PRIME MINISTER:
Now this week we are getting on with the job of delivering on our budget commitments. We delivered a budget that was fair. It delivered, as David Gonski recommended, needs-based funding for all Australian schools. Transparent, fair across-the-board, not discriminating between one sector and another. Utterly fair and transparent and needs-based, as Gonski recommended.
We will be asking House of Representatives to support that legislation so we can get on with delivering on that promise. We will also be asking the House to support what Australians overwhelmingly know is right and just; that is to fully fund the National Disability Insurance Scheme by increasing the Medicare levy by 0.5% from 2019.
Now, a few years ago, the Labor Party and indeed Bill Shorten asked Australians to contribute to the National Disability Insurance Scheme by a 0.5% increase in the Medicare Levy. It wasn't enough to fully fund it, of course, but the Coalition responded in a bipartisan way and supported it.
We are asking Labor to do the same again.
We know that a majority of Mr Shorten's Cabinet want to support it. Because they know, like the majority of Australians know, that we owe it to the parents of disabled children to be able to say to them, the money is there.
How can we credibly, compassionately, offer the promise of a National Disability Insurance Scheme and leave it unfunded as Labor did? We have sought to find the savings to fund it and we have not been able to secure their passage through the Senate. So now, we are preparing, proposing a 0.5% increase in the Medicare Levy which will fund the National Disability Insurance Scheme now and into the future. So we’ll be asking the House to support that and then in due course, the Senate.
This is a vital exercise in fairness.
This is a fair budget, delivering opportunity and security for all Australians.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister given the support in Labor for the Medicare levy, are you hopeful they might rethink their position? Would you write, or have you written to Bill Shorten to ask him for a meeting to reconsider his position?
PRIME MINISTER:
I will certainly be seeking for Labor to follow what was clearly the correct instincts of the majority of their shadow cabinet.
How can we - in good conscience - not fund the National Disability Insurance Scheme? Every Australian benefits from it, so it is fair that all Australians contribute to it.
JOURNALIST:
Just on the bank levy, Prime Minister. Can you categorically rule out, that it won’t be applied to foreign banks? Or is that a matter of negotiation with the crossbench?
PRIME MINISTER:
It does apply to foreign banks who have domestic liabilities in excess of the threshold. It’s that $100 billion of liability threshold, so as I understand it none of the foreign banks’ Australian subsidiaries come up to that level hence they are not covered. It’s the same reason why the regional banks are not covered either.
JOURNALIST:
But if you look at the banks’ global balance sheets, many of the biggest foreign banks in Australia would be covered by the levy. I guess that’s what Senator Xenophon’s point is, would you rethink that position?
PRIME MINISTER:
We are focused on delivering what we promised in the budget and the design as described by the Treasurer.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, one of the justifications of the bank levy is the competition measure. Can you just run us through how it is a competition measure, if the banks do as you have implored them to do, and not pass on the additional cost consumers and therefore there being no price signal in the market?
PRIME MINISTER:
Can I just say the bank levy is designed, its purpose is to raise the revenue we need to bring the budget back into balance and maintain our AAA rating, which as you’ve seen, has been confirmed by the ratings agencies. Had we not raised these additional revenue measures, I don't think many people imagine we would have been able to retain that AAA rating, which is so important for all Australians and the Government of course but in particular it is very important for the banks.
As far as the competition is concerned, the big banks do have an advantage, as has been recognised, widely recognised and if this levy does level the playing field a little bit, then that would be good, I think. A good outcome for consumers and for borrowers generally.
JOURNALIST:
PM, Westpac have issued a statement saying that their assessment of the levy is on an annualized basis, after the tax deductibility, they’ll pay about $260 million. If that’s the case, are you confident you’re going to raise the $1.5 billion a year as expected?
PRIME MINISTER:
I’m confident that the Treasury’s estimates are correct. We’ve relied on the forecasts from the Treasury. I haven't seen the latest paper you have presented from Westpac.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Turnbull, are you concerned about reports that Pauline Hanson’s Chief of Staff James Ashby discussed a plan to sell campaign material to the Party’s candidates at an inflated price?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, I’ve seen those reports. I don’t know whether they’re accurate or not. I think that Mr Ashby or Senator Hanson will no doubt have to respond to them.
JOURNALIST:
He said it was a brainstorming exercise?
PRIME MINISTER:
Plainly, it is vitally important that all of our electoral laws are strictly complied with. They go to the very heart of our democracy and it is very important that they’re always complied with.
JOURNALIST:
So should he be referred to the Electoral Commission, as Labor is proposing?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well again, I have seen some newspaper reports, I don't know the extent to which those reports are accurate. But in the first instance, Mr Ashby, or I should say the leader of the Pauline Hanson party, Senator Hanson herself, should respond to those. But I repeat, it is fundamental to our democracy that our electoral laws are complied with.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, do refugee advocates have a point when they say many of the 7,000 that the Immigration Minister might seek to deport, don’t have anywhere near enough legal resources, or the English language skills for that matter, to fill out the forms required for them to stay here?
PRIME MINISTER:
I have spoken with the Immigration Minister about this matter a number of times and including this morning. What we are talking about - as he has said - are about 7,500 people or thereabouts who have been in Australia for some years now. They are part of the 30,000 caseload that we inherited from the Labor Government when they totally mismanaged our border protection and we had, as you know, 50,000 unauthorised arrivals, 1200 deaths at sea. Our border protection regime was in chaos.
Now, we fixed that. We have stopped the boats. We have restored our sovereign right to determine who comes to Australia. But many of these people are still here, many of them have made applications for refugee status which has been determined or is in the process of being determined.
There are 7,500 or thereabouts individuals who have not, who've either not made an application despite having plenty of opportunities to do so, or who have not responded to requests for further information. So that is what the department is seeking from them. I think it is fair that they provide that information and if they are seeking asylum, set out the basis on which they’re doing so.
JOURNALIST:
Would you call them fake refugees?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look, the issue we face is ensuring that our generosity as a nation, that takes a very large number of refugees through our humanitarian program - we have one of the highest per capita intakes of refugees in the world - we have to ensure that it is not abused and that people who seek refugee status, do so legitimately and their cause, their claim is considered appropriately and determined. If they are not determined to be a refugee, then they should go home to their place of origin.
Now if people are here, if they are here and are not taking the opportunity to make that claim, then they should do so. They should get on with it and make that application.
Thank you all very much.
[ENDS]