Transcript of
Senator Mitch Fifield
Shadow Parliamentary Secretary
for Disabilities, Carers and the Voluntary Sector
Sky News AM Agenda
Kieran Gilbert and Senator the Hon Nick Sherry
24 August 2009
8:30am
EO & E
Subjects: ETS, Malcolm Turnbull, stimulus, China, Henry tax review
KIERAN GILBERT:
Good morning and welcome to AM Agenda. First the Nationals vote to block an ETS come what may. Now the Nationals are boasting they are going to bring some Liberals along for the ride. Also on this morning’s program, is the tourism industry hurting due to the diplomatic row with Beijing? Joining me to discuss these and the other matters of the day, the Assistant Treasurer, Senator Nick Sherry in Sydney, good morning Senator.
NICK SHERRY:
Morning Kieran and good morning to your viewers.
GILBERT:
And thank you very much. And good morning to the Liberal frontbencher Senator Mitch Fifield in Melbourne. Mitch I want to start with you. Barnaby Joyce says it is just stating the obvious that some Liberals will vote with the Nationals against an ETS, come what may. Is he stating the obvious, Barnaby Joyce, in suggesting that?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Well the first thing we’ve got to do is wait and see if the Government will sit down with the Opposition and discuss their legislation. If the ETS legislation, if its passage is as critical as the Government says it is, then the Government will sit down and talk to us. That’s the first thing that has got to happen. We’ve always been committed to an ETS as part of a range of measures to reduce emissions. We have been since Malcolm Turnbull was Environment Minister. This Government has shown no willingness to sit down and talk to us. So I think discussions as to what might happen on a vote, on amendments, down the track are a little premature at this stage. The first thing is that the Government should sit down and talk to us.
GILBERT:
Senator Fifield you say, we’ve been committed since Malcolm Turnbull was Environment Minister, but you know as well as I do that there are some who share the benches alongside you who don’t agree with you.
FIFIELD:
I fully appreciate that. The Nationals have a different perspective on the ETS. It’s just a fact of…
GILBERT:
And some of your Liberal colleagues as well.
FIFIELD:
It is just a fact of life that the Coalition in Opposition operates in a slightly different way to when we are in Government. The National Party are a separate political party. They are a proud and independent party, as are we. And sometimes that finds expression through a different vote in the Parliament. Now it looks as though that may well be the case in relation to an ETS, but again, we’ve got to wait and see what it is the Government ends up bowling to the Parliament. We don’t know at this stage because they haven’t sat down and they’re not talking to us.
GILBERT:
Well the Nationals made their position clear at the weekend at their federal council. Barnaby Joyce was out and about. You would have thought that he was the Nationals Leader, he had that much coverage. He was on the Nine network’s Today Show.
NATIONALS SENATE LEADER BARNABY JOYCE:
The people who will be benefactors won’t be the environment, it will be the share-brokers, the bankers and the bureaucrats. They will make a creaming, the climate will stay the same, farmers, working families, miners, pensioners, people shopping they pay.
GILBERT:
Senator Fifield again to you. You say that the Coalition works differently in Opposition. Just finally, I want to wrap this up, but I want to get your view. Will it be damaging at all if some Liberals where to go alongside Barnaby Joyce and his Nationals, and voted against your leader and any position that he might take on the ETS?
FIFIELD:
Well we will have to wait and see what eventuates. Colleagues put their views in the party room, one of the differences between the Liberal Party and the Labor Party is we do actually allow freedom of thought and freedom of conscience. So it may well be that a Liberal or two do vote differently to others. But again, we just have to wait and see, we don’t know what the Government is going to bowl up to the Parliament. So I think it is premature at this stage to be speculating as to what some individuals might do on legislation when at this point in time we don’t know what the form of it will be.
GILBERT:
Ok I want to go to the Assistant Treasurer now, Senator Sherry. It looks as though there won’t be a double dissolution trigger from the ETS if you take Malcolm Turnbull’s recent comments at face value. And now Laura Tingle at the Australian Financial Review is reporting today that the Government’s focus has shifted from a double dissolution to having a tough May Budget, and that you see that May Budget now as a potential strength to reinforce your economic credentials. Is that the case? Do senior members of the Government now see it as an opportunity, that looming May Budget next year?
SHERRY:
Well the Government’s never been focused or particularly interested in an early election. What it has been focused on has been implementing its policy commitments that it made at the last election and dealing with the fallout out of the worst financial and economic crisis in the last 75 years. That has been our overwhelming focus, to deal with those issues and cushion the Australian economy. So an early election has just not been a focus. In terms of the next budget, it will be tough. I mean I am a member of the expenditure review committee and it is very, very important to ensure that we continue to find savings in Government and returning the Budget to surplus as we’ve committed to do.
GILBERT:
But almost counter-intuitively do you agree with these reports that the budget provides an opportunity for you now, politically, to reinforce your economic credentials. Is it a political opportunity, if you talk about the politics of it?
SHERRY:
Well I think it is important for a government, and this Government has state that we will return the Budget to surplus. I mean revenue has collapsed by some $210 billion in the face of the worst financial and economic global circumstances in 75 years. And we’ll continue that work and that will be reflected in the Budget. This is a Government of great unity and discipline and we’ve set a path to return the Budget to deficit.
FIFIELD:
(Laughter). You are spot on there Nick.
SHERRY:
To surplus, sorry, over the long term. It’s currently in deficit, Mitch, because of a collapse in revenue due to the global crisis and we will continue the hard work in the Budget next year.
GILBERT:
Ok to return it to surplus then, Minister, why doesn’t the Government then wind back the stimulus? If things are looking better than most had anticipated just a few months ago.
SHERRY:
Well circumstances , world circumstances, are still too uncertain. Only a few weeks ago another major bank collapsed in the United States. And whilst Australia has done well, we are the only country of 30 that hasn’t gone into recession. We have done well. We know the stimulus has had a very substantial impact in cushioning the Australian economy, particularly in retail and construction, housing etc. It’s undisputed, other than by the Liberal Opposition, that the surplus, the approach of the stimulus has cushioned the Australian economy.
GILBERT:
Ok you say it is still too uncertain globally, but if things do firm up, is there potential to wind back the stimulus and therefore expedite the return to surplus?
SHERRY:
Well the next, the next stages, medium to longer term of the stimulus is for investment in productivity building important productivity building for the future of the country. So whether it’s infrastructure, roads, ports a national broadband system, they’re very important investments for the future of the country that will strengthen our economy over the long term. Now they are the next stages of the stimulus, and we stand by that approach, it is very, very important given the circumstances we still face, financial and economically in terms of the rest of the world. I mean the road ahead is still uncertain, and we certainly not out of the woods yet.
GILBERT:
So you see no room, in whatever circumstance, for a winding back as some economists are calling for?
SHERRY:
Well what I do see is continued discipline in terms of government expenditure and returning the Budget to surplus over the next five to six years and that will be reflected in the Budget next year.
GILBERT:
So it is possible, a wind-back on the stimulus is possible? It is a possibility?
SHERRY:
No it’s not I mean we stand by the stimulus short, medium and longer term that we’ve set out. Now we’ve gone through the short term stimulus to support the retail sector, to support the construction industry in particular, and that has cushioned the Australian economy. Medium to longer term there are important components in terms of infrastructure investment, broadband, roads, areas where the Australian economy has not received sufficient investment. These are areas that will strengthen the Australian economy going forward, we stand by them, they need to be delivered.
GILBERT:
Ok, on anther matter, back to the Coalition for a moment. Malcolm Turnbull, reports at the weekend that he made representations to senior Labor figures. Julie Bishop, the Deputy Liberal leader commented on this, she was talking to Helen Daley on yesterday’s Sunday Agenda program.
DEPUTY LIBERAL LEADER JULIE BISHOP:
The Labor Party is going to have to make up their mind about Malcolm. On the one minute, he is this neo-liberal capitalist extremist, now on the other hand they are trying to get us to believe he is a closet socialist. I mean this is an old Labor Party tactic. They tried it the other week in Western Australia when there was a person nominated as a potential Liberal candidate, and they rolled out all the Labor heavies to say that this man had actually tried to join the Labor Party. It’s a familiar tactic.
GILBERT:
Mitch Fifield you attended a meeting last week apparently designed to regroup with the Coalition, the Liberal Party room, and staffers and so on, what was the mood like at that, and do you think that these reports about Malcolm Turnbull flirting with the Labor Party will be any sort of setback to him?
FIFIELD:
I saw the reports in the Sunday Age about this supposed gathering in Canberra. It was a staff function in Canberra which I popped into briefly. And I’ve got to say, the conversations I had, and what I heard being discussed at that gathering bore absolutely no relationship to what was in the papers on Sunday. So I’m not sure where those reports come from. And in relation to the other Sunday special story, about Malcolm and supposed interest in the Labor Party; look, I’m someone who joined the Liberal Party when they were 20. But I am quite aware that for a lot of people, they take a different journey, a different path, that for a number of professional and other reasons they join the Party later in life. I’m not too interested in the he said, she said, I just look at the facts, and the facts are that Malcolm Turnbull has never been a member of the Australian Labor Party.
GILBERT:
Senator Sherry, Minister, is this just about the Labor Party trying to spin this to discredit Malcolm Turnbull’s credibility and judgement, is it a Labor strategy?
SHERRY:
Well I know from conversations I had in the period in the mid 1990s and also in the period after the failed public referendum, I know from conversations that I had that Malcolm was interested in the Labor Party. It wasn’t a matter of us approaching him, he was interested in the Labor Party and either being in the House of Reps or the Senate. I know from conversations that occurred at that time. And this just reflects the shambles of the Opposition.
GILBERT:
Are you saying you spoke to him at the time?
SHERRY:
No, no, I certainly didn’t, but I know from conversations that were occurring at leadership level, at that time, Malcolm was interested in the Labor Party. And this just reflects…
GILBERT:
And you’re enjoying stirring the pot, now as well, the Labor Party, quite clearly.
SHERRY:
Well this just reflects a bitterly divided Opposition. The National Party are off on a frolic of its own, the Liberal Party is divided, and a significant question mark is over the level of commitment of their Leader, Mr Turnbull, whether he wanted to be in the Labor Party or the Liberal Party. I mean they are an absolute shambles, and what Australian voters will have to, no doubt ask themselves at the next election, how can a house divided, a house divided, govern the country?
GILBERT:
Ok, stay with us after the break on AM Agenda. We are going to look at the diplomatic tensions with Beijing, and the question is it affecting our tourism industry?
BREAK
GILBERT:
Welcome back to AM Agenda. Our focus is now going to turn to the diplomatic row with Beijing and reports that it is affecting and hurting Australia’s tourism industry.
BRUCE BAIRD, TOURISM AND TRANSPORT FORUM:
By the end of the year, we expect 50,000 job losses in tourism. So this is part of it, whether it is connected in terms of the 80 per cent fall from China, is connected with other political matters, we can’t be sure. The tourism industry is hurting, the industry itself is saying to the Government, look, you’ve given assistance to the Banking sector, to the Car sector with a $6 billion handout, we’ve had nothing in the tourism industry apart from the general stimulus package. And it is about time that specific incentives where provided for the industry.
GILBERT:
Former Liberal MP, now the Tourism and Transport Forum Chairman Bruce Baird. Nick Sherry, I want to come to you about this issue, there are reports in The Australian today that the diplomatic row with China could be affecting the tourism industry, is this a concern of yours, that it will have broader economic ramifications?
SHERRY:
Well I looked at those figures that we’re published this morning and what we know is that internationally visitors are down from almost every country in the world. Why is that the case? Because of concerns about the flu, and because of concerns about the international economic environment. I mean it stands to reason, if the world is going through a major downturn, recession, worries about health, then tourism numbers will be down, and that’s true right across Asia and what was interesting about the figures this morning is that it actually stated visitor numbers for China were down 21 per cent, but they were down in the rest of Asia by some 26 per cent. So in fact in that sense the visitor numbers from China are down, as consistent with the pattern right across Asia.
GILBERT:
But these reports suggest that some tourism operators are fielding questions, enquiries about Australian attitudes towards China, so it seems that it has had some impact on that level.
SHERRY:
But the point I make is that, yes, visitor numbers are down they are down right across Asia and indeed almost every country in the world as I understand it. They are not down any more significantly from China than they are from anywhere else in Asia, so there is no impact in terms of tourism beyond those issues which you would consider would obviously impact on at the moment, namely concerns about flu and the economic crisis. People travel less when they are worried about their economic future, particularly internationally.
GILBERT:
Well the next challenge I suppose on this front to the relations with Beijing and the next test will be the visit of the Dalai Lama later in the year. Yesterday Julie Bishop, Deputy Liberal Leader was asked whether the Prime Minister should meet the Dalai when he visits Australia.
DEPUTY LIBERAL LEADER JULIE BISHOP:
I would hope he would. Prime Minister Howard met the Dalai Lama when he came here. He is the spiritual leader in Tibet and I would hope that Mr Rudd would meet him.
GILBERT:
Julie Bishop there on the Sunday Agenda program yesterday. Mitch Fifield, Julie Bishop says on the one hand that the Prime Minister overstepped the mark in his comments on Chinese human rights, when he addressed the Beijing University last year, on the other hand she is happy to offend Chinese sensitivities when it comes to meeting the Dalai Lama. Is it a contradictory message from her?
FIFIELD:
No, look I think the point that Julie has been making is that Kevin Rudd essentially set the bar unrealistically high when he first became Prime Minister in relation to our bilateral relationship with China. Kevin Rudd promised that he had a special relationship with China, that he could be a bridge between the West and China. Now I think that raised expectations as to the nature of our relationship with China to an unrealistic level. It’s been pretty much downhill since that time. In foreign relations it is important to promise little but deliver much, and Kevin Rudd has done the opposite.
GILBERT:
Nick Sherry are you worried about that sort of mixed relationship that we are seeing at the moment. On the one hand you’ve got the LNG deal, that record deal, but it’s hard to deny that things have soured with that, with the Government in Beijing.
SHERRY:
Well look you’ve referred to the Gorgon project of last week, the announcements in terms of what is one of the, I think the largest resource development in Australia and with China. I mean that is evidence that the underlying commercial relationship is very strong, and indeed improving. It’s working well and the issues…
GILBERT:
Is that all that matters, you’re not worried about the diplomatic relationship?
SHERRY:
Well there’ll certainly be issues from time to time and what I do know is that Kevin Rudd, given his deep knowledge of China, he can speak the language. He’s better placed than any other Australian leader to handle issues that do arise from time to time in any relationship with any country, and particularly with China, Kevin’s particularly well placed to deal with those issues.
GILBERT:
Just finally I want to ask you, Minister, about something in your portfolio area. You reported in today’s Financial Review on the front page suggesting that the Henry Review into the tax system should, among other things, result in the ATO, the Australian Taxation Office, taking over all taxes, fees and charges from the States and Territories. Can you explain your position on that?
SHERRY:
Well one issue before the Henry tax review is the ATO which is a highly efficient tax platform, saving the taxpayers’ money, improving efficiency by collecting state and local government taxes, fees and charges, and passing it back to them. Now if that saves money for taxpayers and it certainly is more efficient to have one collector of tax in Australia rather than three, as we have at the moment. If that saves money then that’s an issue that should be considered and the Henry tax review will report as it will on other issues, at the end of this year.
GILBERT:
Most of the Government Ministers though have been saying that they won’t comment , we’ll leave it to the Henry Review, but you, for the first time, in terms of a senior member of government are advocating a course of action, are you comfortable with that?
SHERRY:
No, what I’m pointing out is that saving taxpayers’ money with one level of government collecting tax is an issue of efficiency, as is the governance of the ATO. They are issues before the Henry tax review and the Henry tax review will provide us with a report on that and many other issues by the end of this year.
GILBERT:
You seem to think that it is a fait accompli, do you?
SHERRY:
We await the outcome and the recommendations of the Henry tax review. What I point out is that it is important in the context of the tax debate to consider how we can save taxpayer’s money by having a more efficient tax collection system, that’s an important issue and the Henry tax review is considering that along with everything else and we’ll receive their report at the end of the year.
GILBERT:
Mitch Fifield what are your thoughts on that issue. Do you think it is an important point from the Assistant Treasurer?
FIFIELD:
I think as a general principle of taxation, it’s best to have the level of government which spends a dollar also responsible for raising that, and possibly also collecting that. Now where you can find efficiencies, where you can lift the burden from business, you should certainly look at doing that. But in doing so I think you’ve got to be very careful not to compromise matters of accountability in relation to Government.
GILBERT:
Ok Senator Fifield, and Assistant Treasurer Nick Sherry, in Sydney, appreciate your time both this morning, thank you very much.
SHERRY:
Good morning.
FIFIELD:
Good morning.
END