COX:
The Prime Minister John Howard is with me. Have you jettisoned Tasmania from your reelection chances?
PRIME MINISTER:
No. I';ll come to Mr Lennon in a minute, but can I just make the general observation#8230; I';ll come to his specific complaints in a minute, but Tasmanians, like all other Australians, have families. Australians who live in Tasmania pay taxes, Australians who live in Tasmania need aged care facilities, Australians who live in Tasmania are interested in defence and intelligence services, and all of the benefits and changes that were announced last night by the Treasurer are as much beneficial, equally beneficial, to people living in Tasmania as they are to the rest of the country. And this idea that in some way you measure a budget by particular measures which are promoted by an individual State Premier, as distinct from the generality of benefits that flow to Australians living in different parts of the country, is very narrow and imprecise. But having said that, I point out to Mr Lennon that the Treasurer and the Deputy Prime Minister have made it very clear that the Auslink plan, the White Paper on transport issues, is going to be released in June and more details, including I imagine by illustration the state break ups, will be made available. That was always being said. And I can assure the people of Tasmania who are listening to me that Tasmania will be very fairly treated. And he talks about their payments being cut. One of the things that was revealed by the Budget last night was that every single state, including Tasmania, is significantly better off as a result of the sharing of the GST revenue than it would have been if the old revenue sharing arrangements had continued. And I say this in full knowledge that every single Labor Government in and around Australia opposed the introduction of the GST, as did Federal Labor, yet Mr Lennon';s government is a beneficiary and all of the other governments of the states of Australia, and some of them to huge extents, and Tasmania is better off as a result of the GST. So I can assure your listeners that in no way will this Budget disadvantage Tasmania, and like Australians living in all other parts of the country, Tasmanian families will benefit, Tasmanian taxpayers will benefit, Tasmanians wanting services will benefit.
COX:
Can I ask you about the taxpayers. With those tax bracket adjustments, as Mr Lennon pointed out this morning, and we';ve heard as well from the non-government sector, Tasmania has the lowest paid workers in the country and the figure that has been put on the number of workers who will miss out on those tax bracket adjustments in Tasmania is 60 per cent of wage earners. How will they benefit then from this Budget?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well can I make the#8230; it is constitutionally prohibited that there be differential tax rates throughout Australia. So I just make it plain#8230;
COX:
No one is suggesting that. With so many lower#8230;
PRIME MINISTER:
Well could I please finish? It is constitutionally prohibited. So any suggestion that you can have differential tax rates is absurd. All taxpayers who have got children benefit, all of them, irrespective of what level they are. Unless you are a very high income earner, you benefit from the family benefits to come out of the Budget. It is true that we have decided to place a particular emphasis in our tax cuts on those people who might bump into a higher tax bracket, even though they';re earning an income that nobody regards as a high income. $52,000 is not a high income, and yet under the present scales it';s the point at which you start paying 47 cents in the dollar. If you';re a part-time worker#8230; many of the low income earners that are referred to are in fact part-time workers. Many of them are retired people who have tax arrangements that were brought in three years ago by this Government that have effectively relieved about the first $20,000 of their income. So when you look at that, you look at the break up of the people who are below the $52,000, you begin to see a pattern where clearly we have targeted the tax cut, because we think it';s bad for incentive and it sends the wrong signal to hardworking Australians wherever they might live #8211; Tasmania or Sydney, wherever #8211; to have a situation where if you do a bit of extra overtime and you go over $52,000, you start losing 42 cents in the dollar.
COX:
You would appreciate that with the lowest paid workers in the country, 60 per cent of Tasmanian workers will miss out on those income tax changes. It';s not discrimination. I';m not saying it';s discrimination.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, no I don';t, I don';t#8230; well it depends you see. That';s not#8230; I mean you';ve got to look at their tax benefits as well, their family benefits I';m sorry. And if you do that, I';m sure that that figure you';re talking about falls. But I';m not pretending that the tax cuts apply to every single taxpayer. We';re not arguing that. What we are arguing is that in the overall scheme of things, it was highly beneficial to make sure that people earning what can';t be regarded as high incomes did not go into unacceptably high tax brackets. It is not acceptable if you want a modern, initiative driven, incentive driven Australian society, to have somebody who is earning $52,000 a year paying 42 cents in the dollar on some of that income. Now that';s the philosophy behind it, and I think it';s a very good philosophy and it';s a philosophy for the future and not a philosophy of the past.
COX:
The passenger freight#8230; the passenger vehicle equalisation scheme has been capped for the Sydney to Devonport route at $8 million a year and there is a provision there that it is not to be extended to any new routes. Is this the thin edge of the wedge for the passenger vehicle equalisation scheme?
PRIME MINISTER:
Certainly not. What, for its abolition?
COX:
Yes, it hasn';t been capped before has it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look certainly there';s no suggestion of that, and I want to give an assurance it won';t be.
COX:
So what happens then once it reaches $8 million?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I';m sure that commonsense will prevail and it certainly won';t#8230; I can make it sure, there is no way we';re going to cut that, and we';re certainly going to make certain that it';s kept at a sensible level.
COX:
Isn';t putting a cap on it though a cut by another name?
PRIME MINISTER:
No, not if you haven';t reached it.
COX:
What if you do reach it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well you';ll find the Government is very generous.
COX:
There is a provision there for some negotiation?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don';t know about a provision#8230; I am just telling you now we are not going to whittle this benefit away, because it has been hugely beneficial.
COX:
Alright, can I tell you, and I';m sure you';ve heard this from other presenters around the country, that we';ve had a number of calls this morning from aged pensioners who say they have completely missed out on this Budget. Are they right?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there are no new measures beyond the following: many older Australians want improved aged care facilities, and we';re putting $2.2 billion into that. Many older Australians are carers, many of them, and we have a number of special new measures for them including a liberalisation of the carer payment #8211; a delivery of at least, in cooperation with the states, of four weeks respite care for carers over 70, and at least two weeks for those between 65 and 70. And also one off payments to carers out of this year';s Budget to the tune of about $255 million. Now that';s not all pensioners, but I';m making the point that in addition to of course maintaining the double guarantee of the automatic indexation of pensions and them being at least 25 per cent of male total average weekly earnings, we have those additional measures for those categories of people who may be either carers or wanting aged care facilities.
COX:
Alright, we';re just about out of time Prime Minister, but a couple of suggestions as well that sole parents are the biggest losers in this Budget. Is that right?
PRIME MINISTER:
How can that be?
COX:
They say there was no special provision for them and that the families package is for two parent families.
PRIME MINISTER:
No well that';s not right. The Family Tax Benefit A goes to the sole parent. I mean that';s a ridiculous proposition to say that they have missed out. That is just#8230; no, I';m sorry, that is just not right. I mean they get the payment and in fact the family tax benefit arrangements that were brought in with the new tax system, according to most analysis, ended up delivering relatively more benefits to sole parents than to any other family formation. There is nothing in this that discriminates against sole parents. That';s just a catchcry that is not based on the reality of what is in the Budget. I don';t know what the basis of that is, and it';s not correct.
COX:
We';ll have to discuss that and other issues further next time we have you for talkback. But just very quickly, every time you';re on I offer you this opportunity as a good host Prime Minister, to tell us when the election will be. The suggestion now is the 14th of August, the day after the Olympics Opening Ceremony. How do you like that one?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well it';s an interesting suggestion, but I don';t know when it';s going to be. I haven';t made up my mind.
COX:
It would keep it away from the Bledisloe Cup.
PRIME MINISTER:
And I won';t be making up my mind about when the election is for some time. It will have to be I guess in the second half of this year because that';s when it';s due, but exactly when I don';t know.
COX:
I';m sure you';ll let me know first. Thanks for your time this morning.
PRIME MINISTER:
Okay.
[ends]