JONES:
Prime Minister, good morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Good morning Alan.
JONES:
Prime Minister, you're earning your keep. They've got you working, haven't they?
PRIME MINISTER:
They have got me working, but that's what I'm paid to do.
JONES:
I must say, you must feel quite comfortable with the knowledge that there would be few Governments anywhere in the world who could argue they have paid for their defence commitment, paid for terrorist response, faced a drought and a bushfire, balanced the books and provided a tax cut.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we are pleased about that, but we're not complacent. We realise that as soon as you bring down one Budget, in a way you start working towards the one in a year's time. But the country is in a solid financial and economic position and that is what, after all, the public wants. They want the Government to provide security, economic security, and national security so that they can get on with their own lives.
JONES:
You're dead right about that. Just on the tax cut, and I don't want to go into the detail about it, I'll just ask you two questions. Is $4 a week for the average bloke, a tax cut, you would note today some people have got their tongue in the cheek to say 10 ways to spend it - you could lose it in the wash or you could buy two scratchies and try to double your money, or give it to a busker or buy a schooner and tip the barmaid 80 cents - $4 for the average bloke is not a lot, is it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Alan, we'd like it to be more but it's better than nothing. And our principle is that if you have paid off your debt, or damn near paid off your debt, which we have, and you have a surplus, you have no right to keep more than the surplus you need. And we therefore take the view that when you've done all of these things, you've met your priority areas of spending like defence and health and so forth, you should then give what is over back to the people who own it - that is the Australian taxpayers.
JONES:
Okay, you're a Sydney bloke though. Born and bred here. $60,000 - earning $60,000 in Sydney - is not a lot of money. And that fellow now at $62,501 pays 47 cents in the dollar...
PRIME MINISTER:
If we've had had our way after the 1998 election and not been obstructed by the Labor Party and the Democrats in the Senate, that figure would at least have been 75 or 77,500 dollars.
JONES:
How much of your Budget in the last... I mean there are aspects of the last Budget and the Budget before that haven't yet been approved.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh yes, yes. The very modest increases in relation to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme - they haven't been approved. And whilst that Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is going to continue, it's not going to fall over tomorrow, as the population gets older and the strain on it increases, unless we have a proper basis of funding it, in the years ahead some people are going to start missing out on things they should otherwise have. So it's very short-sighted of the Labor Party and the Democrats to block those sorts of changes, just as it's short-sighted of them to threaten to block the changes to higher education and also the improvements to Medicare that we announced a few weeks ago.
JONES:
Prime Minister, just talking about all of that, and health. I mean, are we becoming a nation of hypochondriacs. I see that in the Budget papers, the health budget for 95/96 is $18.5 billion. Your health budget announced last night is $31 billion - that's an increase of 65 per cent in health spending, yet the average bloke would think that the health care system is in some sort of mess. I mean, you've jacked up public hospital funding 30 per cent in five years, yet you go to public hospitals and the queues are a mile long. Are we becoming a nation of people who sort of race to the pill, race to the bottle or race to the doctor at the drop of the hat?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think some people are like that. Others are taking more preventative health measures. And we have tried particularly in the pharmaceutical benefits area to get a greater emphasis on lifestyle changes, on better diet and more exercise, and there will be a number of things that we continue to do through the... which are designed to get people to look after themselves more, especially when they are young so that they don't need to go to the doctor as much. I mean, exercise and preventative care is an infinitely better investment as far as health is concerned, in many cases than going to the doctor.
JONES:
PM, your higher education reform will be debated, and we won't cover all of that here now, for weeks ahead and most probably challenged in the Senate. It is valid to point out, is it not though, not withstanding the difficulties that students and parents will face in paying for the university degree, that there are millions of Australians who will never get inside a university gate, and three-quarters of the cost of every degree is being met by the taxpayer.
PRIME MINISTER:
Absolutely. Alan, 70 per cent of Australian young men and women who leave school do not go to university - 70 per cent.
JONES:
So they are being taxed...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well their parents and they, when they go into the workforce, are being taxed to provide the bulk, not all, but the bulk of the cost of educating somebody at university. We are still retaining of course and increasing the funded places, but we're providing universities with greater opportunities to take full fee paying students, and we are providing universities with greater flexibility. I acknowledge that there will be an increased capacity, if the market bears it and if people support it, to charge fees, some higher fees and fees at different levels for different courses. But what we've got to do is provide a more competitive environment for our universities, and there will still be a large number of funded HECS places available. You won't have to begin repaying your HECS debt until you earn $30,000 a year. That will mean a very large number of people who will go to a university with the benefit of HECS, they will go perhaps into the part-time workforce and it will be some time before they begin paying it back. I think it's a very balanced package. I agree with you. We've got to keep reminding ourselves that 70 per cent of girls and boys who leave school do not go on to university, and yet they through their taxes pay for the people who do.
JONES:
PM, the States will be clamouring to get their hands on the $30.5 billion in GST revenue. Now, there has been a phenomenal growth in consumption tax revenues since it's introduction - about 10 per cent [inaudible] - and this is bound to continue next year. I see the Budget talks about $31.7 billion - that will all go to the States.
PRIME MINISTER:
Every last cent of it goes to the States.
JONES:
When then, if this revenue keeps on burgeoning, when can the battlers in the States expect some stamp duty relief or land tax relief and that sort of relief that was guaranteed, that they seem to feel they're paying twice?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well they've really got to ask, in the case of New South Wales and I'm talking to New South Wales listeners, they've got to ask Mr Carr that. And all around the country they've got to ask their Premiers that. The whole design of the GST was to guarantee a growth tax for the States so that they could adequately fund the police, the public hospitals, the Government schools and all the basic services for which States are responsible. Now, the GST is working very well. The revenue stream is stronger even than we anticipated. The States have no excuse for not spending adequately in these areas, and they have money over in many cases to provide stamp duty relief. I mean, heavens above, in Sydney they're collecting a motza from stamp duty because the value of properties is rising so much.
JONES:
Yes. PM, I noticed that the... and this is a rather complicated issue in a way, the debt to GDP ratio was quoted by the Treasurer as being 4 per cent. I mean basically that means that, you know, for $96 of wealth you've got $4 of debt. Is there room here now with this - you talked about the viable economy - to start doing some things that you actually sidestepped last night. I mean you didn't do anything about the question of maternity leave. There was nothing about watering Australia, nothing about paying back the Federal Government's $83 billion liability for unfunded superannuation. And if the infrastructure program in the country is wound back or is decaying, whether it be roads or schools or hospitals or watering Australia, shouldn't we be funding those things now before it gets too late to do it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have begun the process of doing something about watering Australia, and I hope to make more progress on that front when I next meet the Premiers, and we do need the cooperation of States on this because legal rights over water are controlled by the States, not by the Commonwealth. I think you make a valid point about the need to build carefully for the future in those infrastructure areas. As far as maternity leave is concerned, well it is an issue that remains on the table. I'm not opposed in principle, but it's a question of always having a balanced approach in relation to family benefits, and there is quite a bit in... if you look below the fine print for part-time working women, they are the greatest beneficiaries out of last night's tax changes because people on incomes between about $20,000 and $27,000 - and that picks up a very, very large number of part-time workers, particularly women in the Australian community - they in absolute, in dollar terms get the largest tax cuts of the lot.
JONES:
PM, 162,000 primary carers across Australia responsible for the 24 hour care of someone, they have no respite, 23 disabled people Australia-wide waiting for appropriate accommodation. In our surpluses and our generous economic position that we're in, isn't there money for them?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we have... I mean I don't know whether you've seen the disability package.
JONES:
Yeah, that's for employment though.
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes. Well we've also...
JONES:
We're talking about accommodation.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the accommodation, there are no... I understand that there are no additional provisions.
JONES:
No, that's right.
PRIME MINISTER:
We have provided for a lot of additional places in education...
JONES:
I understand that.
PRIME MINISTER:
... for handicapped children.
JONES:
I'm talking about accommodation. This is 23,000 disabled people living with families. They are elderly parents and they've got nowhere to be accommodated. Still looking for places for them. Or 162,000 people Australia-wide who have a person in their family, they're relieving the taxpayer because they're looking after them, but they get no respite whatsoever. There is no respite care for them. It's a lot of people.
PRIME MINISTER:
I don't know that I can agree there is no respite care.
JONES:
[inaudible] there aren't.
PRIME MINISTER:
I'd have to agree with you, there could be enhancements in that area.
JONES:
PM, just finally because you've got to go and we've got to go, there are three variables in all of this of course I suppose today. One is what the Senate are going to do. Secondly, one aspect you can't control - what the Labor Party are going to do with their leader. And of course the third one that all Australians are interested in - what is the Prime Minister going to do about his leadership, does he continue on presiding over the country in these circumstances, that you say you're wanting to create an environment where people feel comfortable, productivity is good and the economy is in sound shape. What can they expect of their Prime Minister for the next Budget? Has Peter Costello brought down his last?
PRIME MINISTER:
My answer to that is Alan, I'll always do the right thing by the Australian people.
JONES:
You're never normally so evasive Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
No. I will always try and do the right thing by the Australian people.
JONES:
And just one last thing since I have got 30 seconds. You did say in the last year's Budget the Government would collect $98.4 million from the Ansett levy. Now, those collections are spiralling. Tourism is in disarray. Would you consider scrapping the levy?
PRIME MINISTER:
Alan, we want to get rid of that levy as soon as possible. Our problem is that we're waiting on the outcome of a court case before we know the full extent of our liability, and therefore the extent to which the levy must be maintained. As soon as that result is known or can be reasonably predicted, and that's always hard with the law, we'll get rid of it.
JONES:
Good on you. Good to talk to you and thank you for your time.
PRIME MINISTER:
Thank you. Bye bye.
[ends]