Month: March 2025

Source: Australian National Party

Source: New South Wales Community and Justice

Murder Investigation Underway

Saturday, 22 March 2025 – 2:49 pm.

Police are continuing to investigate the circumstances of an incident at Dickson Street, Glenorchy on 11 March where a man sustained a serious head injury.
“Sadly, police can advise the man has died earlier today in the Royal Hobart Hospital, and our thoughts are with the young man’s family and friends,” said Detective Acting Inspector Nicholas Bowden, from Glenorchy CIB.
The police investigation is now a murder inquiry.
Emergency services were called to the scene about 11.30pm on 11 March, arriving to find a 19-year-old man unconscious and non-responsive outside a property.
“The young man has received a stab wound to the head.  A police investigation is ongoing into the circumstances surrounding this incident,” he said.
“Detectives are following a specific line of inquiry.  Investigations indicate that the person or people responsible and the victim knew each other, and that this was an isolated incident.
“If anyone has any information in relation about this matter, I ask them to come forward.
“In particular, if anyone saw a small four door sedan, possibly silver in colour, with several occupants, in the area of Dickson Street at the time, please contact Police.  We are particularly interested in dash cam or other CCTV vision.”
Information can be provided to direct to Glenorchy CIB on 131 444 or anonymously through Crime Stoppers Tasmania at crimestopperstas.com.au or on 1800 333 000 – quote OR769213.

Source: New South Wales Community and Justice

Closing of 19th Australasian Police & Emergency Services Games

Saturday, 22 March 2025 – 2:00 pm.

Emergency service workers and volunteers will today mark the closing of the 19th Australasian Police & Emergency Services Games.
Tasmania Police Assistant Commissioner Rob Blackwood said the games had brought together not just police, fire, ambulance and SES, but also those emergency staff that work in customs, corrections, royal lifesaving, environment and the coast guard.
“Throughout the week we have seen participants enjoying both friendship and sportsmanship, with more than 2,000 competitors in over 50 individual sporting events and over 5,000 medals being presented to our competitors.” he said.
“It was extraordinary to see everyone come together to support one another while also enjoying some healthy competition. Supporting the mental and physical health of police officers, as well as other emergency services is extremely important, and we hope this year every participant is walking away with great memories.”
“This year more than 200 volunteers also donated their time to make the games possible and I’d like to take the opportunity to thank them, as well as all of the sponsors, clubs and venues who are hosting the events.”

Source: New South Wales Community and Justice

Firearms Incident in Lutana

Saturday, 22 March 2025 – 9:06 am.

Around 9:30pm on Friday 21 March 2025 police were notified that a firearm was discharged into a residential address on Derwent Park Road, Lutana causing damage to a window.
Several people were inside the property, thankfully, no one was injured.
A crime scene was declared for the purpose of forensic examination.
Witnesses observed a silver hatch style vehicle leaving the area through Goodwood.
The incident appears targeted and there is no suggestion of a risk to the wider community.
If you were in the area around the time and witnessed suspicious activity or have dash cam or CCTV footage of the silver vehicle, please phone 131 444 or contact Crime Stoppers Tasmania on 1800 333 000 or online at crimestopperstas.com.au.
Information can be provided anonymously. Please quote Offence Report 770152.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Peter Stefanovic:

A year‑long ACCC investigation into the power of Coles and Woolies has revealed that they are some of the most profitable retailers in the world, but no findings regarding price gouging.

Joining us live now is the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers. Treasurer, thanks for your time this morning. So let’s start off with the government response to this.

Jim Chalmers:

Good morning, Pete. This is an important piece of work from the ACCC. We commissioned this work, and we’re pleased to see it released, and what it shows is what we need when it comes to supermarkets is more scrutiny, more information and more competition, and we are already acting on each of those fronts.

We are cracking down on the supermarkets because we don’t want to see the supermarkets treat Australians like mugs. We know that a big part of the pressure that people feel is at the checkout, so we are keeping the supermarkets in check, checkout, and this ACCC report will help us as we continue to do that.

Stefanovic:

How exactly are you keeping them in check, because as they say, it’s an oligopoly?

Chalmers:

This report covers a 5‑year period, it says that these price rises beginning in 2021, so covering the life of 2 governments, it says that these price rises started to slow in 2024, which is consistent with what we’re seeing with the inflation figures. Food inflation’s come down from 5.9 per cent when we came to office to 3 per cent now, so slower.

But people are still under pressure, and so whether it’s our Budget next week, our government more broadly, the big focus is on the cost of living, and cracking down on the supermarkets is part of that.

We’ve made the Food and Grocery Code mandatory, we have empowered and funded the ACCC to apply more scrutiny, we’re working with the states on planning and zoning to make it easier for new competitors to enter the market. We’re funding CHOICE, we’re doing a whole bunch of things, we’re reforming the unit pricing code, which is about shrinkflation which drives people absolutely nuts.

We’re doing about half a dozen really important things, consistent with the recommendations of the report today. We are cracking down on the supermarkets. We do want to make sure we get a fair go for farmers and families, and that’s what all of our efforts on supermarkets and cost of living more broadly are all about.

Stefanovic:

Right. That $3 million education campaign though, what’s that actually going to do to help consumers and businesses?

Chalmers:

First of all, that’s not all we’re doing. We funded the ACCC an extra $30 million. The $2.9 million we’re announcing today is all about educating and helping suppliers, so effectively farmers and their peak organisations to train up their people to get a better deal when they’re negotiating with the supermarkets.

Stefanovic:

But the supermarkets –

Chalmers:

And the Food and Grocery Code –

Stefanovic:

– will just disregard that, won’t they, because they’re just too powerful.

Chalmers:

They’re engaged in a negotiation, and we want to tool up and beef up the skills and abilities of the people doing the negotiating. But that’s not all we’re doing on this front. Making the Food and Grocery Code mandatory was all about a fair go for farmers and families as well.

There are a range of things that we are doing. The recommendations released by the ACCC, we welcome them, we accept all of them in principle, we’re acting on a range of them already, because we do acknowledge that we need to apply more competitive pressure in the supermarket sector. We’re doing that, but the ACCC will inform the work that happens from here as well.

Stefanovic:

Okay, just – ‘cause we’re almost out of time, but I want to get you on this story this morning about big tech now pushing Donald Trump to target Australia over our laws on social media and the digital economy. They claim these laws are causing them to sacrifice revenue. What’s the government’s response to this, this morning?

Chalmers:

First of all, it’s not surprising that the tech giants would have that view, but our job, and we embrace this, is to make decisions in Australia’s national interest, to protect kids online – for example – or to make sure that there’s a level playing field in our media with our media organisations, so those are our motivations there.

We’re not surprised that from time to time the tech giants will have different views about that. But our job is to implement the best set of arrangements that we can to look after Australians online.

Stefanovic:

Right. I mean we also saw this with big pharma this week, but when it comes to big tech, I mean Tump’s got Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos, all in his corner. I mean what sort of a chance do we have against that?

Chalmers:

I’m obviously not privy to the conversations that they have with President Trump from time to time, it’s self‑evident that they’re very close with the US Administration. Our focus and our job is to make our case in the US, as we have been doing, but to also make sure that we continue to make the best decisions that we can for Australia.

I think a lot of people around the country – not just parents, but including parents – they want to make sure that there are appropriate protections for people online. The tech giants won’t always like that, they won’t always agree with that, but we’ve got to do that job on behalf of the people of Australia, and there will be different views about how we go about that as we roll it out.

Stefanovic:

All right. Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, thanks as always for your time.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Patricia Karvelas:

For more on this, I want to bring in the Assistant Minister for Competition, Andrew Leigh. Andrew Leigh, lovely to speak to you.

Andrew Leigh:

Likewise, Patricia. Thanks for having me on.

Karvelas:

Now, a lot of Australians would probably fear – perhaps a little disappointed – that the report doesn’t suggest price gouging has occurred given people’s lived experience and worry that business as usual for the big 2 will occur after this. Is that a fair assessment?

Leigh:

Well, the report’s pretty harsh on the majors. I don’t think they’ll like it, but I think a lot of Australians will. It shows very clearly that the big supermarkets are among the biggest in the world and that they have increased their market share in the 17 years since we last had a supermarket report.

It shows too, that there’s a bit of high‑low pricing going on where the majors take it in turns to put items on special with a sort of seesaw pattern, which looks pretty suspicious to me.

The report makes very clear that the government’s approach of a mandatory Food and Grocery Code has been the right one, that we are on the right track with working with the states and territories on planning and zoning, and that we need to continue our action in tackling shrinkflation where the majors have become Olympic champions.

Karvelas:

The report says it’s not a duopoly, it’s an oligopoly. But Coles and Woolworths are among the most profitable supermarkets in the world. Does it concern you that they are that profitable? Does that demonstrate something about what’s going on here?

Leigh:

Absolutely, Patricia. I want families to get a fairer deal at the checkout, and I want farmers to get a fair deal at the farm gate. And that’s why we’ve got the mandatory Food and Grocery Code, the work we’re doing on shrinkflation, but also why we fund CHOICE to do quarterly grocery price monitoring, so people can see where they’re getting the very best deal.

And it’s why we’re providing $3 million for training for suppliers, particularly those fresh produce suppliers so they can take advantage of Labor’s new mandatory supermarket code when it comes into effect next month.

Karvelas:

The ACCC did find that both Coles and Woolworths have a limited incentive to be competitive on prices, so without serious intervention or a serious kind of a big stick – something that they feel fear or fearful about, how does that actually change?

Leigh:

Yeah, I think that’s a really astute question Patricia. We’ve seen over the course of the last 17 years the rise of Aldi, but we’ve also seen the fall in Metcash. And as a result, we’ve seen the big 2 supermarkets actually increase their combined market share.

What the ACCC recommends is we look hard at planning and zoning in order to create the opportunity for a new player if it was to come in to be able to start up. People will remember Kaufland made an attempt to enter the Australian market, and that would have brought welcome competition. We also have Costco and Amazon as potential competitors, and the report makes clear that we need the right competition settings to allow new competitors to pressure the majors in order to keep prices as low as possible.

Karvelas:

The regulator has also recommended the supermarkets provide more transparency in their negotiations with fresh produce suppliers. They found that there’s a bargaining imbalance, right? That’s essentially what their conclusion was. So, what does transparency there look like? Like, how would transparency be achieved?

Leigh:

Yeah, so what’s going on Patricia is that the fresh food suppliers are required to sign an annual contract, but then week to week they’re engaging in auctions around what the prices will be. And the ACCC has said that there ought to be price transparency as to what the prices are that come out of those auctions.

And so farmers can say ‘well, I’m not getting a great deal from Coles, I’m going to go to Aldi or to Woollies’. That gives them greater power, and alongside the additional funding for supplier training and the new anonymous complaints process they’ll be able to make through the ACCC under Labor’s new mandatory supermarket code, that will help tilt the scales in favour of suppliers. Because let’s be honest, for too long, the supermarkets have been stacking the shelves in their favour.

Karvelas:

The ACCC said it had been unable to stack up claims that the big 2 were sitting on parcels of land to keep out competition. That’s been talked about as land banking. So, are you certain that they’re not doing this?

Leigh:

There’s a lot of sites that are being held. I think the draft report referred to about 100 sites which are being held, and so that’s certainly something we need to keep an eye on. And that’s why we’ve set up this work with the states and territories through getting National Competition Policy back on track.

The Commonwealth has put aside $900 million into a productivity fund, which goes to things like ensuring that states and territories have competition front of mind when they’re doing planning and zoning.

That hasn’t always been the case, as you know Patricia. But getting a competition lens across decisions like this makes sure that consumers get the best deal. We’re holding the supermarkets in check so Australians get the best deal at the checkout.

Karvelas:

Now, this report has landed, obviously, at the 11th hour before an election so we’re not going to get, sort of law reform before the election. There are very different policies being offered by you and the Coalition on this.

David Littleproud, who is the Nationals leader and has really been pushing for divestiture powers, addressed this today and said that this is a report that’s been delivered that’s essentially politically palatable to you. I just want you to respond to that criticism that this is a report that essentially lets the government off the hook.

Leigh:

Well, that’s a shocking slur on the independent ACCC which worked hard on this report. David Littleproud’s, of course spitting in the dummy. Because this report has found what every other serious competition report has found. The Harper Review, the Hilmer Review, the Dawson Review, the Emerson Review – none of them recommended divestiture powers, and this report does not either.

The difference between David Littleproud and Labor is we’re interested in solutions that work. He’s interested in slogans. The mandatory supermarket code which Labor put in place was voted against by the Liberals and Nationals.

David Littleproud and his mates set up a voluntary toothless code of conduct and that’s what they wanted to continue. It took Labor to put in place a code with multi‑million dollar penalties over the votes of the Liberals and Nationals.

Karvelas:

He says that without that big stick and without the sort of fear of divestiture that we’re not going to see big change. Could he have a point?

Leigh:

He’s all hat and no cattle. The fact is the divestiture powers are very rarely used around the rest of the world, and a big stick that sits in the shed isn’t going to have very much impact on what you do.

Really, we’re focused here on the measures that will make a difference for Australians. Measures which will help achieve results, like getting food inflation down to about half what it was when we came into office. Food inflation was running at 5.2 per cent when we took office Patricia. We’ve managed to get that down quite considerably.

For the first time in a very long time, we’ve managed to get these additional powers for suppliers, which they just didn’t have under the Liberals and Nationals who took a hands off, laissez faire approach to this. It’s taken Labor to step on the side of the farmers and the side of the families to get both a better deal.

Karvelas:

I want to ask you just a couple of other questions because we’ve got a Budget coming and you have an economic hat, not a sort of farmer’s hat but an economic hat after your last hat comment, I want to talk about structural reform of the budget.

Every day there’s another spending announcement, and some of the spending may be very worthy. So I don’t want to have a debate about whether the spending is worthy or not, because I think cheaper medicines people would probably want delivered. But there seems to be no strategy for paying for it. Are we going to see that strategy on Tuesday?

Leigh:

No look, I think that’s really unfair on Jim, Katy and the team that have worked to put this Budget together. The deficit that you’ll see is significantly smaller than the deficit that we inherited from our predecessors. And that follows 2 surplus Budgets where we have made difficult decisions in order to get spending under control to crack down on the rorts and waste that we inherited from the Liberals and Nationals.

This is a Budget which is fiscally responsible, which aims to make investments for the future, which contains a big focus on dynamism and competition because we understand we need to get productivity going again.

Ultimately, it’s that economic growth in the economy Patricia which will allow us to work towards paying down debt. That’s the very best way of managing to grow the economy. And I know that a pro‑growth progressive like Jim Chalmers is always thinking about those issues.

Karvelas:

Sure, growth is very important – no one would dispute that. But you have to make some tough decisions. Are they being put off until after the election? I mean, I would ask this to any Coalition people too.

It seems to me that there is no serious discussion about the way that the budget looks in the years ahead. And we are clearly spending more than we’re taking in.

Leigh:

No, look, I don’t think that’s a fair critique. If you look at what we did in multinational taxation for example, no government has taken more action on multinational tax than ours. We closed the debt deduction loophole. We put in place a floor on global company tax. We’ve put in place transparency measures like country‑by‑country reporting.

All of this is aimed at increasing the tax take and making sure multinationals pay their fair share, which also has a competition benefit too because then Aussie small businesses aren’t going up against multinationals with one hand tied behind their backs. So, that’s been an area of serious tax reform for us.

Of course, changing the personal income tax cuts so every taxpayer got a tax cut, but within the same budget envelope was a key decision we took last year, opposed by the Liberals and Nationals but ultimately in the interest of the Australian people.

Karvelas:

Just finally, big tech have been lobbying the Trump administration to put tariffs on us for our approach to, you know, making them pay in our country. What’s your message to big tech? Are you prepared to take them on?

Leigh:

We certainly have been. The social media minimum age laws that were passed through last year were a marker of that. And the News Media Bargaining Code ensures that those platforms which benefit financially from great journalism make a financial contribution towards it.

You know, these are sensible measures which don’t seek to curtail the platforms that many of us use and benefit from, but which recognise that in a modern economy we need the rules to advance, to keep pace.

Karvelas:

Do you expect that big tech will, you know, some of these bosses –Elon Musk – there are others will insert themselves into our election campaign?

Leigh:

I certainly hope not. I think we ought to be running an election which is free of foreign interference and one which is a contest of ideas. Now of course Patricia, I hope that in every single election, you don’t always see it, but we need to remember that goal and that the Australian democracy really is an extraordinary creation. We’re great democratic innovators, and part of that democratic innovation is ensuring we can have a contest of true ideas and strong policies.

And, you know, I really hope the Liberals and Nationals actually start coming up with some of those policies, because I think it’s good for the nation when we have competing policy portfolios, not just a government with a big agenda and strong ideas against an opposition with hot air and a bunch of slogans.

Karvelas:

Andrew Leigh, lovely to speak to you. Thank you.

Leigh:

Likewise, thanks Patricia.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Ali Moore:

The big issue you might remember, that the government is making the code – the supermarket code – which deals with relationships with suppliers, mandatory. Dr Andrew Leigh is the Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury. Dr Leigh, welcome.

Andrew Leigh:

Thanks Ali, great to be back with you.

Moore:

The 20 recommendations from the ACCC. They go to things around providing us with information about package sizes, being more transparent with suppliers. You’ve got the code of conduct that you’re making mandatory. You’ve got the 2 bigger – the 2 big players in court over misleading conduct. But I guess beyond that is this just the bed that we’ve made and now we’ve got to lie in it?

Leigh:

I don’t think so Ali. I think we’re able to continue to take action against a significant duopoly whose profits are among the highest in the world and whose margins have been growing over the last 5 years.

This report really is a deep dive data analysis. They analyse over a billion prices and uncover some problematic practices, such as oscillating specials where a product will be on special in Coles one week and Woolies the next week. And that just keeps on going on and on for week after week.

What we’ve done is provided resources to fund CHOICE, to give shoppers more information about where to get the best deal. As you said, we’ve made the Food and Grocery Code mandatory with multi‑million‑dollar penalties. Unfortunately, the Liberals and Nationals voted against it, but our view was we needed to toughen that code, and today we’ve announced additional funding for supplier groups to get the training they need, particularly those fresh food suppliers who are really feeling the squeeze.

Moore:

I guess though Andrew Leigh, I found that curious. You’re putting $2.9 million, so let’s call it $3 million into helping those suppliers. And the wording is that will empower farmers to enforce their rights under the Food and Grocery Code.

It’s not a lot of money to cover a lot of suppliers, a lot of supplier agreements across the country, and the mere fact that you’re supplying it would imply that you are expecting the big players to fight their suppliers when they think it’s in their advantage to do so. So will there be more money where that’s coming from?

Leigh:

Well I mean, one way to think about it is that the big piece of reform we’ve done is taking a toothless voluntary code set up by the Liberals and Nationals and turned it into a mandatory code with multi‑million‑dollar penalties. That comes into effect next month.

And then as that’s coming into effect, our view is we want suppliers to take the very best advantage of it that they can. So this is $3 million directed towards those fresh food suppliers. And the ACCC says those suppliers feel a particular squeeze because they’ll be required to sign up to annual contracts around volume, but then have these weekly price auctions with the notion that if they don’t supply to one of the majors, they end up having to take produce down to the markets and often get much lower returns for their hard work.

Moore:

But that didn’t actually answer the question. If you’ve given them $3 million, if it becomes a constant issue of the big players fighting suppliers, disputing what they take – you know, that they raise under the code, is there going to be more money to help them do that?

Leigh:

Well Ali, that’s why I’m putting it in the context. The big reform is the change in laws, which directly empowers the suppliers, a tougher Food and Grocery Code and an anonymous complaints process going through the competition watchdog to deal with the fact that many of these suppliers said they feared retaliation. And then, as the icing on the cake, we’ve got that additional training for the food and grocery suppliers.

We’re also making sure that we’re clamping down on shrinkflation. I mean, if shrinkflation was an Olympic sport, some supermarkets would be gold medallists. And so enforcing the Unit Pricing Code ensures that Australians are getting a fair deal at the checkout.

Moore:

You’re listening to the Assistant Minister for Competition, Dr Andrew Leigh. We’re talking about the supermarkets and the, well I guess the amount of market power that they have. No word from the ACCC, no recommendation around divestiture of stores – the Coalition is keen on that. That is something that you argue is not necessary and is not the answer?

Leigh:

Yeah, it hasn’t been recommended by any of the past competition reviews, not Hilmer, not Harper, not Dawson, not Emerson, and not this report. We’re focused on practical solutions that the experts say will make a difference. Divestiture isn’t in that list.

We’re very aware that there are shrinkflation, there’s sneaky prices, there’s unfair deals, and we’re tackling those head on to get a fair deal for families at the checkout as you go, and a fair go for farmers at the farm gate.

Moore:

Another issue if I may Andrew Leigh – to what extent are you worried about the tech companies? This has been in the headlines all day. Today, American tech companies are going to Trump arguing that that move by Australia to effectively tax the big tech players unless they fund domestic news content in this country. Tech companies in the US are saying, you know, that’s a non‑tariff barrier if you like, and Trump should act. How worried are you that Trump will act?

Leigh:

Oh well obviously the new US administration is taking a different approach on a range of issues. But on this one we have a system in place which funds quality journalism, which has been operating for a number of years now, that is not aimed at any particular country. It’s an approach which sees journalism funded through the forms which are making significant money through the journalism that they are linked to.

Moore:

Can I ask you another question without notice Dr Leigh, which may be a little short? We’ve just seen that Infrastructure Australia has put out its assessment of the Suburban Rail Loop, which is a massive project here in Victoria, and it’s going to rely for at least a third of the money required to come from the federal government. You’ve so far allocated $2 billion to go into preliminary works. Further funding is dependent on this review. Have you had a chance to catch up with that?

Leigh:

I haven’t. That’s been squarely in the remit of my colleague, Catherine King who’s both a Victorian and the Infrastructure Minister so I’ll leave the specifics of that to her.

But I know we’ve made record investments in infrastructure, and as somebody who comes to Melbourne often, I certainly will look forward to being able to catch the train from the airport soon.

Moore:

Gosh,don’t hold your breath. I mean, even with that announcement this week Dr Leigh, you would know that there was an agreement to sort of discuss an agreement, and we’re not going to get it by 2033 at the earliest? Do you think you’ll still be coming to Melbourne then?

Leigh:

I certainly hope so Ali, and you know, the key is to get this thing moving. So, I’ll be keen to use it as soon as it’s in place.

Moore:

You and many others I’m sure Dr Andrew Leigh, thank you.

Leigh:

Thanks Ali.

Ali Moore:

The Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury there.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Ashleigh Raper:

Hello Treasurer, and welcome.

Jim Chalmers:

Thanks very much Ash.

Raper:

Is this the Budget you didn’t want to do?

Chalmers:

I’m looking forward to delivering a Budget on Tuesday night. It’s a Budget which is all about the cost of living, but also making sure our economy is more resilient in the face of all this global economic uncertainty and one way that we can build the future of our economy and our country.

So, I’m looking forward to handing it down. I know that cost‑of‑living pressures are front of mind for most Australians and cost of living will be front and centre in the Budget.

Raper:

So, in this Budget, you are promising to extend the energy bill rebate before the end of the year. So, an extra $150 off bills. What’s the rationale behind it? How did you arrive at the extra 6 months?

Chalmers:

The broader rationale is that even with the progress that we’ve made together as Australians on inflation, we know that people are still under pressure so we’re helping where we responsibly can. Strengthening Medicare, because more bulk billing means less pressure on families making medicines cheaper, as the Prime Minister announced in the last few days.

But also extending these energy bill rebates, we know that they have played an important role in taking some of the edge off cost‑of‑living pressures. This is more hip pocket help for households. It’s about recognising that even with all that progress on inflation, Australians are still under pressure and we’re responding to it.

Raper:

Is it a mistake for Labor to promise to lower electricity bills by $275 in the lead up to the last election? And has that plagued you and you’ve had to deal with that throughout this term?

Chalmers:

I’m not going to get into the political analysis of that. We’ve been working around the clock to ease cost‑of‑living pressures despite the opposition of the Liberal and National parties.

Raper:

But do you concede it’s a broken promise, essentially?

Chalmers:

We’ve been working around the clock to take pressure off household energy bills. You asked me about $275. We took $300 off last year. $300 for a lot of Australians the year before, at the same time as we’re introducing more cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy into the energy grid.

So, I know that there’s a lot of focus on that. There’s a lot of focus from the government in taking the edge off these electricity bills. That’s what this announcement that we’re making today to extend energy bill release for another 6 months is all about.

Raper:

Last week we said there’d be few surprises because you’ve already made some promises in the lead up to the Budget. You’re also going to keep some for the campaign. Is this energy bill extension the only new cost‑of‑living relief we see this budget week?

Chalmers:

No, there’s also cheaper medicines, making the medicines on the PBS substantially cheaper.

Raper:

That was last week, I’m saying this week.

Chalmers:

There’s a real focus in the Budget on cost of living. We’re cutting student debt, it’s about cost of living. We’re strengthening Medicare because more bulk billing helps address some of these out‑of‑pocket health costs. We’re making medicines cheaper, we’ve got big new investments in women’s health and we’re extending the energy bill rebates.

And again, this is because we understand that cost of living is still front of mind for Australians even with all this progress on inflation. Cost of living is front and centre in the Budget and that’s why we’re making these investments.

Raper:

One of your favourite sayings to get a sound bar is that you turn Liberal deficits into 2 Labor surpluses. We’re now going to get a Labor deficit. How are you going to explain that to voters?

Chalmers:

It remains the case that we turn 2 enormous Liberal deficits into 2 Labor surpluses. The first government in almost 2 decades to deliver those back‑to‑back surpluses. But even this year where we do expect a deficit, it is much smaller than what we inherited from our predecessors. That’s because one of the defining features of this Albanese Labor government, has been responsible economic management.

We’ve helped engineer the biggest improvement in the Budget in a single term of any government ever in dollar terms. That means less Liberal debt and less interest being paid on that debt. It helps make room for us to provide this cost‑of‑living help to invest in the future and make our economy more resilient at a time when there is a new world of uncertainty around the globe.

Raper:

But you are doing a lot of extending. The energy rebate extension, the $8.5 billion incentives for Medicare, bulk billing. There’s been billions for roads, rails. Are there any savings in this Budget?

Chalmers:

There are savings in the Budget, but it’s also important to remember that most of the announcements that we’ve made between the mid‑year budget update and now have been already provisioned for in that mid‑year budget update. For example, the announcement we’re making today to extend the energy bill rebates, was provisioned in the mid‑year budget update in December about 3 months ago.

So, we are managing the economy and the budget in the most responsible way that we can. We’re making these investments, but also making room for these investments by banking up or provisioning the revenue over our time in office, delivering those surpluses in our first 2 years, finding savings where we can so that we can fund this cost‑of‑living relief and these key investments.

Raper:

So, has revenue like a bump in income tax, is that what has helped fund some of these units?

Chalmers:

There’s a very small increase in revenue in the Budget as a consequence of all of the factors, but much, much smaller than we’ve seen in earlier years – and that will all be detailed on Tuesday.

Raper:

Has the US President Donald Trump kept you up at night as you prepare this Budget?

Chalmers:

Well, certainly the escalating trade tensions around the world have been a big concern for us. What we’re seeing out of DC but also out of Beijing, 2 major conflicts, political uncertainty, and division around the world. All of that is casting a shadow over the global economy and over our Budget.

The 2 big influences on the Budget as we put the finishing touches on it, have been cost‑of‑living pressures and global economic uncertainty – so we are concerned about it. We’re a very trade exposed economy. We’ve got a lot of skin in the game when it comes to these escalating trade tensions. That’s why a big focus and a big priority of the Budget is to make our economy and our communities and our workers more resilient in the face of all these external shocks.

Raper:

Has it changed any of the forecasts or expectations in this Budget?

Chalmers:

It’s certainly changed the expectations. Some of the forecasts have been updated and some of them are broadly the same. But in the language of the economists, they talk about the risks being tilted to the downside.

What that means is even where we’ve left forecasts, broadly where they were in terms of American growth, for example, there are a lot of risks that that could get worse rather than better. A lot of economists have identified that risk.

Raper:

Now, the Albanese government has long talked about wanting to build a universal early education system. As the numbers person, the money man, is this feasible? Can it be achieved in the next term or beyond?

Chalmers:

It can certainly be achieved and that’s our aspiration, that’s our objective. But you need to get there in incremental steps, big incremental steps, and that’s what we’re doing.

The 2 big announcements we’ve made on early childhood education, the 3‑day guarantee, for example, but also the new money to build new centres, non‑profit centres, in areas where there’s a deficiency or shortage of early childhood education. These are really big, really important steps towards universality.

The Prime Minister, the Ministers, myself and others, we are huge believers in the transformational, transformative impact of early childhood education. We think it’s a game changer for families and for children and for our country more broadly. That’s why we’ve been such enthusiastic, multi‑billion‑dollar investors in getting closer and closer to universality.

Raper:

The government makes a lot about the gender parity for those sitting around the cabinet table, those in the Labor caucus, and how important it is to have women around the table and what it leads to, the decisions. Is there anything new specific for women in this Budget?

Chalmers:

We made it very clear that there’s a big game changing investment when it comes to women’s health. One of the things I’m proudest of in this Budget is the work that Katy Gallagher and Mark Butler and Ged Kearney and other colleagues have done to make these huge investments in women’s health in areas that have been neglected for too long, frankly. That’s one of the most important things that we will fund on Tuesday night.

The announcements that we made on women’s health, we’re very proud to do that in addition to everything else we’re doing to get women’s wages moving again to fund pay increases in industries dominated by women, investments in women’s safety. A very big and central priority of this government and this Budget is to do the right thing by the women of Australia. I think where people will notice that most substantially is when it comes to women’s health.

Raper:

This is your fourth budget. Has it got easier or harder over this term in terms of identifying your priorities?

Chalmers:

I think the priorities are clear. We’ve never had a problem identifying priorities. Cost‑of‑living help, Future Made in Australia, lifelong learning and education, strengthening Medicare. Our priorities have been clear, and our priorities have been validated and indicated by the progress that Australians have made together. So, the priority setting is easy. Making it all add up is more difficult. Each budget has got its own share of challenges, and this has been no different.

Raper:

Do you think you’ll be delivering a fifth budget?

Chalmers:

That’s up to the voters. It remains to be seen. I don’t take any outcome in any election for granted, least of all this one. It will be tightly contested; it will be close.

I hope that the economy is front and centre in the election contest because it’s really a choice between Labor helping with the cost of living and with a substantial detailed economic plan in the Budget versus the Coalition who have secret cuts that they won’t come clean on and won’t tell people what that means for Medicare or pensions and payments. That’s a choice at the election.

The stakes at the election are really high, and that’s because the stakes in the economy are really high. We’ll be setting out our plan in detail with dollars attached. It’s time for our political opponents to come clean on their cuts and how much worse off people will be as a consequence.

Raper:

Treasurer, thank you.

Chalmers:

Thanks, Ashleigh.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Andrew Clennell:

Live at the desk in Canberra before his fourth Budget in a term, he’s just told me he’s the first Treasurer to deliver that since Ben Chifley, is the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers. Thanks for your time.

Jim Chalmers:

Good morning, Andrew.

Clennell:

Let me start by asking about this energy bill relief. A week ago it was announced power bills were to go up by up to $200 a year, and you’re giving people back only $150. They’re not going to be dancing in the streets over that, are they?

Chalmers:

Well, we’re doing what we responsibly can to help people with the cost of living. These cost-of-living pressures are front of mind for a lot of Australians and they’ll be front and centre in the Budget and this energy bill assistance is a bit of extra hip pocket help for households.

Even with all the progress we’re making as a country together on inflation, we know that people are still under pressure, and this responds to some of that pressure.

Clennell:

It looks like an election bribe, really, I mean you’re doing it for 2 quarters, then cutting it off.

Chalmers:

I don’t think so. This is the third time that we’ve done the energy bill rebates, 2 lots of $300 and now extending it for 6 months and again it’s about recognising that even with all this progress on inflation, we got inflation from higher than 6 per cent and rising when we came to office, now 2.4 per cent, we know that people are still under the pump and so we’re doing what we responsibly can to help people with the cost of living, not just energy bill rebates, but cheaper medicines, but also this historic investment in bulk billing – because more bulk billing means less pressure on families too.

Clennell:

It feels like a big band-aid over a deeper problem with the energy transition.

Chalmers:

There are 2 things that we’re doing simultaneously. If you look at the Default Market Offer that was released in the last fortnight or so, one of the big issues there is the unreliability of the legacy parts of the system, and so we need to make sure that we continue to get more cleaner and cheaper and reliable energy into the system – we’re doing that, and in the meantime we’re helping people with their electricity bills.

Don’t forget in the last year to December in the official inflation data, electricity prices went down by 25 per cent because we’re helping people with their energy bills. We’re extending that for another 6 months because we recognise people are still under the pump.

Clennell:

I mean effectively you’re taking people’s taxes and giving them back to them on their energy bills, right?

Chalmers:

If you look right throughout the Budget, whether it’s investments in Medicare and bulk billing, whether it’s investments in cheaper medicines, what budgets are all about is taking the country’s priorities, and in this case the government’s priorities – Medicare, cost-of-living, making our economy more resilient – making room in the Budget to do those things. And we’ve helped engineer a stunning turnaround in the Budget, $200 billion improvement in the Budget since we came to office, the biggest nominal improvement of all time and that’s helped us make room for these investments, whether it’s helping with the cost of living or building Australia’s future, or making our economy more resilient in the face of all of this global economic uncertainty.

Clennell:

Is any part of this policy an apology to voters for not coming through with that promise to cut their power bills by 275 bucks? In 2022 you yourself recorded on camera really pushing that policy. Is any of this sort of an apology for that?

Chalmers:

I’d describe it differently, as you’d expect, and I would describe it as hip pocket help for households. I would describe it as a government responding to the pressures that people still feel despite this progress that we’ve made on inflation. And if you take a step back for a moment, the Budget will be about the progress we’ve made together to here, and a plan to make the most of that progress from here, and part of that plan is rebuilding living standards which were falling sharply when we came to office. That means helping with the cost of living, getting wages moving again, the tax cuts which are already rolling out in the economy. All of this is about recognising that people are under pressure, we can respond to that in a responsible way, and that’s why really the defining feature of our term in government, and certainly the defining feature of Tuesday night’s Budget will be helping with the cost of living.

Clennell:

Are you sorry you couldn’t deliver on that now?

Chalmers:

We’re always trying to do the best we can for people, whether it’s electricity bills, whether it’s Medicare, strengthening Medicare with these historic investments, whether it’s women’s health, whether it’s cheaper medicines, cutting student debt. There are a whole bunch of ways that we are doing the absolute best we can for people. There’s more than one way to provide cost-of-living help. And here I think it’s really important to draw the distinction and to draw the contrast, and that is this Labor government doesn’t just recognise people are under pressure, we’re doing something about it, it beggars belief that the Liberals and Nationals have opposed that cost-of-living relief at almost every turn, and that means Australians would be even worse off now if Peter Dutton had his way.

Clennell:

Jane Hume says they’re going to pass it. What do you make of that?

Chalmers:

Well, that will be the first time if it’s the case. I mean they opposed the first 2 rounds of energy bill relief, they didn’t want to see the tax cuts, they opposed our cost-of-living relief

Clennell:

What’s your reaction to them passing it this time?

Chalmers:

Well, let’s see, let’s see.

Clennell:

Well, she’s just said it. She said, “We’re not going to stand in the way of it”, so –

Chalmers:

David Littleproud earlier today, I’m told, said that they probably will, which sounds a little bit less than definitive as far as I’m concerned.

This week, what we will see is the contrast. My budget is about a plan for the economy and helping with the cost of living, the Liberals and Nationals are about secret costs and secret cuts which will make people worse off. This is their opportunity to come clean on the $600 billion they need to find to fund their nuclear reactors and what that means for Medicare and pensions and payments and housing and veterans and all of the other things that they’ve described as wasteful spending.

Clennell:

Peter Dutton says power bills have gone up $1,000 since you were elected. Do you dispute that figure?

Chalmers:

Well, the most recent data says electricity bills have come down by about 25 per cent.

Clennell:

Because of the subsidies.

Chalmers:

Partly, but not entirely because of the subsidies. So power bills in 2024 would have gone down 1.6 per cent, instead they went down 25 per cent.

Clennell:

Is he right though with the $1,000 figure?

Chalmers:

I haven’t checked his numbers. The numbers that we rely on are the official CPI numbers, and what they’ve shown is they’ve come down 25 per cent last year primarily because of our efforts to give people help with the cost of living, and don’t forget, you asked me about Peter Dutton, if Peter Dutton had his way, electricity bills would have been $300 higher last year because he opposed our efforts to help people.

Clennell:

In MYEFO there were predictions for real GDP of 2.5  to 2.75 per cent annual growth. Have they been revised up in your Budget?

Chalmers:

Well, we’ve revised all of our forecasts in the usual way, and –

Clennell:

Are they up?

Chalmers:

– you’ll see those in the Budget. What the growth forecasts have to recognise is the weaker growth that we’ve seen in the last little while. Growth is rebounding solidly in the most recent numbers, the private sector’s taking its rightful role as the main driver of that growth but don’t forget we’ve been through an especially soft period of economic growth and so the forecasts have to account for that as well. I’m not prepared to go into the ins and outs of all the forecasts here – there will be changes to forecasts which recognise what we’ve been through to here and what we expect from that.

Clennell:

Because obviously, I guess, if they do go up, that can reduce your deficits, right, that’s one aspect of that occurring. Is that what we’re going to be looking at?

Chalmers:

Well, don’t forget we’ve also got all of this global economic uncertainty casting a shadow over the world, and also over our economy and our Budget, and so there are always swings and roundabouts in these forecasts, there are always a number of influences.

The 2 primary influences on our Budget are cost-of-living pressures, despite this progress on inflation, and the global economic uncertainty casting a shadow over the Budget and the economy, and the Budget is really designed to deal with those 2 pressures at once.

Clennell:

The MYEFO also showed an increase in deficits – they were up to $47 billion and $38 billion in 25–26 and 26–27. Given some of the campaign promises we’ve seen, are they going to be even higher than that?

Chalmers:

What you’ll see in the Budget is that because the midyear budget update was only about 3 months ago, that’s a bit unusual to have them so close together – the bottom lines are broadly similar, there are some changes but broadly similar, and that means it reflects that very substantial progress we’ve made since we were elected.

If you compare the budget situation now to the preelection outlook in 2022 it’s night and day, we’ve made huge progress, enormous strides cleaning up the mess that we inherited, a $200 billion improvement, 2 surpluses in the first 2 years, a smaller deficit this year than when we came to office, and that’s an important demonstration, I think, of our responsible economic management. You’ll see how the bottom lines have changed a little bit but not a lot on Tuesday night.

Clennell:

It feels like you’re back to Australian Treasurer reality a bit. You’ve had the dream, you know, you’ve done the work on it obviously, but you’ve had the dream of presenting a surplus, your old boss Wayne Swan a number of other Treasurers have never had that. Now you’ve got to dole out the red ink. That must be a bit personally disappointing for you.

Chalmers:

Oh, I don’t see it in personal terms. Collectively, we are the first government in almost 2 decades to deliver back-to-back surpluses, and we’re also got this deficit now –

Clennell:

Does this ruin the story a bit?

Chalmers:

I don’t believe so. Our government is defined by responsible economic management. We’ve seen that in the first 3 Budgets, and we’ll see that in the fourth and one of the things I’m proudest about is we’ve got the Budget in much better nick, we’ve cleaned up the mess left to us by our predecessors at the same time as we’ve provided responsible, meaningful, substantial cost-of-living relief and invested in building Australia’s future and that’s really what people can expect to see again on Tuesday.

Clennell:

When do you anticipate an Australian Government could next deliver a surplus?

Chalmers:

Well, it remains to be seen, and certainly our efforts have been about trying to make the Budget as responsible as we can, some savings, banking most of the upward revision of revenue in our time in office, delivering those 2 surpluses, getting interest costs down, paying down the Liberal debt, but it remains to be seen when the next surplus is.

Clennell:

It could be a decade again, couldn’t it? It was 15 years between drinks when you did it. It could be that long again, couldn’t it?

Chalmers:

It was almost 2 decades between surpluses but don’t forget the 2 surpluses that we’ve already delivered and paying down all of that Liberal debt as a consequence is saving us tens of billions of dollars in interest costs already and so it’s got a structural purpose to it – it improves the Budget in a structural sense, so do our efforts on the NDIS and aged care and in other ways as well. So we’ve improved the Budget in the near term, we’ve made a structural improvement in the medium term, but the work of Budget repair and responsible economic management continues.

Clennell:

The NDIS – Jane Hume mentioned it before – said there needs to be more reform. She actually said it needs to grow at the same amount as the economy, so not the 8 per cent you’ve got it down to from 14 per cent. Is that something you’re committed to longer term?

Chalmers:

Well, that’s a new announcement from Jane Hume today. That means huge cuts to the NDIS and that would send a shiver up the spine of a lot of people who rely on the program.

Now we are way too late in the parliamentary term for these characters to still be making it up as they go along. They’ve got secret plans for cuts. Those cuts will make Australians worse off, we know that.

Peter Dutton said on another program on a Sunday morning that there are lots of cuts but they won’t tell people till after the election.

Now this is a very scary proposition. I think in this building we’re tempted to think that their economic policy is some kind of slapstick comedy but it actually masks a much more sinister intent and that is to keep these secret cuts secret until after the election with grave consequences for people on the NDIS, people on pensions and payments, and especially people who rely on Medicare.

Clennell:

The NDIS is out of control though, isn’t it? As a Treasurer, you can’t sit and look at the growth of NDIS and be happy.

Chalmers:

We’re not sitting and looking at it, we’ve taken very substantial steps over the life of this government to make sure that spending on the NDIS is still growing but growing in a more sustainable way, cracking down on the rorts, getting it from growing at something like 14 per cent to something like 8 per cent, and we’re on track for that.

Clennell:

There’s more ways to be tackled though, isn’t there, or is there?

Chalmers:

Well, we’re doing it the most responsible, considered, methodical way that we can, and where we find waste, we’ve shown an enthusiasm to deal with that. That’s why we’re getting growth in the NDIS to more sustainable levels.

Now if Jane Hume is saying that she wants growth in NDIS spending to be between 2 and 3 per cent instead of 8 per cent, then they need to come clean on what that means for Australians with a disability. That is a very scary proposition for a lot of people watching your program today and wondering what it means for them.

Clennell:

She also indicated that she is looking to sack 36,000 public servants, because she said she wanted it at the levels after COVID.

Chalmers:

Let’s see the detail. They are way past due coming clean on what their agenda for secret cuts means for people, what it means for Medicare in particular.

I thought 2 things that were said in the last few weeks are very important; both Angus Taylor and Peter Dutton said in different ways, the best predictor of future performance is past performance. Peter Dutton went after Medicare when he was the Health Minister, Coalition governments always come after wages, they cut pensions and payments when they were last in office, and so they need to come clean this week on what are these secret cuts, what do they mean for people, where are they going to find the $600 billion to pay for these nuclear reactors.

Clennell:

It leaked during the week the Opposition’s looking at increased defence spending as it promised perhaps 2.5 per cent of GDP. Will there be an increase in defence spending in this Budget?

Chalmers:

Well, we’re already increasing it, and it’s already budgeted for.

Clennell:

So there’s not a further increase we’re looking at Tuesday?

Chalmers:

We’ll update the figures, but what people can expect to see is the existing $50 billion plus that we’re investing in defence over the course of the next decade

Clennell:

So correct me if I’m wrong, is that about 2.38 per cent GDP?

Chalmers:

A little bit over.

Clennell:

Yeah.

Chalmers:

By the early 2030s we’ll get defence spending to a bit more than 2.3 per cent of GDP, remembering it’s 2 now, that’s a very substantial increase. Now again, if they’re going to increase defence spending by $15 billion a year, let’s hear how they’re going to pay for it and what they’re going to cut and what that means for Medicare.

Clennell:

You finally released the report by the ACCC on the supermarkets, but you know, it’s a bit of damp squib as a consumer, I have to say, I didn’t see any strong action against the supermarkets. The other mob are saying, we’ll at least threaten you with a big stick. What are you actually going to do about it? What difference does this whole process of the ACCC report make?

Chalmers:

Well, the ACCC report I think is 441 pages from memory, and not on any of those pages does it recommend divestiture, because divestiture can have unintended consequences.

What it’s really about is more transparency, more scrutiny and more competition, and we’re acting on all of those fronts; making the Food and Grocery Code mandatory, empowering and funding the ACCC, dealing with mergers and acquisitions, working with the states and territories on zoning and planning so we can get more competitors to the supermarkets.

We are taking very decisive action to crack down on the supermarkets, to get a fairer go for families at the checkout and for farmers at the farm gate.

Clennell:

Are we expecting less or more net migration in your Budget predictions? Why do we need so much migration at the moment, because it feels like we are becoming Kevin Rudd’s Big Australia?

Chalmers:

We are managing the net overseas migration numbers down quite considerably. I think we saw, I think it was last week from memory in the migration figures, there were about 10,000 people fewer than what was anticipated. The Budget will update all of those forecasts but what they will show overall is the trajectory is down. That’s deliberate. There was a spike in net overseas migration after COVID, students, tourists and the like and fewer departures. We’ve been steadily managing that down and we saw that in last week’s figures.

Clennell:

So will it be 230,000, will it be less?

Chalmers:

You’ll see in the Budget.

Clennell:

Because the students are still coming in in big numbers, aren’t they?

Chalmers:

You’ll see in the Budget.

Clennell:

Is it less?

Chalmers:

The international student market is an important earner for Australia but it needs to be responsible. We need to make sure that we’re managing that and that’s why we’re trying to take the steps that we are taking. Overall we’re managing the program down, we’re doing that in a considered and methodical way, and you’ll see that in the numbers.

Clennell:

What can you say to Australians who look at the strains on housing, on infrastructure that are watching this and hear Peter Dutton saying, “I’m going to slash this”, about why we need this net migration at the moment?

Chalmers:

First of all, there’s a horrendous inconsistency even in what Peter Dutton is saying. He announced he was going to do something, then he pretended he never did, then he pretended there wasn’t an inconsistency. Nobody has any idea –

Clennell:

Yeah, but let me take you back to the point because we’re nearly out of time, sorry. What would you say to Australians about why we need the level of net migration we’ve been having?

Chalmers:

I’d say to them; we’re managing net migration down and we’re building more houses at the same time so that there are more houses for Australians to rent and buy.

Clennell:

How are you feeling about the election, because if the government was to lose, you’re favourite to become Opposition Leader.

Chalmers:

Look, I spend all of my time thinking about the Budget and the economic plan and what we would do as a government and as a country if we win the election. I spend absolutely no time thinking about what I would do if we lost the election. I’d much rather be the Treasurer of Australia than the Leader of the Opposition. I enjoy the work I do for Anthony and our team. We work very, very closely together, and we want the economy to be front and centre in this election.

The stakes are high in this election because the stakes are high in the economy. There’s a lot going on around the world, people are under pressure still, we’ve made a lot of progress together, but we’ve got a plan from here as well, and that’s the difference between us and our political opponents.

Clennell:

You’re seen as one of the best communicators in the government. Have you ever been frustrated the PM hasn’t been able to communicate as clearly as you do at any time in his term?

Chalmers:

No, never, and we’ve got a lot of good communicators in our Cabinet and in our Party Room more broadly and we work together very, very closely with the Prime Minister and with others to put together and convey an economic plan, which is one of the reasons why we’re making so much progress together as a country, but we recognise there’s more work to do, and that’s what the Budget will be all about.

Clennell:

Treasurer Jim Chalmers, thanks so much for your time.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Charles Croucher:

Welcome to the pre‑budget meeting. Just to ask that question, any line dancing in your Queensland days?

Jim Chalmers:

No, no. Blissfully free.

Croucher:

You’re a bit more hip‑hoppy, weren’t you? We’ve done 4 of these pre‑budget interviews. I’ve asked this question every time, so I’m going to start with it this time. When do things get easier for Australians?

Chalmers:

Certainly in the economy things are getting better. But we know that doesn’t always translate to how people are feeling and faring in the economy.

That’s why when cost‑of‑living pressures are front of mind for so many Australians, they will be front and centre in the Budget that I hand down on Tuesday night.

It will be a Budget primarily focused on helping people with the cost of living but also making our economy more resilient in the face of all of this global economic uncertainty and building Australia’s future.

Croucher:

Resilient? What does that mean?

Chalmers:

It means that the world is an uncertain place.

There’s a lot of unpredictability, a lot of volatility. There’s a new world of uncertainty that we’re seeing unfold right around the globe and for Australia, we’re not immune from that.

Making us more resilient means a Future Made in Australia. It means a Buy Australia Plan. It means making sure that as we get the Budget in better nick and we help with the cost of living, that we’re also investing in the jobs and industries of the future so that as the world changes all around us, we can be beneficiaries of that change, not victims of it.

Croucher:

You mentioned a Buy Australia Plan. This is getting more than just a catch cry or something that the Prime Minister has said in the past. This will be a laid out plan that will encourage Australians to buy Australian. How do you do that when cost is the driving factor? And what does it mean if they do that?

Chalmers:

One of the things that the Prime Minister said in response to the tariffs being levied around the world and on Australia was that one of the things that Australians can do, one of the decisions that Australians can make is to buy more Australian products and more Australian produce.

There will be an opportunity for us to promote that in the Budget. That will be part of the Budget, but more broadly, making the economy more resilient means that Future Made in Australia, means making the most of our industrial opportunities, the energy transformation, human capital and skills and lifelong learning.

That’ll be a big focus of the Budget as well. But primarily we know that cost of living is front of mind for most Australians, it will be front and centre in the Budget. You’ll see that when it comes to bulk billing, cheaper medicines and also extending the electricity bill rebates.

Croucher:

Let’s speak about that. Electricity bill rebates, an extra $150. How does it roll out?

Chalmers:

It rolls out in the second half of the year.

The $300 that rolled out in the course of this financial year has been a really important way that we’ve helped people with the cost of living. This is more hip pocket help for households. It recognises that even as we’ve made all of this progress on inflation together, people are still under pressure and so there’s more help being rolled out on Tuesday night.

Extending these energy bill rebates for another 6 months recognises the pressures people are under and in the most responsible way that we can, helps people with those pressures.

Croucher:

This time last year, I asked you if this was now baked into the Budget, this need for energy bill relief, because when it comes back on, it’s going to be inflationary right? When those subsidies are gone, it will force the price of things up. Is this just now another line item that every Treasurer from now on has to pay?

Chalmers:

Not necessarily.

We keep these cost‑of‑living measures under more or less constant review. This is the third time that we’ve provided energy bill relief, but this time for 6 months rather than 12. That recognises first of all the pressures on the Budget, but also the progress that we are making on inflation.

The Australian economy is turning a corner. We’ve got inflation down, real wages and incomes are up, unemployment’s low, we’ve got the debt down, interest rates have started to come down, growth is rebounding solidly in our economy. But we know that there’s more work to do because people are still under pressure. The global economic environment is uncertain. The Budget is designed to respond to those 2 things.

Croucher:

That all sounds like a really solid election or re‑election pitch, except the OECD say living standards have fallen. Now all those other things should be driving living standards. So, when do they turn around?

Chalmers:

They are. All of those things together are driving a recovery in living standards. Don’t forget, when we came to office, living standards were falling sharply, real wages were falling sharply, inflation and interest rates were going up. Now inflation and interest rates are coming down, incomes and wages are recovering, the tax cuts are flowing in our economy and all of that is rebuilding living standards in our economy.

We recognise that it’s been an especially difficult period under the life of the last 2 governments. And when you recognise that, your choice is whether to do something about it or not.

We’ve been doing something about it, getting wages moving again, tax cuts for every taxpayer, energy bill relief for every household, cheaper medicines, cheaper early childhood education, rent assistance, all of these ways that we’ve been rebuilding living standards. Because we recognise the pressure you’ve identified in your question.

Croucher:

David Littleproud was on the programme 10 minutes ago and he said he’d probably support these. This energy bill subsidy. But he said it is a last desperate roll of the dice from a government who’s lost control of energy prices. Is that right?

Chalmers:

Of course not. Energy prices in the last year to December went down by 25 per cent.

Croucher:

A lot of that was subsidy.

Chalmers:

Not all of it, but prices would have gone down even without the subsidies.

Croucher:

So, why is there still a need for subsidies?

Chalmers:

Because people are still under pressure, for all of the reasons that you and I have been talking about today and we’ve talked about on other occasions.

But I say this about the Liberals and Nationals. They say they’ll probably support this cost‑of‑living relief. They haven’t supported the first 2 rounds of cost‑of‑living relief. They didn’t want the tax cuts to flow to every Australian taxpayer. They have opposed at almost every turn our cost‑of‑living help. That’s important for the election contest, because when Australians are doing it tough, the Labor government is helping with the cost of living.

All they’ve got are these secret cuts that they won’t come clean on. And that’s the difference between Labor and Liberal. Our Budget’s about the cost‑of‑living. Their approach is about secret cuts. This is the week that they need to come clean on what those secret cuts mean for Medicare and pensions and payments and all of the other things that Australians rely on.

Croucher:

I want to move on to debt. It goes through a trillion dollars in the next couple of years. That’s been forecast for a while now. Are we at the stage now where any hope of turning surplus budgets is pretty much over?

Chalmers:

Not necessarily. We’ve delivered 2 surplus budgets. We took those enormous deficits that we inherited from the Liberal Party and we turned them into Labor surpluses. Even the deficit for this year is going to be substantially smaller than what was expected when we came to office 3 years ago. So, we’re making good progress. We’ve actually helped engineer the biggest ever positive turnaround in the budget in a single parliamentary term. That means $170 billion or so less Liberal debt. That means we save on interest costs.

We’ve been able to manage the budget responsibly at the same time as we roll out cost‑of‑living help and invest in the future and that’s what you see on Tuesday night as well.

Croucher:

The next part of that is the next 10 years are all in deficit. So, we start going backwards and some of that money saved is still going backwards. So, how do we turn that around? It needs something bigger. Is that part of a second term agenda, a third term agenda? When do you look at that and say we can realistically get back into surplus and avoid that huge interest bill that’s coming down the pipeline?

Chalmers:

It requires the same combination of responsible economic management that we have been deploying, finding savings and there’ll be more savings in the Budget. Banking upward revision to revenue, most of that, we’ve seen that in the course of our time in office. Making sure that where we are making investments, we’re doing them in the most responsible way that we can. That’s what people can expect to see.

Croucher:

I want to be really quick on some, some overseas beef tariffs could be the next thing coming from Donald Trump. Do we have a plan B?

Chalmers:

It remains to be seen the nature and the magnitude of the tariffs that the Americans have flagged for early in April. We don’t take any outcome for granted. We work around the clock to make Australia’s case in that context. But we don’t pretend anything other than this is a new world of uncertainty.

Croucher:

And you can’t control him. What he can control is here. So, is there a plan B?

Chalmers:

What we’re seeing with these escalating trade tensions is casting a shadow over the global economy and over our own economy and our budget.

Our plan A is about making our economy more resilient. What we’re seeing with all this uncertainty actually vindicates and validates the approach that we’ve taken – help people in the near term get the budget in much better nick and invest in making our economy more resilient. A Future Made in Australia, for example, investing in our industries and our jobs, our resources sector in areas like critical minerals.

These are all of the most important things that we can do, and we are doing in the Budget in the face of all of this unpredictability around the world.

Croucher:

Last question on jobs, you mentioned it then. In our first interview we spoke about this collection of Australians that even though there were jobs available, that the unemployment rate was low, still weren’t out there and still weren’t working. You said it was a passion of yours. It’s something that, you know, the region you grew up in dedicates that. Same with me. How are we going with that?

Chalmers:

One of the things I’m proudest of is that we’ve got labour force participation, which is a measure of how many people that we can attract into work, that’s been at or around record highs during our time in office. I’m really proud of that. It’s one of a number of ways that we’ve made very substantial progress together as Australians.

The stronger the labour market can be, the way that we can reward people by making sure that they can earn more and keep more of what they earn with the tax cuts. All of that is playing a very helpful role in our economy. This makes us exceptional around the world. Most other countries, they’ve got inflation down, but they’ve paid for that progress with much higher unemployment. Our unemployment rate, on average, over the life of this government has been the lowest of any government in 50 years. That means more people in work. It means we can address this intergenerational disadvantage that you and I care so much about.

Croucher:

I can hear the Liberals in my ears screaming, it’s lower. It’s now higher than when they left office at 3.9.

Chalmers:

Average unemployment, much lower under this government than under our predecessors. In fact, any government of the last 50 years.

Croucher:

Jim Chalmers, best of luck on Tuesday. Appreciate your time.

Chalmers:

Thanks so much Charles.