WEBVTT - Coalition open to 'constructive' talks with Labor on controversial super tax

0:00:00.480 --> 0:00:07.080
<v Speaker 1>Now onto GB and network stations. Back to afternoons with

0:00:07.160 --> 0:00:10.800
<v Speaker 1>Michael McLaren. All right into the third hour. Thank you

0:00:10.840 --> 0:00:11.440
<v Speaker 1>for joining me.

0:00:12.080 --> 0:00:14.960
<v Speaker 2>Ted O'Brien, the Shadow Treasurer, calling in in just a moment.

0:00:15.000 --> 0:00:17.959
<v Speaker 2>We'll have a conversation with him about his priorities for

0:00:18.040 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 2>the next three years. Also James Thompson later in the hour,

0:00:21.720 --> 0:00:24.320
<v Speaker 2>he's from the AFR, the finn Review. Now they've got

0:00:24.320 --> 0:00:28.520
<v Speaker 2>their AI summit tomorrow, which would be fascinating to attend,

0:00:28.680 --> 0:00:31.920
<v Speaker 2>even for bloodites like me that wouldn't understand one of

0:00:31.960 --> 0:00:34.920
<v Speaker 2>the technical bits of jargon over the other. But nonetheless

0:00:34.960 --> 0:00:37.519
<v Speaker 2>you get the thrust to where this thing's heading. But

0:00:37.560 --> 0:00:39.440
<v Speaker 2>there was a story over the weekend in the Finn

0:00:39.479 --> 0:00:42.600
<v Speaker 2>and you might have seen it made very interesting reading if.

0:00:42.440 --> 0:00:43.120
<v Speaker 1>You got through it.

0:00:43.680 --> 0:00:47.040
<v Speaker 2>And that is how artificial intelligence could firstly kill off

0:00:47.040 --> 0:00:51.560
<v Speaker 2>work from home, but beyond that would have massive ramifications

0:00:51.560 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 2>for the workforce going forward. I get the feeling we've

0:00:54.320 --> 0:00:57.760
<v Speaker 2>only just scratched the surface of what AI is going

0:00:57.800 --> 0:01:01.960
<v Speaker 2>to do or could do to the way the workplaces

0:01:02.000 --> 0:01:07.400
<v Speaker 2>around us operate, potentially even our own workplaces. But you know,

0:01:07.560 --> 0:01:11.600
<v Speaker 2>I guess only time will tell how far legislation allows

0:01:11.640 --> 0:01:14.560
<v Speaker 2>it to penetrate, but nonetheless it's going to be a

0:01:14.680 --> 0:01:17.520
<v Speaker 2>very very difficult force to hold back. Now, a lot

0:01:17.520 --> 0:01:21.399
<v Speaker 2>of different stories around we were speaking earlier about smoking.

0:01:21.840 --> 0:01:24.640
<v Speaker 2>There's an interesting piece by Rob Harris as the European

0:01:24.680 --> 0:01:27.880
<v Speaker 2>correspondent in The Herald about this. Nothing to do with

0:01:28.520 --> 0:01:31.319
<v Speaker 2>the situation out here per se, but as he says,

0:01:31.360 --> 0:01:35.479
<v Speaker 2>for decades smoking was less a habit in France and Spain,

0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:39.479
<v Speaker 2>that it was rather a cultural flourish. But while much

0:01:39.520 --> 0:01:43.280
<v Speaker 2>of the world stubbed out the social acceptability of smoking

0:01:43.400 --> 0:01:47.000
<v Speaker 2>and long ago, the change in Europe has been slow.

0:01:47.120 --> 0:01:51.720
<v Speaker 2>It's been more reluctant, as he says. However, now term

0:01:51.760 --> 0:01:55.760
<v Speaker 2>of the continent's most iconic smoking nations and making their

0:01:55.800 --> 0:01:59.880
<v Speaker 2>boldest moves yet to catch up. From July one, from

0:02:00.200 --> 0:02:04.040
<v Speaker 2>will be banning smoking in many outdoor places public spaces,

0:02:04.080 --> 0:02:08.680
<v Speaker 2>including beaches, parks, playgrounds, bus stops and areas around schools.

0:02:09.080 --> 0:02:11.560
<v Speaker 2>And as for the Spaniards, well, they're preparing to go

0:02:11.600 --> 0:02:14.760
<v Speaker 2>even further, apparently, with the sweeping reform of its anti

0:02:14.760 --> 0:02:16.679
<v Speaker 2>smoking law set to take effect by the end of

0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:20.440
<v Speaker 2>the year, and that plan, the Spanish plan, will outlaw

0:02:20.680 --> 0:02:25.600
<v Speaker 2>smoking and vaping in places as varied as stadiums, swimming pools,

0:02:25.680 --> 0:02:30.400
<v Speaker 2>university campuses and even work vehicles. Now, of course, a

0:02:30.400 --> 0:02:33.280
<v Speaker 2>lot of that's already been done here and to positive effect.

0:02:33.960 --> 0:02:35.880
<v Speaker 2>The difference between here and there, of course, is the

0:02:35.960 --> 0:02:41.040
<v Speaker 2>tax that they charge smokers on the cigarettes. Now in France,

0:02:41.160 --> 0:02:43.119
<v Speaker 2>there will be a lot of people saying, oh, caldomage,

0:02:43.160 --> 0:02:47.200
<v Speaker 2>because over there, part of the legislation is that the

0:02:47.240 --> 0:02:50.160
<v Speaker 2>price of cigarettes per packet will go from eleven euros

0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:52.760
<v Speaker 2>at the moment, which is just under twenty dollars, to

0:02:52.880 --> 0:02:57.119
<v Speaker 2>twelve euros in twenty twenty five, and thirteen euros, oh

0:02:57.160 --> 0:03:00.639
<v Speaker 2>dear by twenty twenty seven. So when you make it conversion,

0:03:00.680 --> 0:03:05.320
<v Speaker 2>that's maybe twenty four dollars, which is not even half

0:03:05.639 --> 0:03:08.320
<v Speaker 2>the price of a comparable packet out here. So they

0:03:08.400 --> 0:03:11.000
<v Speaker 2>got a long way to go before the illicit market

0:03:11.040 --> 0:03:14.000
<v Speaker 2>really comes in muscles in more so than what it

0:03:14.040 --> 0:03:16.720
<v Speaker 2>would be doing already. But reading all of this as

0:03:16.720 --> 0:03:19.080
<v Speaker 2>a non smoker, did it did make me think and

0:03:19.120 --> 0:03:20.959
<v Speaker 2>I'm not sure what the answer is, but I'm trying

0:03:21.000 --> 0:03:24.280
<v Speaker 2>to think about how long ago it was when smoking

0:03:24.400 --> 0:03:26.959
<v Speaker 2>in public places and restaurants and all of that was

0:03:27.280 --> 0:03:30.280
<v Speaker 2>just alloud and common. I mean, do you remember the

0:03:30.360 --> 0:03:34.400
<v Speaker 2>days when smoking was allowed indoors, in restaurants, on flights,

0:03:34.440 --> 0:03:37.360
<v Speaker 2>in clubs, in cinemas, I mean, all of these different places.

0:03:37.840 --> 0:03:39.520
<v Speaker 2>You may not have been a smoker yourself, but I

0:03:39.560 --> 0:03:43.080
<v Speaker 2>bet you remember when others that were were allowed to partake.

0:03:43.920 --> 0:03:46.880
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I remember working behind a bar at a

0:03:46.880 --> 0:03:50.120
<v Speaker 2>restaurant or two, and even when I was working, smoking

0:03:50.160 --> 0:03:53.200
<v Speaker 2>had to be outdoors. But the way that the wind

0:03:53.400 --> 0:03:55.600
<v Speaker 2>was channeled through the door, and when you know, it

0:03:55.640 --> 0:03:57.280
<v Speaker 2>came straight at me at the bar and you could

0:03:57.360 --> 0:04:00.160
<v Speaker 2>smell it. That's unpleasant. It was in your clothes all

0:04:00.240 --> 0:04:01.720
<v Speaker 2>night long, and that sort of thing. When you got home,

0:04:01.760 --> 0:04:05.080
<v Speaker 2>your stank of it. But it wasn't that long ago

0:04:05.120 --> 0:04:07.280
<v Speaker 2>in the scheme of things that people were puffing away

0:04:07.320 --> 0:04:11.520
<v Speaker 2>inside restaurants and on flights and discothechs and in cinemas

0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:13.000
<v Speaker 2>and you know, all these sort of places. And we're

0:04:13.040 --> 0:04:15.120
<v Speaker 2>much better for not having it now. And I think

0:04:15.160 --> 0:04:17.599
<v Speaker 2>even smokers by and large would agree with me. But

0:04:18.160 --> 0:04:21.320
<v Speaker 2>it did remind me, I guess, of how fortunate we are,

0:04:22.040 --> 0:04:24.120
<v Speaker 2>because there's only a few years ago. I was in

0:04:24.200 --> 0:04:28.039
<v Speaker 2>Vienna and we went along to a pub type of

0:04:28.400 --> 0:04:31.680
<v Speaker 2>joint for dinner. And when we walked in you could

0:04:31.680 --> 0:04:34.960
<v Speaker 2>barely breathe. I mean, it's just smoke everywhere. And this

0:04:35.120 --> 0:04:37.000
<v Speaker 2>was I don't know, five six years ago, maybe I

0:04:37.000 --> 0:04:39.120
<v Speaker 2>don't know, maybe eight, not that long ago, in the

0:04:39.120 --> 0:04:40.760
<v Speaker 2>school of there, and they were puffing away to the

0:04:40.760 --> 0:04:45.840
<v Speaker 2>hearts content inside, and I said, look, I can't hang

0:04:45.880 --> 0:04:47.320
<v Speaker 2>around in here. So I had a bit of a

0:04:47.360 --> 0:04:51.560
<v Speaker 2>wander around and found the non smoking room which was

0:04:51.600 --> 0:04:53.880
<v Speaker 2>out in the back, and as soon as I went in,

0:04:53.880 --> 0:04:55.880
<v Speaker 2>there actually a couple of other families, so this are good.

0:04:55.880 --> 0:04:58.839
<v Speaker 2>So in they all went away from the stench of

0:04:58.880 --> 0:05:01.760
<v Speaker 2>the nicotine. Now, I think in Vienna the rule has

0:05:01.839 --> 0:05:03.880
<v Speaker 2>changed since. I think if you go there now, you're

0:05:04.000 --> 0:05:07.000
<v Speaker 2>they're not smoking over the schnitzels inside. But it wasn't

0:05:07.000 --> 0:05:09.400
<v Speaker 2>that long ago they were puffing away and it was

0:05:09.480 --> 0:05:12.480
<v Speaker 2>it was really gross. It's really gross, but it makes

0:05:12.480 --> 0:05:15.880
<v Speaker 2>you appreciate just how I guess lucky. We've been here

0:05:16.440 --> 0:05:18.240
<v Speaker 2>for what is now quite a long time not to

0:05:18.279 --> 0:05:19.880
<v Speaker 2>have to put up with that over a meal or

0:05:19.920 --> 0:05:23.320
<v Speaker 2>in an enclosed environment. One three, one, eight seven three.

0:05:23.240 --> 0:05:31.599
<v Speaker 1>That open line number twelve past two.

0:05:31.680 --> 0:05:34.679
<v Speaker 2>Okay, Now, look it does seem that only since Labour's

0:05:34.720 --> 0:05:38.719
<v Speaker 2>massive election victory the federal election, if we suddenly seen

0:05:38.720 --> 0:05:42.279
<v Speaker 2>the focus switch from some of them, or two, I

0:05:42.279 --> 0:05:44.200
<v Speaker 2>should say, some of the policies that the party were

0:05:44.240 --> 0:05:47.160
<v Speaker 2>actually offering up in the last few months, who have

0:05:47.240 --> 0:05:49.640
<v Speaker 2>finally got a bit of a laser like focus on

0:05:49.640 --> 0:05:52.279
<v Speaker 2>actually what they want to do with all of this power,

0:05:52.760 --> 0:05:54.679
<v Speaker 2>And a lot of these promises were out in the open.

0:05:54.720 --> 0:05:57.880
<v Speaker 2>But the Opposition, and they will now admit this, did

0:05:57.920 --> 0:06:01.839
<v Speaker 2>not effectively prosecute the case against the worst of the policies.

0:06:02.200 --> 0:06:04.320
<v Speaker 2>In some respects they were willing to match them. That

0:06:04.400 --> 0:06:07.200
<v Speaker 2>was the problem. But the main one I've certainly been

0:06:07.240 --> 0:06:09.400
<v Speaker 2>calling out for a while now is this super tax,

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:11.760
<v Speaker 2>the tax of the government want to bring on unrealized

0:06:11.760 --> 0:06:15.440
<v Speaker 2>capital gains super portfolios over three million dollars and they

0:06:15.440 --> 0:06:18.880
<v Speaker 2>don't want to indxit. As we're outlined again today, as

0:06:18.880 --> 0:06:22.359
<v Speaker 2>you know, no thanks to the coalition campaign. This is

0:06:22.360 --> 0:06:24.400
<v Speaker 2>the government's tax policy and it's going to come in.

0:06:25.000 --> 0:06:27.719
<v Speaker 2>The question is will it come in as they envisage

0:06:27.800 --> 0:06:30.919
<v Speaker 2>or as the Greens wanted, or if the Coalition decide

0:06:30.920 --> 0:06:33.800
<v Speaker 2>to try to negotiate something here to knock the Greens

0:06:33.839 --> 0:06:37.160
<v Speaker 2>out of the debate. Will it look a little softer,

0:06:37.760 --> 0:06:40.599
<v Speaker 2>but we will still get the whiff of it as

0:06:40.640 --> 0:06:43.240
<v Speaker 2>it were. Well, this is something that the new Shadow

0:06:43.279 --> 0:06:45.560
<v Speaker 2>Treasurer Ted O'Brien is going to have to mull over

0:06:46.160 --> 0:06:48.839
<v Speaker 2>with his colleagues and indeed over the next three years.

0:06:48.839 --> 0:06:50.960
<v Speaker 2>And he's with me on the line. Ted, good to

0:06:51.000 --> 0:06:54.440
<v Speaker 2>speak with you again, thank you for your time. Likewise, Michael,

0:06:55.200 --> 0:06:57.480
<v Speaker 2>when we last spoke you with a shadow energy minister,

0:06:57.600 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 2>now you're the Shadow Treasurer, so you've got to you know,

0:07:00.120 --> 0:07:04.080
<v Speaker 2>obviously pivot toward the broader economic story here, but tying

0:07:04.120 --> 0:07:07.359
<v Speaker 2>the two together, I think it's still true, irrespective of

0:07:07.400 --> 0:07:11.960
<v Speaker 2>the result a month or so ago, energy is the economy, right,

0:07:12.000 --> 0:07:14.600
<v Speaker 2>So if we've got to get energy policy right so

0:07:14.640 --> 0:07:17.400
<v Speaker 2>that we get the broader economic story of this country.

0:07:17.120 --> 0:07:22.480
<v Speaker 3>Right Michael, you spot on energy still remains absolutely critical

0:07:22.560 --> 0:07:26.080
<v Speaker 3>and an election might come and go, but still Australians

0:07:26.080 --> 0:07:28.320
<v Speaker 3>are paying among the highest prices in the world for

0:07:28.440 --> 0:07:31.760
<v Speaker 3>energy and that makes us poorer and weaker and more

0:07:31.800 --> 0:07:36.200
<v Speaker 3>dependent as a nation and as individuals, and so yes,

0:07:36.280 --> 0:07:40.040
<v Speaker 3>a new portfolio for me as the Shadow Treasurer. But

0:07:40.640 --> 0:07:44.720
<v Speaker 3>the importance of energy being the economy, Well that still remains.

0:07:45.000 --> 0:07:46.520
<v Speaker 2>Now, look, I know you're about to have the debate

0:07:46.560 --> 0:07:49.400
<v Speaker 2>in the party room and this is on net zero.

0:07:49.920 --> 0:07:52.760
<v Speaker 2>But look, whether the Opposition support net zero going forward

0:07:52.880 --> 0:07:56.480
<v Speaker 2>or not, let's assume you do. Is it possible to

0:07:56.520 --> 0:07:59.200
<v Speaker 2>reach net zero in the economy without nuclear power in

0:07:59.240 --> 0:08:00.120
<v Speaker 2>the mixtep.

0:08:00.960 --> 0:08:05.280
<v Speaker 3>Well, certainly, as we spoke about last term of government, Mike,

0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:08.280
<v Speaker 3>when I know you and I spoke about this. Most

0:08:08.320 --> 0:08:12.040
<v Speaker 3>countries around the world, you know, like countries, countries that

0:08:12.080 --> 0:08:16.800
<v Speaker 3>are peers to Australia, they are adopting nuclear energy because

0:08:17.040 --> 0:08:20.120
<v Speaker 3>they've come to the conclusion that you can't get to

0:08:20.160 --> 0:08:23.560
<v Speaker 3>net zero without it and you can't keep prices down

0:08:23.600 --> 0:08:28.320
<v Speaker 3>without it. And so we need to be driven by

0:08:28.520 --> 0:08:31.840
<v Speaker 3>the evidence of what works overseas and what doesn't work.

0:08:32.800 --> 0:08:35.800
<v Speaker 3>Of course, all the policies of the coalition are now

0:08:35.960 --> 0:08:40.440
<v Speaker 3>under review, and that includes our commitment to nuclear energy

0:08:41.000 --> 0:08:44.960
<v Speaker 3>in terms of its form. But we have agreed that

0:08:45.080 --> 0:08:49.960
<v Speaker 3>the moratorium should absolutely be lifted and the details of

0:08:50.080 --> 0:08:54.000
<v Speaker 3>the politician the policy for energy will be determined over time.

0:08:54.760 --> 0:08:58.000
<v Speaker 2>Now to Treasury per se. The big first test, I

0:08:58.000 --> 0:09:00.160
<v Speaker 2>guess here is what you're going to do over this

0:09:00.840 --> 0:09:03.240
<v Speaker 2>tax to do with super balances over three million and

0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:06.520
<v Speaker 2>the unrealized capital gains component. I saw you spoke to

0:09:06.559 --> 0:09:09.679
<v Speaker 2>the Australian overnight and there was some suggestion that there

0:09:09.720 --> 0:09:12.120
<v Speaker 2>may be some deal that could be done here with

0:09:12.200 --> 0:09:15.360
<v Speaker 2>the government if they were willing to walk back certain aspects.

0:09:15.600 --> 0:09:18.000
<v Speaker 2>Wouldn't you I mean, by doing that, aren't you just

0:09:18.120 --> 0:09:20.960
<v Speaker 2>really giving some credibility to what is a dog of

0:09:20.960 --> 0:09:22.960
<v Speaker 2>a policy? I mean, wouldn't you be better off leaving

0:09:22.960 --> 0:09:25.280
<v Speaker 2>it to Labor and the Greens to stuff it and

0:09:25.320 --> 0:09:27.360
<v Speaker 2>then to point out in three years time how they

0:09:27.400 --> 0:09:27.880
<v Speaker 2>stuffed it.

0:09:29.280 --> 0:09:32.200
<v Speaker 3>Well, Michael, the first thing we have to do is

0:09:32.360 --> 0:09:36.040
<v Speaker 3>fight what is your right? A dog of a policy?

0:09:36.480 --> 0:09:39.840
<v Speaker 3>I mean, Labour super innuation tax is it's nothing but

0:09:39.880 --> 0:09:43.800
<v Speaker 3>a tax grap been wrapped up in a lie and

0:09:44.120 --> 0:09:47.160
<v Speaker 3>Jim Chalmers a title pret little bow around that lie

0:09:47.240 --> 0:09:49.240
<v Speaker 3>and is out there trying to sell it. But it

0:09:49.360 --> 0:09:53.720
<v Speaker 3>is bad news. It's super big and super bad and

0:09:53.760 --> 0:09:57.559
<v Speaker 3>you're right. The unrealised capital gains component is just awful.

0:09:58.760 --> 0:10:03.000
<v Speaker 3>This would set a new precedent to tax people for

0:10:03.080 --> 0:10:06.600
<v Speaker 3>a financial gain they haven't even received yet and they

0:10:06.640 --> 0:10:10.920
<v Speaker 3>may not receive. I mean, that is just lunacy. But

0:10:11.000 --> 0:10:14.520
<v Speaker 3>it's going to force a whole change in behavior of people,

0:10:14.720 --> 0:10:16.680
<v Speaker 3>which is why you are going to see tens of

0:10:16.679 --> 0:10:19.480
<v Speaker 3>billions of dollars leave super accounts and go into the

0:10:19.480 --> 0:10:23.840
<v Speaker 3>property market, up in property prices. You'll see startups being

0:10:23.880 --> 0:10:28.199
<v Speaker 3>staffed of a seed capital. You will see high growth stocks,

0:10:28.240 --> 0:10:32.040
<v Speaker 3>including technology, not getting the investment they need. I mean,

0:10:32.040 --> 0:10:33.960
<v Speaker 3>this is bad news. And over time it's going to

0:10:33.960 --> 0:10:36.920
<v Speaker 3>capture more and more people. Younger people today just on

0:10:36.960 --> 0:10:39.400
<v Speaker 3>average salaries, over time they're going to be captured by this.

0:10:40.160 --> 0:10:44.240
<v Speaker 3>So this is indeed a bad piece of public policy,

0:10:44.640 --> 0:10:46.240
<v Speaker 3>and Michael, we have to fight it. We have to

0:10:46.280 --> 0:10:48.320
<v Speaker 3>fight it all the way. Now. As for whether there's

0:10:48.320 --> 0:10:52.880
<v Speaker 3>a deal to be done, my general view is in opposition.

0:10:53.360 --> 0:10:57.040
<v Speaker 3>You should be constructive where you can and critical where

0:10:57.080 --> 0:11:02.080
<v Speaker 3>you master. Across all policies, re portfolio will be exactly

0:11:02.120 --> 0:11:04.959
<v Speaker 3>the same. So yes, of course the door is open

0:11:05.000 --> 0:11:09.400
<v Speaker 3>to talk. But if the Treasurer persists with taxing unrealized

0:11:09.400 --> 0:11:12.120
<v Speaker 3>capital gains, well there will be no ideal to be done.

0:11:12.240 --> 0:11:16.079
<v Speaker 3>Of course, but sure if he wants to talk about it,

0:11:17.400 --> 0:11:18.000
<v Speaker 3>more than happy.

0:11:18.120 --> 0:11:20.800
<v Speaker 2>I let me just try to interpret that and tell

0:11:20.800 --> 0:11:23.040
<v Speaker 2>me if I'm verbaling you ted or not. What you're

0:11:23.120 --> 0:11:27.720
<v Speaker 2>saying is no to unrealized capital gains, no to non

0:11:27.720 --> 0:11:32.840
<v Speaker 2>indexation of the policy, but maybe to a thirty percent

0:11:33.040 --> 0:11:37.320
<v Speaker 2>tax on a conditional rate on super balances over three

0:11:37.400 --> 0:11:41.000
<v Speaker 2>million if those two other elements are left at the door.

0:11:41.240 --> 0:11:46.040
<v Speaker 3>Almost Michael, But what I probably won't please don't you

0:11:46.080 --> 0:11:48.680
<v Speaker 3>be offended by this? But I want sort of go

0:11:48.800 --> 0:11:53.920
<v Speaker 3>through negotiating positions at this point on radio.

0:11:54.720 --> 0:11:57.720
<v Speaker 2>But if it's about principle, right, so you're open to

0:11:57.760 --> 0:12:00.080
<v Speaker 2>the principle of increasing that rate.

0:12:00.120 --> 0:12:04.200
<v Speaker 3>On super So let me answer from a principled position.

0:12:05.040 --> 0:12:10.560
<v Speaker 3>Our starting principle, whether it be superannuation or any other tax,

0:12:11.360 --> 0:12:16.960
<v Speaker 3>is as a coalition, we believe in lower, simpler and

0:12:17.000 --> 0:12:22.920
<v Speaker 3>fairer taxes, and so any increase in taxation for us

0:12:23.600 --> 0:12:29.199
<v Speaker 3>is something that we typically push away. What then we've

0:12:29.240 --> 0:12:34.000
<v Speaker 3>said about superannuation is, as you look at Labour's superannuation tax,

0:12:34.600 --> 0:12:39.280
<v Speaker 3>it is so bad that the most egregious element is

0:12:39.400 --> 0:12:43.200
<v Speaker 3>the tax on unrealized capital gains. And I've referred to

0:12:43.280 --> 0:12:47.040
<v Speaker 3>that as being a red line that would set a

0:12:47.080 --> 0:12:52.200
<v Speaker 3>new precedent. The first thing that Jim Chalmers needs to

0:12:52.240 --> 0:12:56.960
<v Speaker 3>do is to confirm he will scrap that. Secondly, not

0:12:57.160 --> 0:13:01.319
<v Speaker 3>indexing it, which means over time captures more and more

0:13:01.360 --> 0:13:08.000
<v Speaker 3>people get stung by this bad tax. Exactly right. Again,

0:13:08.600 --> 0:13:12.640
<v Speaker 3>the Treasurer needs to confirm that he's prepared to compromise

0:13:12.679 --> 0:13:15.400
<v Speaker 3>on that. There's a third element and that is just

0:13:15.480 --> 0:13:18.000
<v Speaker 3>the integrity of what they're even trying to do. The

0:13:18.120 --> 0:13:21.800
<v Speaker 3>legislation Michael, they've put into the Parliament gives the treasure

0:13:21.800 --> 0:13:26.400
<v Speaker 3>of the power to define how these changes would affect

0:13:26.400 --> 0:13:29.080
<v Speaker 3>the Prime Minister, his boss. And by the way, he

0:13:29.120 --> 0:13:32.440
<v Speaker 3>won't tell the Australian people how it will affect the

0:13:32.440 --> 0:13:36.199
<v Speaker 3>Prime Minister until after the legislation goes through. So there

0:13:36.200 --> 0:13:38.559
<v Speaker 3>are integrity issues here, and then of course there's the

0:13:38.640 --> 0:13:42.959
<v Speaker 3>tax increase itself. So basically we need to fight this,

0:13:43.559 --> 0:13:48.280
<v Speaker 3>but on any policy will be constructed. So if Jim

0:13:48.360 --> 0:13:51.360
<v Speaker 3>Chalmers sees the light and he is prepared to be

0:13:51.440 --> 0:13:56.559
<v Speaker 3>humble enough to recognize that this is a big, bad

0:13:56.960 --> 0:14:00.680
<v Speaker 3>super tax, then more than happy to have a conversation

0:14:01.120 --> 0:14:05.400
<v Speaker 3>about how we can work together on super reform.

0:14:05.640 --> 0:14:08.360
<v Speaker 2>Okay, do super need reform? I guess there'd be a

0:14:08.400 --> 0:14:10.000
<v Speaker 2>lot of people listening saying, well, you know, sit and

0:14:10.040 --> 0:14:12.160
<v Speaker 2>forgets the best way to deal with this. So, I

0:14:12.160 --> 0:14:15.319
<v Speaker 2>mean you've just said that the Liberal position going forward,

0:14:15.320 --> 0:14:17.320
<v Speaker 2>and this is I think sound and right and good,

0:14:17.800 --> 0:14:20.920
<v Speaker 2>is that lower taxes. Is the mantrate, not higher. Now,

0:14:21.040 --> 0:14:23.800
<v Speaker 2>if that is the principal objective of the Liberal Party

0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:27.600
<v Speaker 2>with you as shadow treasurer, doubling the concession or rate

0:14:27.640 --> 0:14:29.920
<v Speaker 2>from fifteen to thirty percent for those with over three

0:14:29.920 --> 0:14:32.920
<v Speaker 2>million in assets would automatically be ruled out, won't it,

0:14:32.960 --> 0:14:37.080
<v Speaker 2>because that's that's higher tax? So why is there still

0:14:37.120 --> 0:14:39.880
<v Speaker 2>a bit of equivocation here ted about what might happen?

0:14:40.760 --> 0:14:43.520
<v Speaker 3>Well, let's wait to see whether or not Jim Chalmers

0:14:43.520 --> 0:14:47.840
<v Speaker 3>and the Labor Party are prepared to compromise on anything. Michael, again,

0:14:47.960 --> 0:14:49.720
<v Speaker 3>our principle of you know, but I.

0:14:50.160 --> 0:14:51.960
<v Speaker 1>My question is what is there to.

0:14:51.880 --> 0:14:54.320
<v Speaker 3>Company we else to talk about? Is that what you mean? Now?

0:14:54.360 --> 0:14:56.040
<v Speaker 1>What is there to compromise on?

0:14:56.360 --> 0:14:59.440
<v Speaker 2>I mean, if the first two things and no goes

0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:01.440
<v Speaker 2>and good on your saying that, but the unrealized and

0:15:01.480 --> 0:15:04.600
<v Speaker 2>the non indexation. The only thing quote unquote to compromise

0:15:04.680 --> 0:15:10.400
<v Speaker 2>is increasing tax on super portfolios with over three million

0:15:10.440 --> 0:15:10.920
<v Speaker 2>in assets.

0:15:11.000 --> 0:15:12.600
<v Speaker 1>So that's a tax hike.

0:15:13.120 --> 0:15:15.920
<v Speaker 2>You've just said the principle the bedrock of view, a

0:15:16.040 --> 0:15:17.600
<v Speaker 2>shadow treasure is lower tack.

0:15:17.760 --> 0:15:21.040
<v Speaker 3>So what's the compromise, Well, it depends what he might

0:15:21.080 --> 0:15:23.200
<v Speaker 3>be prepared to bring to the table. Candidly, I'll be

0:15:23.240 --> 0:15:27.440
<v Speaker 3>surprised so far by his words publicly if he's prepared

0:15:27.480 --> 0:15:31.080
<v Speaker 3>to compromise on anything, Michael. And if that's the case,

0:15:31.160 --> 0:15:32.400
<v Speaker 3>well there's no idea to be done.

0:15:32.480 --> 0:15:32.720
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:15:33.920 --> 0:15:37.200
<v Speaker 3>You know, the one thing that we should be talking

0:15:37.200 --> 0:15:42.200
<v Speaker 3>about when it comes to superannuation is that principle of simplicity.

0:15:43.120 --> 0:15:46.680
<v Speaker 3>I don't know when you last received advice about superannuation,

0:15:46.880 --> 0:15:52.080
<v Speaker 3>but a common piece of feedback I have constantly received

0:15:52.200 --> 0:15:55.960
<v Speaker 3>over the years is how complex the entire system is.

0:15:56.600 --> 0:15:59.920
<v Speaker 3>So you know, we're not saying that there's no room

0:16:00.040 --> 0:16:03.200
<v Speaker 3>for improvement on super, but what we are saying is

0:16:03.280 --> 0:16:07.760
<v Speaker 3>labor super innuation tax is super big, super bad, and

0:16:07.840 --> 0:16:11.720
<v Speaker 3>we should be fighting against it. That reason, I want

0:16:11.800 --> 0:16:14.440
<v Speaker 3>to compromise and cave in. Sure, more than happy to

0:16:14.440 --> 0:16:16.760
<v Speaker 3>sit down and talk about how we can reform super.

0:16:16.840 --> 0:16:18.720
<v Speaker 2>Okay, you said earlier it was a tax scrab wrapped

0:16:18.800 --> 0:16:20.520
<v Speaker 2>up in a lie with a bow added by doctor

0:16:20.600 --> 0:16:22.320
<v Speaker 2>Charmill's or words to that effect. Well, that's of course

0:16:22.360 --> 0:16:23.920
<v Speaker 2>tream but of course it was all of that before

0:16:23.960 --> 0:16:26.400
<v Speaker 2>May three. So why didn't the Lib's character shreds during

0:16:26.440 --> 0:16:27.040
<v Speaker 2>the campaign.

0:16:28.560 --> 0:16:32.360
<v Speaker 3>Well, we should have gone harder, and we didn't, Michael,

0:16:32.400 --> 0:16:34.760
<v Speaker 3>I'd like to be able to come up with a good,

0:16:34.880 --> 0:16:38.800
<v Speaker 3>solid reason. One of the early lessons learned as we

0:16:38.880 --> 0:16:41.480
<v Speaker 3>continue to review what happened on the third of May,

0:16:41.720 --> 0:16:45.000
<v Speaker 3>is that we should have gone harder on this one.

0:16:45.440 --> 0:16:47.480
<v Speaker 3>And I say that not pointing the finger by the

0:16:47.520 --> 0:16:50.080
<v Speaker 3>way I put my hand up to saying me too,

0:16:50.240 --> 0:16:52.680
<v Speaker 3>I should have gone harder on this one. We all

0:16:52.720 --> 0:16:56.360
<v Speaker 3>should have. But here we are, and we've got to

0:16:56.360 --> 0:16:58.920
<v Speaker 3>make sure that we do everything now to call out

0:16:59.240 --> 0:17:02.520
<v Speaker 3>the problems this the flaws, what it means to not

0:17:02.720 --> 0:17:06.400
<v Speaker 3>just people today, but young people as they advance through

0:17:06.400 --> 0:17:10.959
<v Speaker 3>their careers, they collect money into their savings. They two

0:17:11.000 --> 0:17:12.520
<v Speaker 3>are going to be stung. We need to call it out,

0:17:12.560 --> 0:17:15.879
<v Speaker 3>we need to fight it. But sure if Jim Chalmers

0:17:15.960 --> 0:17:19.760
<v Speaker 3>and Labor are prepared to compromise, more than appy to

0:17:19.760 --> 0:17:21.000
<v Speaker 3>have a conversation.

0:17:20.600 --> 0:17:23.160
<v Speaker 2>Because it just finally that the theory doing the drownds

0:17:23.280 --> 0:17:26.119
<v Speaker 2>is that the reason the Liberals didn't call this out

0:17:26.400 --> 0:17:29.120
<v Speaker 2>is because behind the scenes they would have been more

0:17:29.160 --> 0:17:33.080
<v Speaker 2>than happy to have the additional revenue raised to go

0:17:33.119 --> 0:17:36.120
<v Speaker 2>to treasury so they can fund promises. Now see, when

0:17:36.119 --> 0:17:38.600
<v Speaker 2>you're talking about compromises and all of this, rather than

0:17:38.640 --> 0:17:40.399
<v Speaker 2>just saying no, we're going to have no part of

0:17:40.400 --> 0:17:43.919
<v Speaker 2>this at all, that theory gains a little credence in

0:17:43.960 --> 0:17:44.840
<v Speaker 2>some people's minds.

0:17:44.840 --> 0:17:48.760
<v Speaker 3>You see, Oh, Michael, not a chance in the world

0:17:48.960 --> 0:17:51.800
<v Speaker 3>if we had won the election, would we be taking

0:17:51.840 --> 0:17:57.960
<v Speaker 3>forward labour superannuation tax? Not at all. And that's never

0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:02.240
<v Speaker 3>been our position. I think what is a fair cop

0:18:02.680 --> 0:18:07.400
<v Speaker 3>is we should have done better, We should have done

0:18:07.520 --> 0:18:12.439
<v Speaker 3>more at fighting against this tax. We are where we

0:18:12.480 --> 0:18:16.439
<v Speaker 3>are and what I'm certainly giving you the assurance of

0:18:16.520 --> 0:18:20.679
<v Speaker 3>today is that we have every intention of fighting against

0:18:20.720 --> 0:18:24.720
<v Speaker 3>this tax and we are making it clear upfront about

0:18:24.720 --> 0:18:28.280
<v Speaker 3>the key issues of concern. You know, we're not vacating

0:18:28.320 --> 0:18:32.399
<v Speaker 3>the field and becoming commentators. We are a party of

0:18:32.520 --> 0:18:35.719
<v Speaker 3>government even though we are not in government, and that

0:18:35.760 --> 0:18:39.520
<v Speaker 3>means we need to engage with these policies with the detail.

0:18:40.000 --> 0:18:43.000
<v Speaker 3>That's what we will be doing. And so he is

0:18:43.080 --> 0:18:46.800
<v Speaker 3>hoping that Australia doesn't continue to go down the path

0:18:46.800 --> 0:18:51.600
<v Speaker 3>of becoming poorer and weaker and less productive. But this

0:18:51.640 --> 0:18:53.680
<v Speaker 3>will just be one of many measures I'm sure we're

0:18:53.680 --> 0:18:55.080
<v Speaker 3>going to have to deal with in this term.

0:18:55.359 --> 0:18:57.119
<v Speaker 1>Look good to talk to it, and let's make it

0:18:57.160 --> 0:18:58.439
<v Speaker 1>a regular thing if time permits.

0:18:58.480 --> 0:19:01.159
<v Speaker 2>Thank you for your time, Quice, thanks for Michael, all

0:19:01.160 --> 0:19:03.720
<v Speaker 2>the best, Ted O'Brien, the Shadow Treasurer,