DOYLE: Well, last week was the inaugural Ask the PM segment. Now, three viewers got to ask Kevin Rudd a question without notice. Hundred of you have since emailed us with your questions, so thank you very much. The response has just been fantastic.
KOCH: Now, let's recap what this segment is about. This is your opportunity to ask the Prime Minister directly about any issue, because he's ultimately the man who makes the decisions, he's the only bloke, he's the boss of the country. Mr Rudd has not been briefed on the nature of the questions, and this morning the PM joins us from our Melbourne studio. Prime Minister, good morning to you.
PM: Good morning, Kochie. Good morning, Mel.
KOCH: You've got a bit of homework to catch up on from last week. Let's quickly get that out of the way. Liz from South Australia wanted to know why aged pensioners were given an increase in the last Federal Budget, not the Widow's Allowance.
PM: She's right, the Widow's Allowance did not go up. The age pension went up because it's for people over 65, and many who are on Widow's Allowance are, of course, well widows are often under 65, but when they become 65 they begin to qualify for the aged pension.
But secondly, what we did in the budget was we increased the utilities allowances for widow's allowees - those who receive the widow's allowance - and that went up from something like $100 to about $500-plus, and secondly we made that payment quarterly to help with those big bills that come in.
The other thing she asked about was age discrimination in the workplace. She's right - there's too much of it, and therefore what we've done is begun to change the laws to make that sort of discrimination harder, and secondly change the Job Network so that mature people seeking to get a part time job can get it more easily.
DOYLE: OK, well, that was the answer for Liz. The other one that you were following up was Jessica in Victoria, and she was asking what incentives are there for mums to return to work given the cost of child care is so high?
PM: Well, Jessica faces the challenges so many young families have, which is juggling is it worthwhile going back into the workforce because I'm going to earn so much, but I've got all these childcare bills over here.
Three quick points - one is there is this thing called the childcare benefit, and it's means-tested, but if you're on a family income of up to about $130,000, you're still eligible.
The second thing is this - on top of that, for further out-of-pocket expenses there's another thing called the Childcare Rebate. That's what we've increased from 30 per cent to 50 per cent to an amount up to $7,700 per year per child.
And here's the last thing - this is really complicated for individual families, and that's why we've introduced a new service as of January this year. It's called the Childcare Estimator. If you go to the Centrelink website, it tries to make it clear - "here are the fees being offered by the childcare centre you're thinking of taking your children to on the one hand, here are the benefits that are available from the Government on the other" - and it enables you to do the sums about which decision you might want to make.
KOCH: That's a good idea. Alright, let's move on to today's questions from viewers. We've got the homework out of the way. The first one is from Rebecca Wade in Melbourne. Rebecca, good morning, welcome to the program. Now, you've got the Prime Minister's ear.
CALLER: Good morning, Kochie.
KOCH: What's your question?
PM: Morning, Rebecca.
CALLER: Morning, Prime Minister. My question relates to the changes to the Medicare rebates for IVF treatment, in particular the huge discrepancy in costs for people who require an egg donor. For example, in my case, the increase for this year from last year is huge. Last year I would have been out of pocket around $1,600 and this year it's over $7,500. And it just seems totally unfair that your ability to have a child is now dependent on your bank balance.
PM: Well, listen, thank-you so much for that question, and can I just say at the very beginning I understand something of the anguish folk are going through in terms of wanting to have a baby and the need to use IVF. I have many friends in these circumstances, so it's a real struggle.
Second point - on the question of the cost, look, there has been a huge debate over the cost of IVF services and the rebates available. Can I again, take the detail of this one on notice? I really want to get back to you on the precise amounts which we are making available here. I don't wish to mislead you and to make that sure that you are getting everything that you are entitled to. I am surprised by the quantity of the price increase you've just described, but I want to come back with the absolute detail next week.
CALLER: My case is, as many women, the increase to IVF per se has only gone up about $1,000 using your own eggs. But in my case where I would require an egg donor, that is where the huge increases come in. There seems such a big discrepancy between cycling with your own eggs to cycling with a donor, when the actual cost of treatment isn't that much different.
PM: Okay, I think I've got the point now. Basically, you're saying there are two sets of different charges which apply here.
CALLER: That's right, yeah.
PM: I'd really like to get the detail of this one right and come back to you with a direct answer about your circumstances, but can I just say - all power to your arm. This is a big challenge for so many families across Australia, many of whom are watching the program this morning.
KOCH: Okay, alright, we'll have the answer next week for you. Thanks for joining us.
DOYLE: That was Rebecca. Alright, let's go to Alex in Perth with a question for the Prime Minister. Alex, hi.
CALLER: Good morning, Mel.
PM: G'day, Alex.
CALLER: Yes, Prime Minister, my question is what are your views on same-sex marriage, and don't all Australians deserve equal rights?
PM: Well, first thing is that what we said prior to the last election - I'm just being upfront with you - is that marriage is between a man and a woman. That's what we said, and that's what we've committed to since the election.
The second point is this, though: what we are absolutely committed to is removing all forms of legal discrimination against same-sex couples from the law of Australia. What we've done, through the Attorney-General, is knock out more than 100 discriminatory provisions in various Commonwealth laws, like on social security and a whole range of other areas as well.
And the last thing is this: for same-sex couples, the big challenge that we're presented with is how do you have what is a fair, dignified, uniform arrangement for respectful relationship recognition across the country? We've been engaged in discussions with many State governments on this question, and that is what we are working towards at the moment.
I know that doesn't perfectly answer your question, but that is what we are doing on the discrimination question generally for same sex couples, secondly what we're seeking to do with respectful relationship recognition for same-sex couples, but our position on marriage is as I described before.
DOYLE: Alex, does that answer, sort of, satisfy?
CALLER: Yes, but, you know, some of those laws don't apply to the States. When it is going to be general across the board? Should not Federal law override State law?
PM: You raise a good question there. When I talked about removing discrimination from all of our statutes, that is, the Australian Government's statutes, the Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, has been very thorough on that. Took him more than a year, law by law, right across the statute book.
On the individual States, you are right - some have been quicker than others to do the same, and the progress in each individual State I cannot fully account for. But on that one I'll try and give you a quick, sort of, three-point update on the program next week about where the state of play is across the six States of Australia.
KOCH: Alright, Alex. More homework there. Let's go to Emily in New South Wales. Emily, what's your question for the PM?
CALLER: Good morning, Mr Prime Minister.
PM: Emily, is it?
KOCH: Yep.
CALLER: Yeah.
PM: Hi.
CALLER: My inquiry relates to the child support formula and its supporting legislation. There are two points: firstly, the legislative formula is quite complicated, so to summarise, it calculates the gross amount of child support payable but then this amount is payable from the parent's net income. How is that correct?
Secondly, the consideration given to a paying parent's relevant dependants is completely inaccurate. How can we get the Government to review this as a matter of urgency?
PM: Well, firstly, on the question of child support payments, you are absolutely right. This is a matter of huge controversy right across the country. A whole lot of families are going through a whole lot of angst on this, and as you know, there are many personal sensitivities associated with it, depending on which of the parents we are dealing with.
Secondly, on the question of the detailed formula that you described, can I say that the Minister is currently working through a whole series of long-term reform proposals on this. This is very complex. It's very hard, but once that's concluded I'd like to come back again - not next week - but once that process is concluded with any changes that we propose to make to the system.
On the individual calculations in your cases, I think it's far better, if you are willing for this to happen, for the Minister responsible to actually speak with you directly to make sure that your calculations are right.
KOCH: Oh, okay, so Emily, we'll put the Minister's, your details to the Minister, you'll get a call from him directly as part of that review process and certainly, when something's decided we'll have them all back on to explain, and get you back on, too. How's that?
CALLER: Yeah, that's perfect. Can I just ask, though, when do we expect, you know, a result? Is there an end date for this, that it will come to a conclusion?
KOCH: That's a good point. Prime Minister, have you got it, when this review is going to be up?
PM: Sure. This one, because it's so complex, and as Emily said, it affects so many families right across Australia, we've got to get it absolutely right, so our anticipation is any changes to the system would be made by year's end, so we're in February now. The Minister is working hard on this as we speak.
KOCH: Okay, we'll put it in our diary, Emily.
CALLER: But what happens, then, just one last thing, though, what happens then? Will it be applied in retrospect? Because some of these amounts are just grossly inflated and it really impacts your standard of living. So, you know, it's fine to take the time to calculate the amount, but will we be benefitted in the long run?
PM: Well, can I be very upfront and blunt with you, Emily? We are highly unlikely to do anything retrospectively. It would be for the future.
That's not saying that the Minister in question may not have further to say on the subject more generally, but retrospectivity is something we generally don't get engaged in. I know that's not the message you want to hear, but I just want to be upfront with you.
KOCH: Okay, alright, Emily, we'll keep you up to date with that. Prime Minister, just quickly, before you go, we did an interview with a new lawyer for Schapelle Corby a bit earlier this week. We promised everybody we would chase it up with you.
PM: Sure.
KOCH: What's the progress of trying - Schapelle Corby, apparently, is in a terrible physical and mental state. What's the progress in trying to help her get back to Australia to at least serve her time here? You've, sort of, expressed views of support in the past.
PM: As you can appreciate, Kochie, and I'll try to be very brief on this - complex discussions with the Indonesians about prisoner transfer agreements in general and any individual case in particular, I don't want to prejudice where that's all up to in terms of saying a whole lot of stuff on air. Nor do I want to give people false hope.
But can I just say, we are working on this and a whole series of other consular cases which are really hard ones with the Indonesians at present. The key to it, though, is to secure prisoner transfer arrangements in general, and we're working as hard as we can on that now.
And I am very mindful of the deep, traumatic, personal circumstances of individuals in prison in Indonesia and elsewhere at present. We have many people in similar circumstances around the world as well.
KOCH: So you haven't given up?
PM: No.
KOCH: Okay.
DOYLE: Okay, well, keep us up to date. Let us know when there's a moment that you can say something, and also, Rebecca and Alex's questions, we'll get some homework next week, so, thank you for your time this morning.
PM: Thanks for having me on the program.