?

ALBANESE: We started that process. We think there’s problems with the financing of the project. It doesn’t actually go to the port and now you have a study being undertaken to get the freight from Acacia Ridge, where it stops, more than 30 kilometres from the port. Now, that’s the most expensive bit. That’s the most difficult bit of the project to do so we think there are flaws in the way that the Government is handling this issue, but we’re supportive of Inland Rail. We put some $900 million in, $600 million into fixing the existing track that will form part of it, and $300 million in the Budget for the acquisition and the preconstruction work for that project. But we also have been making major announcements in Western Australia including the Ellenbrook rail line, the extension of the rail line to Byford, the extension of the Mitchell Freeway into the northern suburbs. These are all important projects. The Midland project, which is about moving the station closer to the hospital and also expanding it to one further stop. So that expansion of METRONET in Perth is a great example of a state government that’s done the work, is doing the planning, and is receiving the support of Federal Labor. The Government should get on board.

GILBERT: I want to ask you about the National Energy Guarantee because this is another big story in the lead up to the Ministers’ meeting with the states on Friday and it looks like Mark Butler your colleague is opening the way here for Labor to back the National Energy Guarantee but to toughen your benchmarks, your reduction targets within that framework. But I think business would welcome that development if you could see fit to have some bipartisanship.

ALBANESE: What we’ve said all along is that what industry needs here is certainty. You need certainty to be able to invest. This government has had five years of flip flopping. They could have had an emissions trading scheme, one would have thought that they would have supported a market based mechanism, but they didn’t support that. They’re not only climate skeptics on their backbench, they’re market sceptics as well. They could have had the Chief Scientist’s recommendations for a clean energy target. That was their policy that they developed and then they rejected it after the Chief Scientist recommended it and now we have the NEG being put forward. Labor will closely examine what comes out of any of these processes with the states. We’ll continue to be constructive.

GILBERT: But one of the recommendations of the regulators, and a lot of what you’ve said is accurate in terms of the chopping and changing, and to be fair the Labor Party’s chopped and changed a bit as well in terms of Kevin Rudd’s approach to it but if you look at…

ALBANESE: Well, no. We…

GILBERT: You got forced into it…

ALBANESE: We pursued our processes. We tried to get it through the Senate.

GILBERT: And you gave up on it.

ALBANESE: No. We couldn’t get it through the Senate.

GILBERT: And then you gave up on it.

ALBANESE: No, we couldn’t get it through the Senate. We tried on multiple occasions…


ALBANESE: … to get it through the Senate.

GILBERT: Just quickly in terms of the broader recommendations. One of the key ones is the need for political constancy beyond the cycle, isn’t it? I mean, that’s crucial.

ALBANESE: Absolutely.

GILBERT: So you can invest in assets beyond 20 years.

ALBANESE: What we need to do is to have mechanisms that allow the market to operate, and when the market operates, guess what? The future is renewables, because that’s what all of the markets are saying. That’s what the energy sector itself is saying. That’s what the economy needs. And it’s also what our environment needs.

GILBERT: Just quickly, it was on an interview with you and Ben Fordham on the Nine Network. Josh Frydenberg made a bit of a critique of Tony Abbott. Peta Credlin wasn’t very pleased with it, my Sky News colleague, and phoned him about it this morning. Mr Frydenberg says he stands by his words, he’d continue to call it as he sees it. This is just a bit of robust politics and it happens on all sides?

ALBANESE: Well, as Josh should, he has called Tony Abbott out for being a wrecker because that is the way that he is behaving. What’s extraordinary was Peta Credlin’s comments. I mean, this is a Sky News commentator seeking to dictate to Cabinet ministers what they say. I’m not surprised that Josh Frydenberg has rejected that. That’s the sort of approach that has led to Tony Abbott’s demise.

GILBERT: That interview is on Multiview in fact, still with Andrew Bolt if you like to catch it. Good interview, interesting one. Thank you, Anthony Albanese. Appreciate your time.

ALBANESE: Good to be with you.

Apr 16, 2018

Transcript of Radio Interview – 4BC News Talk with Ben Davis – Monday, 16 April 2018

Subjects; M1, Cross River Rail. 

BEN DAVIS: If elected, it will be up to the Shadow Infrastructure and Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese to deliver all this and I’m pleased to say he joins me on the line. Anthony Albanese, good afternoon. Welcome to God’s country.

ANTHONY ALBANESE: Thanks for having us, Ben.

DAVIS: I know your stay is only brief, but can I ask you about the M1? You’re matching the Coalition’s billion dollars. Does that mean you’re going 50-50 with the Palaszczuk Government?

ALBANESE: We are. We put more than half a billion dollars into the M1 when we were last in office on top of the $355 million we put in for the Gold Coast Light Rail and $37 million for the Carrara Stadium which was the scene of the Opening and Closing Ceremonies. So we have a record last time in Queensland. The Redcliffe Rail line…

DAVIS: Yep. Anthony though, just with the M1. Did the Palaszczuk Government know you’re going 50-50 with them? Because this has been the sticking point here. Do they know it’s 50-50?

ALBANESE: Yes, they do.

DAVIS: They told me last week they were adamant it should be 80-20.

ALBANESE: Well, the Government will put the money they’ve announced in the Budget in May. We are committed though not just to that but to also fund public transport. We in government –  the M1 upgrades that we put in place in government were on that basis, so we believe that infrastructure funding right across the country should essentially be on a 50-50 basis but…

DAVIS: Have you had that conversation with the State Government, though?

ALBANESE: I certainly have. I certainly have.

DAVIS: And they’re open to that?

ALBANESE: Well, it’s consistent with what – they would prefer more. Of course, state governments will always want more money but what we want is genuine partnerships between the Commonwealth and the State Government across the board. It’s not surprising that the State Government are upset with Malcolm Turnbull’s Government. I mean, New South Wales, where I’m from is getting 46 per cent of the national infrastructure budget this year. Last year they got 48 per cent of the infrastructure budget. Queensland isn’t getting its fair share. The Cross River Rail project was identified as the number one project in 2012.

DAVIS: And I will get to Cross River Rail in just a moment, I think that’s important. But just on the M1, it’s been a real big sticking point for three years and I had the Transport Minister here Mark Bailey on the program last week saying no, we’re standing our ground, it’s going to be 80-20. The Federal Government, regardless of who it is, I’m assuming, the Federal Government needs to pay 80 per cent of the way. This has been something that’s been going on for three years and we’ve seen nothing on the M1 but butting heads. You’re putting up exactly the same amount of money as the Coalition, fantastic. So that means that the Palaszczuk Government has to cough up 50-50?

ALBANESE: What we’re saying is, as well though, that there needs to be – that’s on the basis of the fact that the Commonwealth Government should invest not just in roads but also in public transport. We did that when we were last in Government with the Redcliffe Rail Link and Light Rail. We will do that when we are next in government with the Cross River Rail project. Malcolm Turnbull…

DAVIS: Anthony, sorry, that still doesn’t answer the question. Does the Palaszczuk Government agree to a 50-50 funding split for the M1?

ALBANESE: We’re not the Government, so they’re negotiating with the Government. What we’re saying is what we will put in the Budget…

DAVIS: Which is 50-50.

ALBANESE: We will honour what the Government puts in in the May Budget. They’ve announced a billion dollars for that project.

DAVIS: That’s the big sticking point, though. That’s why nothing’s been done yet, because they can’t sit down and figure out who’s going to split the bill.

ALBANESE: To be fair, that’s not why nothing has happened. Nothing has happened because the Commonwealth Government have massively reduced investment. This billion dollars…

DAVIS: But with all due respect there, you’re still putting up a billion as well, so I mean, the money is the same whether it’s from Malcolm Turnbull or Bill Shorten.

ALBANESE: Yes, but it’s only been on the table for a couple of weeks. It hasn’t been on the table from them for three years. For three years they’ve put nothing into Cross River Rail. They’ve put nothing into the M1. They’ve put only the money that we had in the Budget in 2013 on projects like the Ipswich Motorway and a very small amount for the next section, that we intended to have spent. That section should have been done by now, moving onto the next section afterwards. They’ve put no additional money into the Gateway North project. This is a Government that hasn’t invested in infrastructure. They’re now making some announcements in terms of the billion dollars for the M1. We’ve welcomed that. We’d said that we will match that. But we’ve also said that they need to commit to the Cross River Rail. It’s important to remember that funding was in the Budget in 2013 and they cut it when they came to office under Tony Abbott in their disastrous 2014 Budget. The Cross River Rail should have been nearing completion by now. We had an agreement, indeed with Campbell Newman’s government, a signed agreement between us. We had the media release all done for the joint press conference at Kangaroo Point with Campbell Newman and Wayne Swan as the Treasurer.

DAVIS: Anthony, it should have happened. There’s so much infrastructure that should have happened not only in the south-east, in Queensland, in this country. There’s a lot of infrastructure that should have happened, Cross River Rail, and I do want to talk about that, just one final question on the M1. Have you spoken to the Palaszczuk Government about going 50-50? Is that a yes or no?

ALBANESE: We have said yes, we will put in that amount of money.

DAVIS: But have you told them?

ALBANESE: Yes, we have. But guess what? It’s been on TV and I’m on radio now.

DAVIS: Yes, but have they agreed to it?

ALBANESE: It’s not a matter of them agreeing. The Commonwealth decides where Commonwealth money goes. It’s up to them to make their own…

DAVIS: To make up the shortfall. Okay.

ALBANESE: It’s up to them to make their own announcements. They’re the ones who have to – state governments actually build the infrastructure and oversee the projects. The Commonwealth decides where Commonwealth investment goes and what the level is. And so I think that the fact is that we have been consistent about a partnership between the Commonwealth and the states across the board, across projects. We support 50-50 funding. We did that when we were in government and we did that as a part of more than doubling the Queensland infrastructure budget and doing vital projects like Redcliffe, like the Ipswich Motorway, like Legacy Way. We partnered with the Brisbane City Council here for that project. A vital project that’s been very successful, the upgrades to Gateway, both north and south, the M1 upgrades, the Gold Coast Light Rail, and Cross River Rail. We had the funding in the Budget in 2013. We’ve lost a few years, but it’s time to get on with it.

DAVIS: $2.2 billion today put on the table for the Cross River Rail. What’s it being spent on? What’s the breakdown?

ALBANESE: Well, $800 million of that will be a grant and then there will be an availability payment from both the Commonwealth and the State Government of $58 million over the first 30 years. What that means is it’s an acknowledgement that part of the problem of why you can’t get infrastructure built, because the cost is upfront but the benefit is over a long term. What that will enable you to do is to bring in a private partner in terms of financing, it could be superannuation funds or any form of private financing in order to get the costs repaid over the lifetime of the benefit of the project. So I think this is an innovative financing model, consistent it must be said with the arrangement that we came to in government with Campbell Newman’s government, after Anna Bligh’s government did all the work on the planning and preconstruction work for this project. So it really was ready to go and it’s been delayed of course by Tony Abbott withdrawing the funding and then Campbell Newman…

DAVIS: Infrastructure Australia though says that the business case doesn’t stack up though.

ALBANESE: That’s not right. Infrastructure Australia had it as their number one priority in 2012.

DAVIS: Now they’ve only got it as a number one initiative.

ALBANESE: Infrastructure Australia unfortunately has been sidelined by this Government. You’ve had a whole range of projects announced where they don’t even know where the projects are going. In Victoria and New South Wales, in recent times, I’ve got a project in my area of Sydney that’s a $17.6 billion road project where the tunnels have commenced but they’re not quite sure where the tunnels are going to come up let alone the dive sites, and a range of other things. Now, that appears on the Infrastructure Australia priority list as a priority where the business case certainly hasn’t been completed or the environmental approvals for the last stage of the project. So Infrastructure Australia unfortunately has been sidelined by the Government. We think this is a vital project that’s important to increase the capacity not just of the Brisbane rail network but of the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast as well. It will take – here’s just one figure – 526,000km of private vehicle travel per day off the roads. So it will make an enourmous difference but essentially doubling the transport capacity across the river into the Brisbane CBD and that will allow for an ultimate capacity of 24 services per hour in each direction. It’s the sort of visionary project that we want to see happen. It’s great that Annastacia Palaszczuk’s Government with Jackie Trad, now the Treasurer, but she was the champion of it as Infrastructure Minister, is so supportive of the project and it’s off and running.

DAVIS: Off and running and with your help too if you get into the Lodge. Anthony, appreciate your time this afternoon. Anthony Albanese there, he’s the Shadow Infrastructure and Transport Minister.



Apr 14, 2018

Transcript of Doorstop Interview – Gold Coast, Queensland – Saturday, 14 April 2018


Subjects: Infrastructure investment, Syria.

ANTHONY ALBANESE: The upcoming Budget is a big challenge for the Turnbull Government and the challenge is to actually reverse the cuts in infrastructure that have been put in place. What we have seen is that infrastructure investment will decline from what was anticipated to be in their own Budget in 2016-17, some $9.2 billion, down to $4.2 billion in 2020-21. What we are seeing is a cut in infrastructure as a proportion of the national economy in half from 0.4 per cent to 0.2 percent over the next decade according to the Parliamentary Budget Office. And this is at a time where there are heaps of projects that are ready to go that the Federal Government has refused to fund, projects that were cut when it came to office like the Cross River Rail project in Brisbane, the Melbourne Metro project, but other projects as well like AdeLINK in South Australia, where South Australia is due to get just 2 per cent of the national infrastructure budget in 2020-21. This Government has to invest in infrastructure. Malcolm Turnbull has spent a lot of time taking selfies on trains and trams. It is about time he funded them.

REPORTER: The Government says that this year’s Budget will include unprecedented spending on infrastructure. Do you believe that is possible?

ALBANESE: Well we will actually look at the detail. What they have done in the past is not even invested the money that they themselves have said they would – some $5 billion of underspends in their first four years, which means an effective cut in infrastructure investment. Last year alone $9.2 billion was in the Budget, announced in 2016, but they only spent $7.5 billion, so a $1.7 billion cut in effective infrastructure investment.  And a Government that has failed to invest in projects like Cross River Rail in Brisbane. The big challenge for the Government is to actually match its rhetoric with real investment, real dollars that make a real difference on urban congestion.

REPORTER: The Government also says that the focus of its spending this time round is on easing congestion and (inaudible).

ALBANESE: This would be welcomed if they stopped cutting investment and actually invest. Labor has a record when we were in office of investing more in public transport than all previous governments combined in the previous 107 years. So our investment was real. We didn’t just talk about it. We did it. This Government hasn’t invested and the challenge for it is: Is there real money on the Budget for the Cross River Rail project in Brisbane, for the Melbourne Metro, projects which are underway right now, or projects that need to be fully funded like the complete north-south corridor for Western Sydney Rail, including to the Macarthur region? That’s what people want to see from this Budget because we need to deal with urban congestion and it has been getting worse under this Government because it has failed to invest in public transport and in roads it has only invested in toll roads. It hasn’t invested in the sort of work that needs to be done and when you look at projects like the Black Spots Program, in every state and territory they have spent less than they said they would on those programs in spite of the fact that the Black Spots Program is so important for dealing with high-accident areas.

REPORTER: Labor has made quite a few announcements in the last week regarding roads and rail. Do you see this as a key battleground going into next year’s election?

ALBANESE: Labor will always invest in nation building infrastructure. We will continue to do so and we will point to our record last time we were in office. If we are returned to the Treasury benches, you will see more investment from Labor. Labor will always do more on nation building that this Government. This Government has cut public transport investment in projects like the Cross River Rail, in projects like the Melbourne Metro. They have wrecked the NBN model with their hybrid model that changes from day to day, that was the responsibility directly of Malcolm Turnbull as Communications Minister and they have only invested in roads in our cities that are toll roads. They have actually cut funding to projects when they came to office like the M80 in Melbourne. This is a Government that hasn’t invested in infrastructure. They’ve got all the rhetoric. They’ve got these big figures, but they are out into the never-never, the investment. Even their statement this week when it came to the airport line in Melbourne is funding is funding that is scheduled to commence, perhaps, sometime next decade. Well, there is a project that is under way now, Cross River Rail in Brisbane, as well as Melbourne Metro, which they could have invested in today but they have chosen not to.

REPORTER: Just with what is going on in Syria, what is Labor’s reaction to the news that the US, the UK and France have started air strikes?

ALBANESE: Well Labor has requested a briefing from the Prime Minister’s office. It is important that these national security issues not be the subject of partisan political debate.  We have requested a briefing and that will be happening in coming hours and then Labor will make a comprehensive statement. We quite clearly, along with anyone who cares about human rights, abhor the use of chemical weapons. It has no place whatsoever.



Apr 13, 2018

Transcript of Television Interview – Channel Nine, The Today Show – Friday, 13 April 2018

FRIDAY, 13 APRIL, 2018 

Subjects: Syria, China, immigration, Christopher Pyne.  

BEN FORDHAM: There is no escaping the tension this morning between the US and Russia with fears we could be on the brink of full-scale military action. Joining us is Anthony Albanese from the Labor Party, Josh Frydenberg from the Liberal Party. Good morning to you both.

ANTHONY ALBANESE: Good to be with you.

JOSH FRYDENBERG: Good to be with you boys.

FORDHAM: Where is Christopher, Josh?

ALBANESE: He is on holidays with Karl.

FRYDENBERG: Obviously, yes.

FORDHAM: That will start a rumour.

FRYDENBERG: Pina coladas in hand I am sure.

FORDHAM: I can picture the two of them now. Josh let me start off. Donald Trump has threatened all-out war. He is talking about sending missiles Syria’s way, also directing some of his language to Russia. He’s softened his language a little bit overnight. Where are we headed here?

FRYDENBERG: Well obviously the chemical attack in Syria was unacceptable. We have seen a huge humanitarian disaster in that country. The US’s presence in the Middle East is absolutely critical and we just hope that peace can be restored, calm can be restored but obviously with as little loss of life as possible.

FORDHAM: Albo, your boss Bill Shorten once upon a time said that Donald Trump’s views are barking mad. But if America gets into action we go side-by-side, don’t we?

ALBANESE: Well, what we need here is cool heads and we need an appropriate response to the chemical weapons attack in a sober way.

FORDHAM: Do you think Donald Trump has shown a cool head?

ALBANESE: Well, I notice that he has changed overnight apparently, the rhetoric. I think it would be a good idea if foreign policy wasn’t announced on Twitter. It would be a good idea if it was done in a way that was calculated, in a way that understood what the end game was rather than just the rhetoric.

FORDHAM: Just briefly, do you agree with that Josh, that it would be better if foreign policy announcements were not made via social media?

FRYDENBERG: Well I don’t think they are. I think what Donald Trump is doing is taking the advice of his senior military people, talking to other world leaders and working out a considered response because, as Albo said, it was a completely unacceptable attack. There needs to be a proportionate response and we need to ensure that this sort of attack doesn’t happen again.

FORDHAM: It did look like he fired off a tweet first though, didn’t he, the President?

FRYDENBERG: Well he is known to be quick on the tweet. That’s for sure.

FORDHAM: Now back home the Prime Minister has admitted that there is tension between Australia and China. Now this is a comment that he made yesterday during an interview with Neil Mitchell who joined us earlier and he basically said that this has been going on for some time now. We’ve now got ministers who are being frozen out of invitations to China. That has got to be a bit of a worry Josh, that no Australian ministers are receiving any invites to go to China anymore?

FRYDENBERG: Well the Prime Minister didn’t confirm that, but what he did say there was a bit of tension in the relationship. This is a critical bilateral partnership that we have with China. We have $175 billion worth of two-way trade strongly in Australia’s favour. But since we introduced that foreign influence law it has been reported negatively in the Chinese press. But we will always stand up for Australia’s rights and values and that is what we will continue to do.

FORDHAM: It’s a bit of a worry what is going in going on in the region Albo when you have a look at the influence of China in the region. We have had a look at what has happened in Vanuatu in the last week or so, China suggesting they might want to set up a base in Vanuatu. We need to keep an eye on this don’t we?

ALBANESE: Australia is a leader in this region. We often I don’t think comprehend how significant we are. For many of those Pacific nations their most-important partner isn’t China or the United States, it’s Australia. It’s important that in a bipartisan way we continue to have that presence in the Pacific.

FORDHAM: Sam Dastyari when he caused a lot of dramas to do with donations from Chinese business people – that reaction to all of that apparently didn’t go down well in China, when Australia was collectively was outraged about the fact that Sam Dastyari was having bills paid by Chinese businesspeople so the Shanghai Sam-Sam Dastyari controversy has caused a few problems there.

ALBANESE: WelI, think the term that you have just used isn’t appropriate Ben, and did cause some problems out there. Sam Dastyari’s behaviour was clearly inappropriate. It cost him dearly. But I think some of the rhetoric around the relationship with China was overblown. Guess what? They noticed.

FORDHAM: So Aussies calling Sam Dastyari Shanghai Sam has upset Chinese leaders?

ALBANESE: Well I would have thought a lot of the rhetoric at that time and since has caused some issues and it is important that, fine for people in the media, but I think people in political leadership positions need to give appropriate statements, whether it be about China or the US or any other nation we have an important relationship with.

FORDHAM: OK. When it comes to immigration numbers the big discussion point this week where a story appeared on the front page of The Australian newspaper that the Immigration Minister Peter Dutton had gone to the Prime Minister and also the Treasurer saying let’s lower our annual migration intake. That was denied really strenuously by the Prime Minister, Josh Frydenberg. But Tony Abbott, the former Prime Minister came out and said I think … what are you laughing about?

FRYDENBERG: Well Tony Abbott, I mean, he is always going to try and cut across what the Prime Minister has been saying lately.

FORDHAM: Really?

FRYDENBERG: Yes, absolutely.

FORDHAM: I thought he was a member of the team.

ALBANESE: You haven’t been paying attention.

FRYDENBERG: He is a member of the Government.

FORDHAM: I thought they were on the same team. Isn’t the PM and Tony Abbott both on the same team? He’s laughing again.

FRYDENBERG: I think you are covering up the biggest secret in sport mate there.

ALBANESE: That’s like saying Ben that the mighty South Sydney were on the same team as the Roosters last night. It’s a similar relationship.

FORDHAM: All right. Let’s stick to the facts. Tony Abbott says that the Prime Minister was being tricky in that denial and he was also saying that he was denying something that was substantially true. So Albo, let me ask you, who do you believe? Do you believe Peter Dutton? Or do you believe Malcolm Turnbull?

ALBANESE: Well, they can’t both be right. That’s the point. Peter Dutton’s response was to say that something different from what Malcolm Turnbull said actually happened, but that Malcolm Turnbull was right. The contradiction was there in Peter Dutton’s own statement.

FORDHAM: Josh, I know they are both trying to say we are on the same page, but it is pretty clear here that something has gone on here and the PM is not too happy about it.

FRYDENBERG: No, the PM is absolutely right. There has not been a Cabinet submission on this issue. But what the Prime Minister said is that ministers discuss issues with the Prime Minister. Now when it comes to our migration intake, we had to clean up Labor’s mess because they lost control of our borders. We have a ceiling of 190,000 people a year. It is below that over the last 12 months. We will obviously consider to ensure that our immigration policy is in Australia’s national interest because immigration has been the backbone of our country. Albo and myself, you know we are two products of European families. We know how great Australia is and the fact more than half of Australian people have at least one parent or both parents born overseas I think says something about our willingness to be open to other countries.

FRYDENBERG: OK Albo, do you want to keep Josh or do you want to go back to Chris next week?

ALBANESE: He’s doing OK this bloke. I reckon this is a good rehearsal. If he agrees to turn up to the studio I reckon Pyne is gone.

FORDHAM: Everyone gets along with in Liberal Party as Josh has highlighted this morning by laughing at the former Prime Minister.

FRYDENBERG: Let me just say I think Christopher has just choked on his pina colada.

FORDHAM: Thank you both.

ALBANESE: They are a rabble without a cause.


FRIDAY, 13 APRIL, 2018

Contact Anthony

(02) 9564 3588 Electorate Office

Email: [email protected]

Important items

Enrol to vote Parliament of Australia Australian Labor Party Clean Energy Future