SUBJECTS: 2022 Federal Budget; Budget Reply; fuel excise; cost of living; Labor’s Regional First Home Buyer Support Scheme; Federal election; Labor’s policy agenda; Labor’s Housing Australia Future Fund; housing affordability; housing in regional Australia; national security; defence; Australia and Indo-Pacific relations; Labor’s Powering Australia Plan; Australia’s relationship with China.
 
ANTHONY ALBANESE, LEADER OF THE AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY: This is a Government that's characterised by being long on politics but short on plans. This is a desperate Government fighting for itself, not fighting for the interests of Australians. Government should be about helping people. But the Morrison Government is just interested in helping itself. After almost a decade in office, they want to convince people that they're now concerned about standard of living. They're now concerned that people are going backwards. That they can't afford the costs of petrol, the rising costs of food, the rising costs of housing. And in some ways, they're adopting some of our plans. And I welcome the fact that they've adopted our plan which we announced last week on regional housing. I thought today, the Prime Minister in southwest Sydney might adopt our plan of extending the rail line from Leppington down to MacArthur, so it truly provides that north-south link with that growing region of Sydney. But I was disappointed. We will wait and see if there's anything for it finally tomorrow night. They could also adopt our plan to address costs of living by supporting our plan for more affordable child care. Our plan to assist families. Our plan which would boost workforce participation, would boost productivity, as well as boosting population. The three Ps that are the key to growing the economy. But this is a Government that has been in decade for almost a decade. And now, they're waiting at the very last minute in their Budget, brought forward, so that they can delay the election that should have been held by now to give the Australian people a say. They are now throwing money at issues without a plan to actually grow the economy, and without a plan to actually make sure we have an economy that works for people, not the other way around. Well, in contrast, Labor has a plan. We have a plan for cheaper energy through our Powering Australia Plan. We have a plan for new industries and growth through our National Reconstruction Fund. We have a plan to skill up Australians through our fee-free TAFE plan in areas of skill shortage, and our additional university places. We have a plan for Australia's future. We are the greatest country on Earth. But Australia deserves a Government that's as good and strong and resilient as they are. We need to learn the lessons from the pandemic. And one of the big lessons of it is we need to make more things here. We need to recognise that we can't just continue to ride our luck when we're at the end of the supply chain. We need to make sure that we build back stronger from the pandemic. We have been outlining our positive plans for the last three years. We'll have more positive plans to come on Thursday night and then in the lead-up to the election. Jim?
 
JIM CHALMERS, SHADOW TREASURER: Thanks very much, Anthony. A budget should be plans for a better future, not just plans for an election. This Budget is showing all of the signs of a desperate Government spraying money around in their own political interests. One of the reasons why we have a trillion dollars in debt and nowhere near enough to show for it is because this Government only sees budgets through the prism of their own political survival. And now, on the eve of an election, the Government wants to pretend that, all of a sudden, they've discovered cost of living pressures for Australian working families. If they cared about cost of living pressures, they wouldn't have spent the best part of a decade going after wages and job security and Medicare. And if they hadn't rorted tens of billions of dollars in the Budget, there'd be much more room to provide responsible cost of living relief for Australian families. This Prime Minister only holds a hose if it's spraying borrowed money on the eve of an election. Even since the Mid-Year Budget update in December, this Government has committed more than $70 billion in the three months since the Mid-Year update. And what that tells us is this. The Budget won't be a plan for the future. It'll be a plan for Scott Morrison's re-election. We want it to secure a better future for Australian families. He just sees it as an opportunity to secure a fourth term for this Government. Budgets should help people through difficult and uncertain times, not just help the Coalition through the election. Now, everything we've heard so far, I think, highlights and underscores the problems that we have with this Government, whether it's the gap between announcement and delivery, whether it's the fact that they go missing when Australians need them most, whether it's the fact that they point the finger and don't take responsibility for challenges in our economy. It's whether it's the fact that Josh Frydenberg is out there claiming credit for a Budget improvement, which flows, in part, from the commodity price spike that we're seeing at the moment. It is a Government that takes credit for everything that goes well and never take responsibility for anything that is difficult. And Anthony will be different. We'll see this on Thursday night in the Budget Reply, in the election campaign, and if we're successful, into an Albanese Labor Government. The choice is really clear. A Labor Party, a Labor Government, which would see budgets as an opportunity to plan for the future and not just plan for election campaign. A Leader who shows up and takes responsibility and wants to bring the country together versus a Prime Minister who can claim to be doing none of those things.
 
JOURNALIST: You seem to be very hot with your criticism. But of all the cost of living measures that you've heard of so far, is there one that you're actually going to oppose?
 
CHALMERS: Look, we've said for some time, that we won't stand in the way of responsible cost of living relief for Australian families. But nothing that the Treasurer announces in the Budget will make up for a decade now of attacks on take-home pay and job security. So, of course, we will look at whatever the Government proposes. We haven't seen the detail of what they're proposing, for example, on petrol or pensions, or some of the other issues that have been flagged. We will do the right thing by Australian families by the Budget and by the economy. But nothing the Government proposes or announces in the Budget will make up for the fact that they've spent the best part of a decade coming after the living standards of Australian working families.
 
JOURNALIST: The other day, Mr Sharma talked about making some spending cuts. What's your approach to whether Labor would cut spending in any area in the Budget? And do you believe that Labor has to show a better Budget bottom line than the Coalition, as it's tried doing previous elections? Is there any prospect that Labor could actually spend more than the Government and have a weaker Budget bottom line?
 
ALBANESE: Well, where we cut is in areas of waste. Where we would cut is in areas whereby the Government has made political decisions in its own interest, not in the national interest. And we've seen the Australian National Audit Office document, in area after area, areas of waste. Why is it that $65 million of commuter car parks were announced in the Treasurer's own seat prior to the last election in 2019? And these were Government announcements, not election commitments. Government announcements that were in the 2019 Budget. Announced and then nothing happened and then having them withdrawn. What that shows is that the Government itself is saying it can't be trusted with its announcements. It can't be trusted in what it says on Tuesday night. Because for so often with this Government, it's all about the announcement, not about the delivery.
 
JOURNALIST: Will Labor implement this free rapid antigen testing policy if you win this election? Or has the time passed, given the ease of supply and the cheaper cost?
 
CHALMERS: Look, we've said for some time, Trudy, as you know, is that people shouldn't be denied a rapid test if they can't afford one. That's been our position now for some months. We went through that extraordinary period over the summer from hell, where there were grocery shortages and worker shortages, because the Government didn't get around to ordering enough rapid tests. The people were driving around our suburbs and our communities searching in vain for tests they either couldn't find or couldn't afford if they found them. What we said, what I said yesterday, is that we don't want people to be denied those tests if they can't afford them. Obviously, that depends on what kind of situation we might inherit if we were successful at the election. But our position has been clear for some time, and consistent for some time. People shouldn't be denied them if they can't afford them.
 
JOURNALIST: Would it be free to everyone or just for those who need them?
 
CHALMERS: Well, we'll have more to say about it, obviously, depending on the health situation that we inherit. The situation in the pandemic, obviously, the pandemic is fast-moving, different variants, different kinds of testing. We've said for some time that our policy will reflect that. And that remains the case.
 
ALBANESE: And we'll have more to say about Medicare and healthcare during the election campaign. But what we have is the principle, very clearly, which is that healthcare should be given on the basis of need, not on the basis of whether you can afford it or not. And the problem with the Government's approach is that it excluded people from access to rapid antigen tests on the basis that they couldn't afford one.
 
JOURNALIST: Just on fuel excise, would Labor support that cut? Can you actually say to voters that it would have a significant impact to consumers? And isn't this just a symbolic gesture?
 
ALBANESE: Well, what we've signalled is that we'll examine any proposal that assists with cost of living on its merits. That's what we've signalled. But we don't know what is in the Budget. So, we can't give guarantees as to our position. But Labor supports alleviating measures on cost of living. And that's been our position, it must be said, in Opposition in 2014. This is a Government that won office in 2013 and immediately set about attacking the living standards of Australians. And Australians haven't recovered from that. Throughout it all, this has been a Government that can find money for its mates, can find money for projects, can find money to support its own political interests in the short-term, but can't find appropriate funding to assist Australians in areas where they need it. That's why we have seen cuts to Medicare. That's why we have seen a failure to provide appropriate funding in ways that will grow the economy and support people's living standards. And that's why the big issue that you won't hear from this Government is the issue of wages. Cost of living is about your income in and then your costs out. The problem here is that the costs out have been going up and the income in through people's wages has been going down in real terms. And the last Budget said that there will be real wage decreases over the forward estimates. And that scenario is being played out. And last Budget, when the Treasurer stood up and gave the speech on the Tuesday night, did he mention that as a problem? No. Did he mention cost of living as a problem? No. Now, we're in just two minutes to the election being called. And now, they discover cost of living is an issue? Well, Australians will be quite rightly cynical about this Government's motives and how fair dinkum they are.
 
JOURNALIST: You will potentially be the Prime Minister who has to raise the fuel excise in six months or further down the track. If the Government decides to cut it, is that putting a poison pill in the Budget?
 
ALBANESE: Well, we'll wait and see what they do. We'll wait and see what they do. But what we know is that everything with this Government will be focused not on where Australia is in a year's time, or three years' time, or five years' time, or 10 years' time. It'll be focused on where Australia is on May 14 or May 21. This is a Budget that is all about politics and not about plans. And that's the problem with this Government is that Scott Morrison's always focused on short-term politics, not putting in proper plans. And that's why when he does act belatedly, after blaming everyone else, after refusing to accept responsibility, his actions are always too little and too late. It doesn't matter whether it's the bushfire response, it doesn't matter whether it's ordering enough vaccines or ordering enough rapid antigen tests, it doesn't matter whether it's declaring a national emergency on the floods, it's always too little and too late. And it's always about short-term politics.
 
JOURNALIST: Do you promise there will be real wage rises in a first-term Labor Government?
 
ALBANESE: What we promise is that we will be doing our bit to assist real wage increases. And we'll do that by making changes so that secure work is a part of the objectives of the Fair Work Act. We'll do that by addressing the gig economy and so many people who've been excluded from even being paid the minimum wage under this Government. We will do that by making wage theft a crime. We will do that by a range of measures, including by assisting living standards through our child care measures. And another measure that the Government hopefully can adopt tomorrow night. Now, they've adopted our regional housing policy that we announced a week ago. A Budget Reply ago, I announced the Housing Australia Future Fund. We will do that by placing pressure in terms of improving supply of housing, by giving more support for social housing, for affordable housing for essential workers. That's an idea that the Government, I hope, steal again on Tuesday.
 
JOURNALIST: If you win the election, you'll chair the next meeting of National Cabinet, which is scheduled for June. What instinct will you bring to that meeting, given one of the very looming problems regarding the economy is the prospect of the large swathe of the workforce being locked down by June due to close contact rules and COVID going through the schools? What instinct will you bring in terms of if you will leave it all up to the medicos or will you be pushing the business line that we need to maybe lift some of these rules and be a bit more practical about it?
 
ALBANESE: The instinct I will bring is the instinct I've always brought to federal, state and local government relations. It's one of building cooperation and looking for solutions, not looking for arguments. That's what I did when I chaired three separate ministerial councils when we were in Government. And that's what I brought in terms of real outcomes that made a real difference. That's how we doubled the roads budget, increase the rail budget by more than ten times, rebuilt a third of the Interstate Rail Freight Network, introduced single national transport regulators that went from 23 down to three. That was done with cooperation with state and territory governments, producing real outcomes. I'll do that in the way that we did with local government, where I brought together 565 mayors and shire presidents to this building, to work out a cooperative way so that we could deliver on local community outcomes based upon a bottom-up approach, not people sitting in Canberra, telling people in Kalgoorlie or in Mackay what was best for them, but so that you actually listen to people and bring them with us on the journey. What we've seen from the National Cabinet in recent times is that the state premiers and territory chief ministers tell each other what they're doing. And then Scott Morrison announces it. We've seen less national coherence, not more. I will bring a cooperative approach to it. I have a good relationship with all of the state premiers. I know the Premier of Tasmania less than I know the others, Premier Gutwein. But I'm very positive about the prospect of being able to achieve a cooperative approach. One of the things we know is we have to get the health outcomes right. That's how you maximise the economic benefit. And we need to work through those issues, but provide leadership. And to do so in a way which maximises national consistency.
 
JOURNALIST: According to the polls, you will be Prime Minister, obviously, as Phil alluded to, by mid-year. We know Jim Chalmers next to you will be the Treasurer. It's an uncertain geo-strategic region we live in, and world we live in. What about the security team? We don't have as much certainty. Will Brendan O'Connor be your Defence Minister?
 
ALBANESE: Those processes will take place. And I'll make those announcements at the appropriate time, rather than at a press conference here. But I have every confidence in the team that I have going into this election. Brendan O'Connor has been outstanding as the Defence Shadow Minister. He someone who is doing a terrific job. This morning, I was delayed by having briefings from the national security agencies this morning about the circumstances in Ukraine, but also the circumstances in the Solomons. And that was the reason for the slight delay in this morning's press conference. But I myself, as well, continue to be updated by the agencies. I have every confidence in them. But I also have every confidence in my team, including Brendan O'Connor.
 
JOURNALIST: Would a reduction in the fuel excise and direct payments to more than 10 million people add an inflationary pulse into the economy, which has got inflation tracking towards five per cent by the middle of year? Is it reckless to go down that path?
 
CHALMERS: Well, first of all, we don't know if they will make the payments to the 10 million Australians. I think there's an expectation. But I don't think anybody's confirmed that yet. So, let's see what the Government proposes across any of these measures. The Government needs to strike the right balance here, between providing cost of living relief for Australians whose real wages are falling and their cost of living are skyrocketing. They're falling further and further behind. Government needs to strike the balance between supporting people through a difficult period, not just supporting themselves through an election, and building some of the longer term drivers of economic growth so that we can have strong growth without adding unnecessarily to inflation. One of the reasons I'm so proud of the agenda that Anthony and I and the team have worked up is because when you think about our skills policy, when we've got skill shortages as a handbrake on the economy and pushing up inflation, you've got issues around the digital economy, you've got issues around child care. Yes, you can provide cost of living relief in child care and have an economic dividend as well. Our policy around cleaner and cheaper energy will get power bills down, provide cost of living relief, but also make the economy more productive and lift the speed limit on the economy by making energy cheaper for business and wealth creators as well. The Future Made in Australia, National Reconstruction Fund, all of our policies are about lifting the speed limit on the economy so that we can have strong growth without adding unnecessarily to inflation. And what's missing from everything the Government is talking about right now, everything they talk about is geared towards the first couple of weekends in May. We take a longer term view about the economy. Because the best way to take the sting out of inflation over the medium-term is to have an economy which isn't riddled with these capacity constraints, which is pushing up inflation on the medium-term. We can get the place growing again the right way, in a way that everybody can benefit from it. But only if we make some of these intelligent investments. And that's why it comes back to David's question before about the differences in spending intentions between the two sides. The quantity of spending matters. What matters more is the quality of that spending. We've got a trillion dollars in debt with nowhere near enough to show for it. Because we've got this low-quality spending. There's no plan for the future. Whether Labor takes the election, a bottom line, which is a little bit stronger, or a little bit weaker than what the Government proposes, is not the main game. The main game is the quality of the investment in skills, in the digital economy, in child care, in cleaner and cheaper energy, in advanced manufacturing and the care economy. That's how we get the place growing the right way. The other thing is we can do much, much better when it comes to the nature of growth in this economy than we had before the pandemic. The Government wants to pretend that every challenge popped up at the beginning of 2020. You know, and I know, better. There were challenges in the economy which have been neglected for the best part of a decade. An Albanese Labor Government would not neglect those crucial drivers of economic growth.
 
JOURNALIST: You have been very critical of the Government for slow-pedalling or fumbling the Pacific step-up. Will your Budget Reply include a commitment to increase foreign aid? And why are we not seeing ambition on foreign aid in the same way that we do for defence spending?
 
ALBANESE: Well, you'll have to wait and see Thursday night. But I'll tell you what Thursday night is. It's a speech, it's not an alternative budget. That what a Budget Reply is.
 
JOURNALIST: (Inaudible).
 
ALBANESE: That's not what you asked.
 
JOURNALIST: I am asking it now.
 
ALBANESE: It is not up to me to correct your questions, Paul, with respect. So, let's be very clear. Thursday night is a speech. It is not an alternative Budget. I look forward to putting forward an alternative Budget if we're successful. And this bloke will give the speech, not myself, when that occurs later this year. But let me say this with regard to the issue in the Pacific. It is about our level of aid, but it's about much more than that as well. If you go to the Pacific, if you meet with leaders in the Pacific, the first thing they raise with you is not aid, it is climate change. The second thing they raise with you is climate change. The third thing they raise with you is climate change. And whilst Australia sits in the naughty corner, at international conferences such as Glasgow, with a Prime Minister giving an empty speech to an empty room with no increase in ambition for 2030, then we continue to alienate our friends in the Pacific. So, it's about aid, but it's also about so much more than that. It's about having an understanding for the Pacific, for Tuvalu, for Kiribati. It is a matter of their survival. It's the way that they see it.
 
JOURNALIST: Why would they go to China?
 
ALBANESE: People who have been to those conferences know that is the case. If we are going to continue to have a strong position in the Pacific, then we have to do things like be good neighbours, we continue to, historically, we have punched way above our weight. But we have lost some paint over the last decade, just as we did by our refusal to sign up to Kyoto under the Howard Government. That has been an issue as well as the aid issue.
 
JOURNALIST: Why are those nations running to China? They are worst climate offender in the world. They didn't even go to COP26. They blew up the G20. They don't agree with net zero by 2050. How do you explain that? Why do they run to China?
 
ALBANESE: It is a matter of their attitude towards us is really influenced by the engagement in international affairs, which is, if you ring up, Phil, you've got contacts, ring up someone in Fiji, or in the Solomons, or in Tuvalu, or any of those countries, one of the ways in which we counter what is going on, which is strategic competition in our region, is by being taken seriously as leaders in our region on climate. And we're not doing that at the moment. We're not.
 
JOURNALIST: Neither is China.
 
ALBANESE: I didn't say they were.
 
JOURNALIST: But they are going to China right now. They are playing us up against China. And you are saying climate change is the reason.
 
ALBANESE: They are not. You can ask a question and I will have a debate.
 
JOURNALIST: I find the logic inconsistent. That's all.
 
ALBANESE: Well, that is not the first time you have thought that, Phil. But I'll live with that. I'll live with that. What I say to you is go to those countries and say, if you want to increase your influence, it's not just about aid. That is the point that I'm making. Not just about money. It's also about politics and values and commitment to climate change. And one of the most important issues for those countries is climate. And one way we increase our influence with those countries is by taking action on climate change. If you think that's illogical, ring them up and ask them. Because I assure you, every Pacific island nation, and I attended UNFCCC conferences in Montreal and in Nairobi in 2005 and in 2006, when Kyoto came into effect, and there, very much, our Pacific Island friends, as every time there is a meeting in the Pacific, what is the communique concentrate on? One issue. And that is climate change.
 
JOURNALIST: Just on regional housing grants, places like Launceston, according to figures you put out last week, have 40 per cent rises. How is expanding that scheme going to alleviate the price pressures in those areas, of regional areas? And should there be more to do on the supply side and the tax incentives given to multiple home purchases?
 
ALBANESE: Well, we have a supply-side answer in terms of our Housing Australia Future Fund.
 
CHALMERS: Obviously, there are a range of things you need to do. But the task for the regional first home saver policy that we announced, and the Government happily copied today, is to make it easier for people to save for those homes. I think the average in the regions for price growth over the last year, I think, was about 26 per cent on average, which is extraordinary growth. And so, you need to do what you can to help people. You also need to do what you can in social and affordable housing. We've had a policy out there for some time. And we'll have more to say about housing between now and the election.
 
JOURNALIST: There are obviously condolence motions going on in the Senate right now for Kimberley Kitching. And you've recently said that her preselection had been delayed because of the court action related to the intervention in Victoria.
 
ALBANESE: That was one of the aspects. Yes.
 
JOURNALIST: That is one of the aspects. Why weren't there also delays to the preselection for the Lower House seats?
 
ALBANESE: Because in terms of the dynamic, that was one of the dynamics that occurred, was that you had, first of all, action in, I think it was the Victorian court. Then that was appealed. Then there were negotiations over costings that occurred as well between the parties. And now, you have an appeal to the High Court, which will be heard, I think, an interim hearing. I haven't followed all of the legal detail on Thursday or on Friday. Senator Carr has announced his retirement. And that was always a possibility. And I do want to take the opportunity to pay tribute to Kim Carr. There is no one in this Parliament, in my time, Kim Carr has been here for longer than me, who has been such a strong advocate for science and for manufacturing. Kim Carr, as a Minister, put together a plan to keep the car industry here. It's a pity that the current Coalition Government told the car industry to leave and take the jobs with them. And during that period, none of the sitting Members in the House of Representatives, of course, were going to retire or did retire. So, there's a range of factors came in. That was one of them. A Senate ballot is selected in a ticket rather than as one-off ballots as well.
 
JOURNALIST: Also, on housing. The Government's announcement today on the Home Guarantee Scheme, is that the solution to Australia's housing crisis?
 
ALBANESE: Well, there's not a solution. But part of the solution is by providing support for first-home buyers in our regions, which is why we announced it last Friday and we're pleased the Government matched it. Thanks very much.
 
ENDS