E&OE................................
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I've called this news conference this afternoon to comment on the plan revealed in the Australian newspaper yesterday by Simon Crean that a future Labor Government would increase the superannuation guarantee charge from the maximum now legislated of 9% to 15%. If that were to occur up to 200,000 jobs would be at risk. It would be a direct addition to labour costs. It sits very oddly with the claim made in the same interview that Labor would reduce unemployment to 5%, and it represents another savage impost particularly on small business.
When we were elected in 1996 we said that we would honour the legislation put in place by the Keating Government. The Coalition if re-elected will not increase the charge beyond the existing 9%. Labor by contrast would slug the business community another 6%. It would not only be an additional burden particularly for small business, but it would cut the number of jobs up to 200,000 according to economic modelling normally employed with these things, coming on top of Labor's opposition to unfair dismissal changes, secondary boycott protection under the Trade Practices Act, and general commitment to wind back workplace relations reform under the present Government, all of which have been promised at the behest of the trade union movement. It shows just how unfriendly a future Labor Government would be to the business community, particularly to small firms.
JOURNALIST:
So do you believe the 9% is adequate?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes. We don't have any commitment to go beyond the 9%.
JOURNALIST:
Where will those 200,000 jobs come from?
PRIME MINISTER:
They could be right across the board. I mean economists say that a 1% addition to labour costs has a half a per cent impact on employment growth. Even applying that figure conservatively, given Mr Crean's promise, it represents quite a threat to employment growth and incredibly enough in the same jumbled interview he says that a future Labor Government would have an unemployment target of 5%. Like so many of the other promises made in a quite remarkable interview, which is full of internal contradictions, that simply doesn't add up.
JOURNALIST:
Would you reduce it?
PRIME MINISTER:
No. We promised when we came to government that we would honour the legislation put in place by the former government. And the former government legislated to a maximum of 9%. We don't favour going any further than that. We think that is a burden enough for the business community, particularly small firms. We have other provisions encouraging people to make their own arrangements for superannuation. We are not in favour of going above the 9%.
JOURNALIST:
Labor's always said the next election will be won or lost on economic management. So what do you think this says about their economic management policies so far?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I found Mr Crean's interview yesterday bizarre and contradictory and certainly the interview of somebody who is still driven by his trade union roots.
JOURNALIST:
Can I just ask you about the Sunday program just in relation to an abattoir business in Victoria apparently involved in some union busting techniques. I guess people think of the stevedores immediately. Do you see any relation there at all, any correlation?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't know anything about it. I didn't see the program.
JOURNALIST:
Well okay. It was about..
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm not going to comment on something I didn't see.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister are you disappointed with the Democrats' ballot?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's a matter for the Democrats.
JOURNALIST:
But if you're working with the leader of an opposition party..
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'll deal with whoever's the leader of the Australian Democrats. People have got to be judged on how they deal with particular issues not on their general political rhetoric. I'll just wait and see. I'll deal with the new leadership team. I congratulate them. I also record my respect for what Meg Lees did as leader of the Australian Democrats. History will record that she did the right thing by Australia in backing taxation reform. This country needed taxation reform. This country will be better for taxation reform and in the medium to longer term the benefits of that taxation reform will be apparent to everybody and Meg Lees is to be thanked for putting Australia's interests ahead of other interests.
[Ends]