THE HON CHRIS BOWEN MP

SHADOW TREASURER
MEMBER FOR MCMAHON
E&OE TRANSCRIPT
TELEVISION INTERVIEW
SKY PM AGENDA WITH DAVID SPEERS
MONDAY, 12 MAY 2014
SUBJECT/S: Tony Abbotts Budget of Broken Promises and Twisted Priorities;
P Ta!; Cuts to "ea#t$; Cuts to t$e Pension; Tony Abbotts Ta! %n&rease;
Petro# Ta!; Pub#i& ser'i&e (ob &uts; )reedom of %nformation; Cost of *i'ing;
Pri'atisations+
DAVID SPEERS: Thank you for your time. Is there anything you can say right now
you will actually oppose in this Budget?
CHRIS BOWEN, SHADOW TREASURER: We would oppose any moves to pay to
go to the doctor. That would be a fundamental attack on Medicare and we will fight to
protect the universality of Medicare. Joe ockey might think !".#$ or !% is not much
money to him& but I have to tell you if you're a family with a couple of kids and they
get sick often it's a lot of money and it will deter people from going to the doctor.
There has been evidence of that in the last () hours and we will fight& fight and fight
again to defend Medicare.
SPEERS: The argument though here is that Medicare funded services cost the
ta*payers !+,.% billion last year and that's gone up more than # per cent -ust on the
year before. It is unsustainable.
BOWEN: ealthcare costs are growing around the world& that's true. That does not
mean you fundamentally attack Medicare. I mean& Tony .bbott says he's Medicare/s
best friend& I would hate to see it's worst enemy.
SPEERS: 0o what's the solution? 1o you believe the Medicare levy should go up for
everyone?
BOWEN: 2o& I don't think this la3y cheap option of saying& 4let's charge people to go
to the doctor' is the answer 5
SPEERS: 0o what is?
BOWEN: To what is a comple* issue of the growing technology of health care& an
ageing population and the growing pressures on the health budget around the world&
on 0tate budgets& on 6ederal budgets etc.
SPEERS: 0o what is the answer then? If you agree it's a ballooning cost we can/t
afford.
BOWEN: What I/m saying 1avid is obviously we will have policies for the ne*t
election but we are not accepting and will not support charging people to go to the
doctor.
SPEERS: 2ow what about the pension age& lifting that to "$?
BOWEN: We'll have more to say about that but I've got to say Joe ockey wants
.ustralians to work longer than any other people in the developed world.
SPEERS: 7ou're not categorically saying you'll vote against it?
BOWEN: There is not one country in the 89:1 with a pension age of "$ or heading
to a pension age of "$ on anywhere near the timetable that Joe ockey has put out.
2ot one. If he wants to make the case to the .ustralian people he has to do a lot
better than arrogantly saying& 4this is what I/m doing& everyone has to cop it.'
7ou can have a debate about& a proper discussion& about sustainability of aged
pensions. But while he's making it harder for people to save for their own future&
particularly low and middle income earnerers by pairing back superannuation ta*
concessions for lower5middle income earners& while he's lecturing people& brick
layers and manual labourers and policeman that they have to work and work longer
than any other nation in the developed world he is going to have to do better.
SPEERS: ;abor did increase the access age to %"& why is that the magical number?
BOWEN: Well if you look around the world that's about where countries are heading.
But to suggest that we should& remembering that the :ommission of .udit said let's
move to a 5 they had <uite a comple* formula about life e*pectancy and on current
pro-ections that would get you to retirement age of "$& about ($#$. 2ow Joe ockey
said& 42o& I've got to do much better than that and will beat my chest and is a it has to
be ($=#.' There is no 89:1 country pro-ected to have a pension age of "$ by ($#$&
let alone by ($=#. Joe ockey has got to e*plain why is .ustralia meant to be the
outlier& the e*ception to the rule& to say that .ustralians should work longer than
anybody else in the developed world.
SPEERS: 7ou're not sure whether you will vote against it at this stage?
BOWEN: We will have more to say about it& as you would e*pect.
SPEERS: 2ow& fuel e*cise& the >overnment is going to bring back twice yearly
increases& inde*ation& with the additional proceeds apparently going to road pro-ects.
What do you think about that?
BOWEN: 7ou are a bit definitive on that. I have seen all sorts of different reports
about what they're going to do so we're going to wait to see detail. With respect
1avid& you can/t e*pect me to respond to a budget which has not been delivered yet.
I have seen all sorts of speculation& some of which is probably inspired by
>overnment Ministers& others which is leaked out of :abinet room.
SPEERS: 0ure but on this issue itself& do you accept keeping it at =, cents forever&
fuel e*cise& means it's a dwindling ta*?
BOWEN: I'll tell you what I accept& that Tony .bbott campaigned on cost of living
issues& said he would relieve cost of living pressures for the .ustralian people& it was
a campaign of deceit and lies. e didn't tell people that he would increase petrol ta*.
e talked about the impact of a carbon price on .ustralian people& did he ever say&
4by the way I'm going to put your petrol ta* up'? 2o& he did not. 0o that/s what I/m
focusing on today.
SPEERS: ?utting Tony .bbott to one side& this issue itself& fuel e*cise is meant to at
least pay for road funding. If it stays there and inflation keeps going up& every other
price goes up& it's not going to fund what it is meant to.
BOWEN: Well John oward& of course& fro3e the e*cise. If Tony .bbott wants to
make changes he's going to have to -ustify that.
SPEERS: 1o you think it's a good idea?
BOWEN: I put out criteria 1avid& which we will apply to the decisions which will be& if
you like an answer to this& any <uestion you might want to ask on rule in and rule
out.
SPEERS: What is the criteria?
BOWEN: 6airness and e<uity& impact on the budget and budget sustainability&
participation in the work force& which would be relevant in some matters and the
>overnment's election commitments and whether it is an egregious breach. They're
the sorts of things 5
SPEERS: 0o does every one of those criteria have to be met?
BOWEN: They're the sorts of things 5
SPEERS: The first three of those you mentioned there& the deficit ta* would pass.
BOWEN: They are the sorts of things that we will consider. 2ow& there has been all
sorts of speculation about all sorts of ta*es and charges and cuts et cetera& I have
outlined principles& it would be irresponsible for me to go through and respond to a
budget which has not been delivered. I will respond to the Budget when it's delivered
and you will find things which of course there is a proper consideration& 0hadow
:abinet discussion about our response.
SPEERS: 1o you agree with this deficit levy? It would be e<uitable. Well& it would
mean that it does help the Budget bottom line& it wouldn't hurt workforce participation
really. 0omeone on !($$&$$$ is not going <uit their -ob 5
BOWEN: I've see speculation of !,$&$$$ and then I see speculation and then that/s
off and !,$&$$$ is not a high income earner 5
SPEERS: 0o you want to see the intel but you're open to looking at this?
BOWEN: Well& we have made the point that ;abor >overnments& as well as ;iberal
>overnments have reduced top marginal ta* rates since +@,=. When we came to
office& the top ta* rate was %$ per cent& it was down to ?aul Aeating to fi* that& that
was the inheritance of ;abor in a globalised world. The old days of -ust -acking up the
top marginal ta* rate whenever the >overnment had a problem aren't any longer
sustainable. We don't like it one little bit but if you are asking me to respond to a
Budget& I will do that tomorrow night.
SPEERS: :ertainly ;abor/s rhetoric on this has changed over the last couple of
weeks. Initially it was thought it would be !,$&$$$ and they have shifted that 5
BOWEN: There are reports that that/s happened but this has ebbed and flowed the
>overnment's leaked it will be !,$&$$$& then !+#$&$$$. I have seen !+,$&$$$ and
($$&$$$& I'm not going respond to moving goal posts. When I have seen the Budget
in black and white that's when I will respond.
SPEERS: 7ou are no longer saying you will oppose this sort of ta* increase?
BOWEN: I have outlined the principles that we'll apply. I have told you one particular
matter in principle in relation to being charged to go to the doctor. 7ou would e*pect
me& 1avid to be responsible in my response and to be responsible in my response I
need to see what's actually proposed first.
SPEERS: .nd the list of government bodies produced today that the >overnment
has got in its sights& you must admit there are some there that look a bit suss and we
probably shouldn/t be supporting any longer?
BOWEN: Well 1avid& a couple of points. 6irstly I have seen you make relevant
comments. . lot of these aren/t actually government bodies& they are committees
which might meet by telepresence or video. We are not talking about millions of
dollars here& point one. ?oint twoB sure you can have sensible realignment
sometimes& we did some of that in office& when I was the Minister for uman
0ervices& we brought together the back offices of Medicare and :entrelink and put it
all into the 1epartment of uman 0ervices.
7ou can do some sensible things. There are other things which I will be very
reluctant to go down& for e*ample& this is a >overnment addicted to secrecy so I will
be pretty sceptical about the abolition of the ?rivacy :ommissioner who is the
6reedom of Information :ommissioner& who is in the end the ultimate arbiter of
6reedom of Information re<uests. This is some sort of plan to bring that into the
department of ?rime Minister and :abinet& and remove their independence& I will be
pretty sceptical about that.
SPEERS: .nd on the overall public service& do you accept that the +%&$$$ -ob cuts
the >overnment is talking about isn/t actually that deep when a lot of it was ;abor/s
efficiency C
BOWEN: The >overnment is being <uite tricky here. They said they would reduce
public service numbers by natural attrition& it was an election commitment that there
would be no forced redundancies. Then they got into office and found out it was
harder and came up with an alibi& they said 4we -ust discovered ;abor had an
efficiency dividend'. ello& it was in the Budget.
SPEERS: That did cost -obs?
BOWEN: We actually had -ob losses as the last resort when we had an efficiency
dividend. There were lots of innovative things which 1epartments did& in terms of
improved efficiencies etcetera which is what an efficiency dividend is meant to drive.
To force that innovation. Job losses should never be the first resort. 2ow& this
>overnment is trying to beat an ideological drum here& that's their bent. That/s okay
for them to try to prosecute that but we will abide by principles which should say&
public service is important& front line services are important& and -ob losses should
not be the first response of a >overnment.
SPEERS: Just finally& the .ustralian Mint& you have a problem with selling that?
BOWEN: I think there should be some test for privatisation& sometimes they work
and sometimes they don/t. The first test isB is this a role that the private sector could
conduct? 2ow for e*ample one organisation is .ustralian earing. They do great
work very important work in indigenous health& many Indigenous young people
having hearing issues& in the outback& nobody else will do that work frankly. It is very
important work. 0o I will be very reluctant to go down that road. If that first threshold
is passed and it could conceivably be done in the private sector then the second test
isB well do the pro-ected dividends outweigh the sale price you get at the moment?
SPEERS: Is that the case?
BOWEN: Well we'd need to have a look at the detail. Mints are generally held in
government ownership& this would be a rather unusual move so we need to -ust see
the business model and see the pro-ected revenue flows et cetera versus any
potential sale price.
SPEERS: 0hadow Treasurer :hris Bowen& look forward to talking to you tomorrow
night when we have more detail on what/s in the budget.
BOWEN: That/s right. Thank you.
E,-S