Economy, US Dollar, Defence Reserves, Budget, Leadership – Doorstop Interview
May 19, 2003Red Shield Appeal, superannuation, River Murray, leadership, security – Doorstop Interview
May 21, 2003TRANSCRIPT
THE HON PETER COSTELLO MP
Treasurer
Interview with Paul Murray
6PR
Tuesday, 20 May 2003
8.35 am
SUBJECTS: Commonwealth Bank, Superannuation, University Fees, AMP, War Veterans,
Election
MURRAY:
Good day, Peter.
TREASURER:
Good morning, Paul.
MURRAY:
Fan club waiting for you.
TREASURER:
Yes. Good to be with you. I am sorry I was a little bit late. We were talking
at a breakfast this morning.
MURRAY:
Okay. Look, I will get to the nub of the Budget, some Budget issues that are
still coming up, shortly. But as has just been announced on our news, the Commonwealth
Bank this morning is saying that it’s going to axe 1600 positions. There has
already been debate around the place that Telstra’s looking at 10,000 jobs to
go, 4,000 probably in the short term. In the Budget, you projected the same
unemployment as last year, 6 per cent. So you weren’t going to make any inroads
into unemployment. Would these put a hole in those figures? Would these losses
put a hole in those figures? That’s the first point. The other is, is this a
sign of a good economy?
TREASURER:
Well, these figures would not cause us to change our estimates. Last year,
230,000 new jobs were created in the Australian economy. So, you need a couple
of hundred thousand new jobs each year just to take new entrants to the workforce
and to keep the unemployment rate steady. Now, obviously, the Commonwealth Bank
employees and Telstra employees, those that are affected, I have a great deal
of feeling for them. And it is up to the Commonwealth Bank, and it is up to
Telstra, to announce what is motivating it, and what it is going to put in place
for those employees, in the way of entitlements on so on. But the important
thing is to keep an economy growing so that we get new job opportunities. And,
as I said, we need a couple of hundred thousand each year in Australia just
to keep those new entrants with job opportunities coming into the workforce.
Let me put it in context, since the Government was elected in 1996, there have
been about 1.2 million new jobs created in Australia. So that is the order of
the dimension of net new jobs in the country. Some people put off labour, but
if you can encourage business to create new jobs, overall you can create better
opportunities.
MURRAY:
What we are seeing in the banking sector is increased profitability and declining
jobs. I mean, is there a responsibility on companies that are doing well to
employee Australians?
TREASURER:
Oh, I think that Australian companies should always employ Australians. Yes,
of course I do. And that is part of the reason why I think it is important that
we have head offices here in Australia. And I have been very strong on that.
That is part of the reason why we want to reform taxation, so that Australian
companies can remain headquartered in Australia, notwithstanding the fact that
they are seeking investment opportunities offshore. But what you are seeing
in relation to the banking sector, is new technologies coming through, which
are changing the nature of banking. One of the biggest changes, of course, was
automatic tellers. That was one of the big changes that we saw in relation to
banking. Obviously, banks try and make use of those new technologies. But at
the end of the day, it is up to the Commonwealth Bank to explain its decisions.
David Murray can announce and explain his decision. It is not my duty to announce
or explain decisions of the Commonwealth Bank. It is a privatised bank. It is
not owned by the Commonwealth. People know that.
MURRAY:
Yes, sure. But you have a banking policy which limits competition in the banking
sector to some extent and, you know, it’s a matter very much under your control.
TREASURER:
We do not want to limit competition in the banking sector. Let me be entirely
clear about this. We want to promote competition in the banking sector. Some
of the things that we have done, for example, is, we gave credit unions the
right to issue cheques. We are giving credit unions access to the payment system.
We are encouraging organisations like the Bendigo Bank, which is now starting
community branches. We want more competition in the banking sector, certainly
not less. Let me give you another example, which is going on right at this moment.
The Government has announced reforms which will cut the major international
credit card providers, Visa and Mastercard, from setting interchange fees which
we think are too high. The Government is being sued, or the Reserve Bank is
being sued, I should say, in the courts at this moment because we are cutting
those fees and trying to promote competition. So our policy is actually to promote
competition in the banking sector.
JOURNALIST:
I just want to raise with you an issue which didn’t get much coverage, hardly
any at all, out of the Federal Budget, and that’s the issue of superannuation.
Over the past year or so, you’ve outlined the problems faced by our ageing population
in your Intergenerational Report. You’ve told us we need to look after ourselves
more in our retirement. Many people feel that they’ve been herded into superannuation
and that now super is failing them. Why didn’t you address broad superannuation
reform in the Budget?
TREASURER:
Well, we have got a number of measures in the Parliament, as we speak
JOURNALIST:
From the last Budget, yes.
TREASURER:
Not only from the last Budget, Paul, but from 1997. In 1997, we adopted a policy
of allowing freedom of choice so that employees, if they did not like their
superannuation fund, could take their money out and put it in a different one.
That has been in the Parliament since 1997. The Labor Party, because it is beholden
to the unions and industry superannuation funds, is opposing it. We have legislation
in the Parliament, as we speak, to cut the superannuation surcharge. Labor is
opposing. We have legislation in the Parliament to increase the ability for
husbands to make payments into superannuation on behalf of their wives, as we
speak. We have a very broad agenda.
JOURNALIST:
But Labor says those changes advantage the rich. They’re offering tax cuts
on super for everybody, from 15 per cent to 13 per cent. You didn’t seek to
do that.
TREASURER:
Labor would not know what they’re saying. Ask Labor this question: Why can’t
people choose their superannuation fund? They will give you a complicated reason.
But one of the things that is worrying people at the moment, Paul, is, they
are getting negative returns. The equity markets are down and they are getting
negative returns. Now, part of that, of course, is that the worldwide economy
is down and equity of returns are down around the world, worse outside of Australia
than inside Australia.
JOURNALIST:
But also because they’ve got limited flexibility and most super funds are tied
to the stock market.
TREASURER:
Absolutely right. And if they do not like the performance of their fund, they
can’t even change it. This is the thing that amazes me. Imagine if you went
to the bank and the bank said, you know that $100 that you deposited, well there
is only $90 left. The first thing you would say, is, I am taking my money out.
If you try and do that in superannuation, you are not even allowed to take your
money out and put it in a new fund because there is no competition between these
funds. Unions have set up these industry funds. If they make a negative return,
bad luck. You cannot take your money out and put it in another fund. We have
been trying since 1997 to give people freedom of choice. It is all blocked in
the Senate. Part of the obstructionist Labor tactic.
JOURNALIST:
Well I’m sure, though, that what wouldn’t get blocked in the Senate is a move
to lower the taxation level on superannuation generally. As I understand it,
the problem you’ve got in the Senate is that they think your changes advantage
the rich and not the average income earner.
TREASURER:
No, the problem we have got in the Senate, is, that the Labor Party is beholden
to the unions, which run the industry superannuation funds, and unless the unions
approve, you can’t get any legislation through. That is our problem.
JOURNALIST:
Well, even the Association of Superannuation Funds says about this Budget,
it says you’ve failed to deliver on last year’s Budget promises and that the
Budget is a huge disappointment in that it offers no long term commitment or
strategy to help people save for their retirement. That’s what Philippa Smith
says.
TREASURER:
Yes, well we have delivered in full on last year’s Budget promises, and they
are currently in the Senate awaiting legislation.
JOURNALIST:
But you don’t deliver until they’re through the Parliament, surely?
TREASURER:
Sure. I agree with that. I agree with that. Absolutely. Absolutely. And to
get through the Parliament, they pass the House of Representatives and they
have to pass the Senate. Now give me a clue, Paul. How do I get the Labor Party
to pass our legislation in the Senate?
JOURNALIST:
Well, what the Association says, is, that it’s time for the Government and
the Opposition to step away from partisan politics in the Senate and to find
a compromise solution that works in the interests of average Australians.
TREASURER:
Could not agree more. Don’t you think the Government should be entitled to
implement its election policy? You know, Paul, in a democratic society, you
put your policy out and, if you are elected, you go and implement it. We put
our superannuation policy out. We were elected. Labor lost the election. Shouldn’t
we be allowed to put in place our policy? What is our policy? Freedom of choice.
What is our policy? Reduction in the superannuation surcharge. What is our policy?
Allowing higher income earners in the family to make superannuation contributions
on behalf of the lower income earners, mainly husbands in respect of wives.
We have delivered in full. It is through the House of Representatives. It is
in the Senate. Shouldn’t we be allowed, having been elected, to get that legislation
through? Surely.
JOURNALIST:
Well, that’s an issue about the Senate, isn’t it. Peter, there are callers
lined up for you, to talk you. Humphrey is first up. Good day, Humphrey. Peter
Costello’s listening.
CALLER:
Good day Paul, good day Mr Costello. Mr Costello you might have noticed in
the polls that we are more concerned about education than four bucks a week
and apart from the glaring inequality of battlers like me paying for your free
education, could you tell me why athletes are exempt and under the next Liberal
Government, will the various institutes of sports around the country become
fee paying institutions?
TREASURER:
Well thanks for that question Humphrey. I think that Australians are interested
in keeping the tax burden as low as possible, and that’s what the Government
is doing in this budget. Not only have we introduced a surplus but we have returned
to the taxpayers and you will have noticed that most of the State Labor Governments
have been increasing taxes. We think it’s important that we keep that tax burden
as low as possible. Can I say in relation to Higher Education, that the taxpayers
pay about three-quarters of the university course and the student pays about
a quarter of the full cost of the course and they are given an interest-free
loan, which is not repayable until, under our changes, the student goes above
$30,000 worth of income. Now we think that’s a fair distribution between the
taxpayer and the student, it’s still good value for the student and this was
a system that was as you know introduced by the Labor Party back in the mid-80’s.
It’s one that we are preserving and building upon. We think it will make a more
flexible higher education system.
MURRAY:
Thanks Humphrey, Liz Thompson, from the National Union of Students is on the
line for you Treasurer. G’day Liz.
CALLER:
Hi, Mr Costello, I was just interested to hear your comments on the Business
Council of Australia’s report in August 2002, that demonstrated that Australia
is in fact, a high user pays, low graduate benefit system compared to other
countries in the OECD. You have graduates from a secondary school, sorry graduates
from university earning on average an extra, 36 per cent income in Australia,
when the OECD average is 60 per cent, and the UK 71 per cent, the USA 80 per
cent, so in fact we are already facing a situation where graduates in Australia
find it very difficult to earn a higher income despite the fact that they pay
significantly higher fees than a lot of other OECD countries and I was very
interested in your comments about, I think you would like to check your figures,
first of all our figures demonstrate that students are paying more than 40 per
cent for contribution towards their education, in some courses like Law, it’s
closer to 80 per cent. I was interested in your comment on
MURRAY:
Is there a question in here anywhere Liz?
CALLER:
yes certainly
MURRAY:
Well let’s get to it.
CALLER:
in how you have said that there is going to be all this extra money for
higher education, how do you justify, first of all you have taken out $1 billion,
since
TREASURER:
Well, I can answer that question because we haven’t taken out $1 billion. In
this Budget we actually announced a 7 ½ per cent increase in Commonwealth
funding for universities. A 7 ½ per cent increase on the forward estimates,
so Commonwealth expenditure is dramatically growing. The figures have been out
for a very long period of time, they are published by the Government. Three
quarters of a place is paid for by the taxpayer, and one quarter by the student.
It is true, that what some of the universities do, is where they have high demand
courses, sometimes they don’t direct as much resources into those high demand
courses, and they use high demand courses like Law, to subsidise other lower
demand courses. But at the end of the day the taxpayer is still paying for three-quarters
of the place. And you have got to remember this, that there will be a lot of
people who will never get near a university, people who will be working in trades,
or in service industries, who are paying taxes all of their lives, and they
will be making a contribution to the students, which is three-quarters of the
cost of the course and the student is asked to make a contribution which is
one quarter, with an interest free loan. We think that is a fair system and
a system that has been in place for quite a long time.
MURRAY:
Andrew from (inaudible). G’day Andrew.
CALLER:
Hi G’day Paul, Mr Costello
TREASURER:
Good Morning Andrew.
CALLER:
I was just curious as to what you are saying about the industry-based super
funds, I actually have one of those from a previous employer, and one currently
with AMP. Now, the industry-based super fund is far and away out performing
the AMP fund, with 7 ½ per cent better return last year
TREASURER:
But that is a good thing, I mean I am not complaining about that. I am just
saying if it were doing worse you should have a right to take your money out.
If it is doing better you should have the right to leave your money in. My point
is this, shouldn’t you have the choice?
CALLER:
Yes, for sure you should have the choice. What my question was, was is there
going to be some sort of regulatory body that investigates why a company like
AMP, who was obviously, should have better financial advisers, is so badly under
performing in comparison to a super fund which you would assume would have a
generic type financial adviser, doing bulk deals?
TREASURER:
Well, I think the fact that AMP has performed so badly is a disappointment
to everybody, especially its shareholders, but they have now got rid of previous
Chief Executives, and Board Member. They are now attempting to restructure themselves,
I think as the Chairman of the AMP said in a moment of candour, at the annual
general meeting, they were in the wrong business, in the wrong country, at the
wrong time. They were a company that mucked it up. And now they are trying to
restructure themselves, and perform better for their shareholders, and if I
was a shareholder in AMP I would be pretty angry about that, but unfortunately
that is what happens in the business world. Some people run companies well and
some run them badly. And if you are a shareholder, the trick is to try and pick
the good Directors and the good Chief Executives who are going to run companies
that get you a better return rather than a loss on your share income.
MURRAY:
Alan from (inaudible) on the line for you Peter. G’day Alan.
CALLER:
Good Morning Mr Costello.
TREASURER:
Morning.
CALLER:
I am president of the EDA, War Veterans EDA Society which is the most disabled
war veterans of all, no matter who you speak to, as has been accepted by the
Vets Affairs and we are. When are you going to give GST free cars (inaudible)
of TPI. A number of people of the Second World War like myself, cannot get a
TPI because we are over 65 years. We paid tax all our lives and we do not, get
any of the benefits of the TPI, when are you going to get us a GST free car?
TREASURER:
Well, look I would actually have to have a look at, and speak to the Veterans
Affairs Minister in relation to the entitlements, but as far as I know the War
Veterans who have seen active service are entitled to full medical health, they
are entitled to a Veterans pension, and they are entitled to a additional benefits,
I can’t tell you every precise one and I’m not quite sure of the age limit that
you refer to, but I will take it on board and we will come back to your association
and I will speak to the Veterans Affairs Minister and see what we can do.
MURRAY:
Ok, thanks for that call Alan. Peter yesterday you drew a crowd of about 500
to the 500 Club, a fund raising outfit for the liberal Party, I know that the
Liberal Party were putting great stock in getting you here to raise some money
for them. It does raise the question about an early election and that the party
is trying to get some sort of war chest up. I mean there’s almost, well there’s
certainly a $900,000 debt in the Liberal Party here in WA. What are the chances
of an early election, I mean you certainly have no shortage of triggers?
TREASURER:
Well, we would like the Senate to pass our legislation, because I think the
public feels that you elect a government – you have only got a three year term,
the States have got four year terms, we have only got a three year term – elect
a government, they want us to get on with governing. Now as you know, the Constitution
says that if the Senate becomes obstructionist and defeats too much government
legislation, it’s up to the government what it would want to do about that.
But I hope it doesn’t come to that. We don’t need an early election, what we
need is, we need the government to be able to pass its legislative program.
Now you ask me about, meetings, we have had some terrific meetings here in Perth,
I am always working as hard as I can to help the local organisation, we had
a terrific lunch yesterday, if it raises money well and good, but you shouldn’t
read any particular election timing into that, Paul.
MURRAY:
The AC Nielsen poll says 77% of Australians would have rathered to have the
tax cut money spent on health and education, a matter that you and I discussed
the day after the budget. Would you really want to go to an early election on
this Budget?
TREASURER:
I think that, this is a very responsible Budget, Paul. We balanced the budget,
we funded a war, we funded the worst drought in Australia’s history, we have
upgraded Australia’s security and we have reduced taxes. There aren’t many countries
around the world that would be in that position, not the Americans, not the
British, not the Europeans, not the Japanese. In this country we can all look
at things that we want improved, and there are many things can be improved,
but let me say this Paul, if you want to compare where Australia is, to other
countries around the world, other advanced industrial economies around the world,
to be able to do all that puts us in a pretty special class.
MURRAY:
Good to talk to you, thanks for coming to see us today.
TREASURER:
Great to be here Paul.