Source: Jobs and Skills Australia
REOS Spotlight: Trends and change in recruitment difficulty
Michelle Looi
Source: Australia’s climate in 2024: 2nd warmest and 8th wettest year on record
Acknowledgements omitted
I always enjoy the perspective of Western Australia and Perth which reflect your economic position and your geographic position, so close to Southeast Asia and so engaged with the regional economies.
I know the business community thinks deeply about what it means to protect and promote Australia’s interests in an increasingly uncertain world.
I know you think deeply about how we shore up Australia’s prosperity despite that uncertainty. I don,t need to tell this room, Western Australia is vital to that prosperity: when you succeed, the whole country prospers.
That success includes WA resources, metals, critical minerals and rare earths but it also includes WA manufacturers and workers, your universities, research and technology, which are all globally prized.
So what’s my role as Foreign Minister? Amongst other things and importantly, it is to help create opportunities, and promote and protect Australia’s interests as a reliable exporter of choice in an increasingly competitive international environment.
Our foreign policy helps build and maintain the strategic conditions that enable our stability and prosperity.
And you have to say that is a task that is not getting any easier.
Each day, our assumptions are being tested.
We live in a world of increasing strategic surprise. We live in a world that is ever more uncertain and unpredictable.
We see the devastating human toll of conflicts including in Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan.
Malign actors continue to engage in sabotage and terrorism.
Bullies threaten to use nuclear weapons, and authoritarianism is spreading.
Some countries are shifting alignment, high global inflation continues to put pressure on working people.
And institutions that we helped build are being eroded and rules that we helped write are being challenged.
These factors compound threats and risks in our own region from a changing climate, military buildup without transparency, and disruption of trade – as well as the risks inherent in great power competition.
I recently released the 2025 Snapshot of Australia in the World, a summary of our foreign policy strategy, priorities and policy achievements.
What it clearly shows is that even though we face a time of growing uncertainty, Australia is well-placed to protect our security, our stability and our prosperity.
But that is only if we continue to build our disciplined focus on our region, because it is here where our interests are most at stake; if we invest not only in traditional but also in more diverse relationships; and if we work with partners to uphold international rules that protect us all.
We have to apply ourselves to these tasks with ambition and calm, consistent and disciplined engagement.
This is the approach the Albanese Government is taking with the United States.
President Trump’s America First agenda envisages a very different role for America in the world, and that is what the American people have chosen.
President Trump campaigned on change and none of us should try to minimise the implications of this change.
And over the first seven weeks of the Trump Administration we have seen how broad those implications are around the world.
Mindful of the scale of this change involving our most important strategic partner, there has been extensive engagement across senior levels of the Albanese Government.
In addition to our relentless Ambassador in Washington, the Prime Minister has had two productive phone calls with the President.
I had the honour of being the first Australian Foreign Minister ever to be invited to attend a Presidential Inauguration, and I was able to put the case for Australia to the Secretary of State Marco Rubio on his first day in office.
The Deputy Prime Minister was Secretary Hegseth’s first international counterpart to meet with him following his confirmation.
The Treasurer has made an early connection with his counterpart, US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent.
And our Trade and Tourism Minister has also been engaging with his counterparts.
In those interactions we make the point that the US enjoys a two-to-one trade surplus with Australia and has since the Truman Presidency.
We make the point that US exports to Australia face no tariffs.
And that our trade and investment relationship is important for US industry and jobs. Half of Australia’s exports are inputs into US manufacturing and construction. And of course, we are a top 10 investor in the United States.
And given the pool of funds under management in Australia’s superannuation sector that can only grow.
Nevertheless, last week we saw that the second Trump administration has hardened its position in favour of tariffs as a centrepiece of its economic policy.
And whereas the first Trump administration exempted 36 countries from steel tariffs and 32 countries from aluminium tariffs, this time not one single country has been exempted.
Not Australia. Not Japan. Not anyone.
And the degree of a country’s engagement has not changed the outcome.
Indeed, the administration has been clear that the exemptions granted in its first term were a mistake.
Our response to the Trump administration’s imposition of tariffs on Australia has been firm and it has been clear.
As the Prime Minister has said, these measures are “entirely unjustified”.
And “it is against the spirit of our two nations, enduring friendship and fundamentally at odds with the benefits our economic partnership has delivered over more than 70 years.”
Steel and aluminium exports to the US represent 0.18 per cent of Australia’s total exports in 2023.
We will continue to press the case for all Australian exporters, including steel and aluminium.
We will continue to have advocate for the existing economy-wide access commitments under the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement. They should be maintained.
And we will also keep making the case for the many opportunities Australia has to offer.
After the US announced their position, Peter Dutton said he would “do a deal” and “there’s no question about that”.
Given not one leader of the 36 countries that got a deal last time got a deal this time, Australians are right to be incredulous about that claim.
And they,re rightly concerned Peter Dutton would do a deal at any cost.
Unlike Mr Dutton, we are not going to give away the farm – and we don,t have to.
We will always put the interests of Australian industries and workers first.
Remember, these tariffs do not necessarily mean that Americans won,t keep buying Australian products.
And many nations want our exports. This state understands that possibly more than any part of Australia.
We have a strong track record of supporting our exporters diversify their export markets, and regardless of what happens with US tariffs, that is a priority we will continue to pursue.
One of the priorities I have brought to this job has been a focus on Southeast Asia, in part because of where I,m from originally, but in part because of my firm belief that ASEAN and the countries of Southeast Asia are critical to our next generation’s stability and prosperity.
So just to our north, Indonesia stands as a major and growing power in our region and beyond.
The world’s third largest democracy, projected to become the world’s fifth largest economy.
So deepening our economic engagement with Indonesia is of enormous value to Australia, and part of our broader effort to diversify our economy, especially through Southeast Asia.
Now we have our work cut out. When we came to government, Australian direct investment in Southeast Asia was lower than it was in 2014.
Over this period, while international investment in the region had grown apace, Australia’s investment in it had gone backwards, both in relative and absolute terms.
And by 2040, Southeast Asia is predicted to be the world’s fourth-largest economy after the United States, China and India.
Australia’s trade and investment has simply not kept pace – and we need to turn this around.
Australia has been central to the north Asian economic growth story, so we must be to the Southeast Asian economic growth story.
That’s why we appointed Nicholas Moore AO as Australia’s Special Envoy to Southeast Asia and charged him with developing a Southeast Asia Economic Strategy to 2040.
In the almost 18 months since its launch, we have made tangible progress.
We have now implemented a number of initiatives responding to its recommendations, including new deal teams to identify and facilitate Australian investment in the region.
New landing pads in Jakarta and Ho Chi Minh City, in addition to the existing hub in Singapore, to help our tech companies scale up.
Business and investment missions, including three to Singapore, one of which was our largest ever outbound investment mission by value, representing a combined $2.5 trillion of assets under management.
Improved visa access for businesspeople from the region and the establishment of the ASEAN-Australia Centre because we have to continue to build Southeast Asia literacy and enhance business and cultural ties.
It’s no accident that Austrade had their best ever client results in Southeast Asia in 2024, with over $1 billion in commercial outcomes.
We all need to play our part in diversification.
Complacency, or business as usual, risks compromising our influence today and our prosperity tomorrow.
Nobody today could claim they don,t understand the risk of putting too many eggs in one market.
As you know, China’s growth has been a crucial driver of Australia’s prosperity and the world’s prosperity – and we know this has never been straightforward for business.
Especially during the last term of government, when China’s doors were closed to many of our exports.
Since the Albanese Government was elected you have seen a concerted effort to restore dialogue and stabilise the relationship with our largest trading partner.
We pressed China to lift impediments on more than $20 billion of Australian exports – barley, wine, coal, timber logs, cotton, beef, hay and copper ores, concentrates, and lobsters.
The final impediments on lobster were lifted in late December, and we have seen in just the first month of the crayfish trade resuming into China, sales have already reached $118 million.
We know how important that is to Western Australia. In 2023-24, China received 56 per cent of exports from this state. And what we want is grow opportunities for our great exporters – both into China and elsewhere across our region.
The China relationship will continue to face challenges.
You see, the term stabilisation has never meant there would be no problems.
It has always meant we should be able to engage directly with China in order to manage differences and problems that are inevitable – without these problems derailing our ability to talk to each other – as we saw in the past.
And that is what we will keep doing – and it is what the Australian people expect of us, your government – to engage confidently, calmly and consistently, protecting our sovereignty and advancing our interests.
We have seen in recent weeks that the same people who had no regard for the consequences for Australian exporters and jobs are at it again – trying to turn China into an election issue, with inflammatory language.
This country, as you all know, built our prosperity in great part because we are a trading nation.
A great trading nation has to grapple with a world where trade can be a vulnerability as well as an opportunity.
And the whole country, all of us, government, business, the workforce – we have to manage these risks together.
We can’t imagine the challenges away nor can we put other countries, interests ahead of ours.
What we can do is recognise our challenges in the world are growing.
That our interests are most at stake in our region.
And that we must not just invest in our traditional relationships but also in diversified relationships.
And if we do these things, we can be confident that together as Australians we can meet these challenges, and keep building a better future.
Source: Australia’s climate in 2024: 2nd warmest and 8th wettest year on record
Penny Wong, Foreign Minister: Thanks very much. And look, it has been great to be here in Perth and really great to do this event today. I want to say that one of the great things about coming to Western Australia is that people here understand how important the region is. You’re an economy that is so deeply engaged with your region, you understand the importance of not just the economic engagement, but also the foreign policy and diplomatic engagement. That’s something, whether it’s business people or people I’ve talked to as I’m walking around the streets of Perth, Western Australians really understand. As Foreign Minister, I’ve been very clear our priority is the region, relationships and rules, and so much of our work has been focused on that, something very much in the same vein as the way Western Australia deals with our region. Happy to take questions.
Journalist: What information can you share about the situation with Kevin Yam?
Foreign Minister: I can say to you what I said in there, that the Australian Government does not accept other governments interfering with our citizens, making anybody feel unsafe. We expect our citizens to be respected, and we stand firm against any foreign interference, and against any infringement of our sovereignty. We will make, and have been making, appropriate representations since this was alerted to us. What I would say also, is that there is a National Security Hotline, people who feel that they have been under at risk in any way or feel threatened or nervous, they can speak to someone, and the appropriate authorities can respond.
Journalist: You’ve described that letter as deeply worrying. Who has contacted the Chinese –
Foreign Minister: Sorry, same question?
Journalist: Same question, sorry. You’ve described it as deeply worrying. Who has contacted the Chinese government to register concerns?
Foreign Minister: Those representations are being made in the usual way through the diplomatic arrangements.
Journalist: Is he someone that you’re aware of in terms of his stance?
Foreign Minister: Yes I am, I’ve met with Kevin.
Journalist: Do you believe this apparent campaign of intimidation has been directed at Hong Kong?
Foreign Minister: At Hong Kong?
Journalist: From Hong Kong?
Foreign Minister: From Hong Kong. Well, I’ll await whatever investigations come to light but I have made my view about Australians being targeted by the Hong Kong authorities very clear to both Hong Kong and to China.
Journalist: There have been reports about Australian university researchers being asked to complete a questionnaire to gauge how their activities comply with the Trump administration’s domestic and foreign political agenda. How much of a concern is that for you regarding potential interference?
Foreign Minister: Well, first, I’d say Minister Clare has been engaging with the universities about these issues. Second point I’d make is that we would say to the Trump administration that there has been very beneficial and collaborative research between Australia and the United States, and we would want that to continue.
Journalist: You’ve spoken there about the need to diversify export markets. Is it something that maybe Australian universities need to consider in terms of looking elsewhere for funding? Obviously, a lot of them are quite heavily reliant on the US for funding, are we going to need to look further abroad?
Foreign Minister: Diversification is an element of resilience, and if your markets are more diversified, then you’re obviously more resilient against any changes that might arise. So of course, we would want to make sure that all markets are as diversified as they can be. I’ve said that since before we were elected, I’ve made the point that, you know, don’t put all your eggs in one market.
Journalist: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin will be talking about Ukraine, the Ukraine peace plan again?
Foreign Minister: We want a just peace in Ukraine that reflects Ukraine’s interests as well as the interests of peace and we’ve made that clear,
Journalist: And can I just ask, is Australia preparing that Trump might hit Australian agricultural exports?
Foreign Minister: I think I’ve responded to that already in there.
Journalist: Just one, have you spoken to Kevin Yam recently about this situation?
Foreign Minister: Not in the last 24 hours, but I certainly will be reaching out again. I’ve had quite a lot of contact. I’ve had contact with him and with others in similar situations.
Journalist: What did you make of Dutton’s referendum proposal?
Foreign Minister: I’ve responded to that in there, but what I would say is a referendum is what you propose when you’ve had no costed, coherent, credible economic policies for three years.
Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry
Sally Sara:
Well modelling from the federal Treasury suggests new US tariffs on steel and aluminium will only have a modest impact on the Australian economy. Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers will use a speech today to argue that the tariffs are both senseless and wrong.
It comes as he prepares for his fourth Budget with the OECD revising down forecasts for global growth overnight. The federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers joins me now. Treasurer, welcome back to Breakfast.
Jim Chalmers:
Thanks very much, Sally.
Sara:
Before we get to the Budget, so there were shocking revelations about the childcare sector aired on Four Corners last night, allegations of child sexual abuse not being addressed by regulators and profit being put above the care of children, along with regulations not being enforced. This is all happening in a sector that’s heavily subsidised by taxpayers. What’s the government’s response?
Chalmers:
Some of those details in the Four Corners story were distressing, deeply concerning.
Most operators and services in the sector do the right thing. They’ve got our kids’ and their kids’ safety as their top priority, and we take that very seriously. But what we saw on Four Corners was incredibly distressing.
We work closely with state and territory governments. They’re responsible for the approval of providers and services and to make sure that those services comply with the National Quality Framework, and so we’ll keep working with them to make sure that our kids are safe in early childhood education.
It’s such an important part of our community, and we want to make sure that it’s up to scratch. Most services are up to scratch, but clearly from that Four Corners story there are some that are falling way, way short of any reasonable expectation, and that’s very distressing.
Sara:
The Four Corners report showed us that up to 47,000 children are currently in for‑profit facilities that don’t meet National Quality Standards. Rather than working with the states, does there need to be a reworking of the regulations, and more importantly, the way in which they are enforced?
Chalmers:
Clearly we need to do this better. The National Quality Framework is the overarching standard that applies to all of these services in all of the states and territories, and clearly that hasn’t been adhered to in these instances, and these services have fallen way, way short in very dangerous and distressing ways. So we will do more work with the states and territories to make sure that the National Quality Framework is adhered to.
Sara:
The federal government has looked to make the industry sustainable through subsidies. In your view, has that come at the expense of child safety?
Chalmers:
Again, it’s important to remember, and this is a message for thousands and thousands of wonderful educators in the early childhood system, overwhelmingly the providers in that sector are doing the right thing by our kids, some wonderful people work in the sector, we can’t lose sight of that.
Where services are falling short, of course we need to do more work with the states and territories to make sure that they’re up to scratch. In 2023, as I recall, the Early Childhood Education Minister, Anne Aly, working with Jason Clare commissioned the Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority to review the National Quality Framework, and these revelations from Four Corners will obviously feed in to the implementation of the recommendations from that work.
Sara:
Treasurer, let’s move on to the Budget. In your speech today you’re highlighting Treasury estimates that the indirect impact of US steel and aluminium tariffs will be 0.1 per cent of GDP by the end of the decade. But how much worse could it be if the US imposes its next round of tariffs?
Chalmers:
It’s the right way to think about it, Sally, this is how the Treasury have modelled the impacts of these changes from the US Administration. The direct impacts are concerning but manageable. It’s the broader, indirect impacts that come from this serious escalation of trade tensions around the world, which is much more concerning to us.
This is a new world of uncertainty, and the pace of change in the world when it comes to rewriting the rules of global economic engagement has quickened since the new administration took office in the US.
Some of these developments, they’re not surprising, but they are seismic, and for Australia, we have a lot at stake as a trading country, and so what we need to do is, first of all, understand the impacts, direct and indirect, the indirect impacts are far more concerning. Our strategy in the Budget and in our economic plan is not to go for retaliation but to go for resilience, to make our economy more resilient at a time of very serious global economic uncertainty.
Sara:
Treasurer, the next round of tariffs could possibly hit Australia’s beef and pharmaceutical exports. What conversations are you having with your US counterpart, Scott Bessent, about that issue?
Chalmers:
As you know, I went to DC to speak directly to the new Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent, also Kevin Hassett and others in the US about these tariffs being imposed and discussed in the US.
We’re engaging across a number of ministers in our government, the Ambassador, Kevin Rudd’s doing a good job engaging with American counterparts as well.
Obviously, the imposition of any additional tariffs would be very concerning. We’re not unique here, we’re not uniquely disadvantaged by the sorts of tariffs coming out of DC, but we deserve better as a long term partner and ally.
These sorts of tariffs are self‑defeating, they’ve self‑sabotaging, they’re a recipe for less growth and higher inflation, not just in the US but around the world.
That’s one of the reasons why the OECD overnight downgraded their expectations for growth, because of these trade barriers and this escalation of trade tensions.
It’s very concerning to us as a trade exposed country, and that’s why we engage where we can in the most meaningful way we can to put Australia’s case.
Sara:
The Financial Review is reporting that the tariffs could potentially be between 2 and 8 per cent for Australia rather than 25 per cent. Is that your expectation also?
Chalmers:
It remains to be seen. I’ve seen that story in the Financial Review, and obviously there’s a lot of discussion in both countries and around the world about what the next steps may look like in terms of trade policy out of the US.
The point that I’m trying to make today in this speech, when I talk about the major influences on the Budget, particularly these global influences, is what’s happening over in the US is obviously very important, but also what’s happening right around the world is introducing a new level of uncertainty, and in that context, despite all of that global economic uncertainty, the Australian economy is performing quite well, the Australian economy’s turned a corner.
We’ve got growth up now, inflation down, real wages growing, unemployment low, interest rates have started to come down, and that puts us in a better, more resilient position to deal with everything that’s coming at us from around the world.
Sara:
These OECD forecasts, it’s maintaining the forecast of 1.9 per cent GDP growth for this year, but for 2026 it’s revised down those forecasts from 2.5 to 1.8 per cent, and it’s giving some indications that while inflation will come down slightly next year, there may be a chance that it lingers for longer than expected. What do you think of those forecasts?
Chalmers:
Obviously the OECD is a very respected institution. We’ll provide our own forecasts in the Budget this time next week for growth and for inflation.
We’ve had some very heartening news on both of those fronts in recent times. Growth has rebounded solidly in the Australian economy, the private sector has started to take its rightful place as the key driver of growth in our economy, at the same time as we’ve got inflation down from higher than 6 per cent and rising when we came to office to now in the bottom half of the Reserve Bank’s target band.
We’ve made a lot of progress together as Australians. We don’t want to put that progress at risk. There’s a lot of global economic uncertainty right around the world, and that’s why this will be a responsible Budget. It will be all about making our economy more resilient in uncertain times. It will be about cost‑of‑living help and building Australia’s future and continuing to clean up the mess that we inherited a few years ago.
Sara:
Treasurer, on the CFMEU, the Opposition says Australia needs laws to tackle organised crime in the construction industry, and they say they’ll bring in legislation to parliament for such powers next week. What’s your response to that? Is it needed?
Chalmers:
We’ve got zero tolerance for criminal behaviour in the workplace, and that’s why we’ve referred these matters, as I understand it, to the Australian Federal Police. It’s why we appointed an Administrator of the CFMEU, because this criminal behaviour is completely and absolutely unacceptable to us.
We’ve taken these decisive steps because these are very serious allegations. There’s an important role for the police and there’s an important role for the Administrator in cleaning up this union.
Sara:
Is Labor too afraid of the CFMEU to put proper oversight in place, because clearly what’s there now and what’s been there in the past hasn’t stopped these practices?
Chalmers:
First of all, we’ve taken the most decisive action by putting the Administrator in charge. The alternative, which is to deregister the union, would just hand the union back to the worst criminal elements that used to run the show. That’s why the employers don’t want to see that happening. That’s why they support the decisive steps that we’ve taken to appoint the Administrator.
So the Administrator is cleaning up the union, the old arrangements which are in place under the former government obviously weren’t working to crack down on this kind of unacceptable criminal behaviour in the union. So we’ve taken the decisive steps, whether it’s at the law enforcement level or in terms of appointing the Administrator.
The Administrator is cleaning up the union, it’s a difficult job, because some of these issues are entrenched, but the Administrator’s doing their job, and they should be allowed to get on with it.
Sara:
Just finally, Treasurer, Peter Dutton is considering proposing a referendum to change the Constitution to allow the government to deport dual citizens convicted of serious crimes. What do you make of that idea?
Chalmers:
A couple of things about that. First of all, these are important issues, but he will do absolutely anything to avoid coming clean on his cuts or on any economic policies, and that’s what we see on an almost daily basis.
Last time he tried to impose these laws the High Court threw them out, and now he wants a referendum to fix his mistakes.
We’ve taken a different approach. We rewrote his broken laws to create a more robust system to keep our community safe. We’ve worked through it in a methodical, in a considered way. He, quite bizarrely, wants another referendum.
I don’t think this idea will last long, just like a lot of the other things that he said in an effort to try to avoid talking about the economy and his cuts.
Sara:
Treasurer, we’ll need to leave it there. Thank you for your time this morning.
Chalmers:
Appreciate it, Sally. All the best.
Sara:
That’s the federal Treasurer there, Jim Chalmers.
Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry
Tom Connell:
I spoke to him a short time ago, started by asking him about the impact Cyclone Alfred has on the budget.
Jim Chalmers:
First of all, our focus, as you’d expect, is on the human cost of ex‑Tropical Cyclone Alfred and all of the other natural disasters we’ve seen in recent years. But there will be a substantial economic cost and also a cost to the budget. The $1.2 billion you refer to will be provisioned for in the Budget. It will be one of the key influences on the Budget we hand down in 8 days. But economic consequences as well, about a quarter point of growth, we think in this quarter. One of the consequences of the 12 million work hours that were lost in our economy when businesses shut down.
When it comes to inflation, the 2 things we’re monitoring very closely are the impact on fruit and veg, once we have a better handle on how the various farms and producers fared over a big geographic area during this natural disaster, and then building costs, as you rightly identify.
We’ve made a lot of progress on building and construction costs. It’s actually one of the more heartening reasons why inflation has come off substantially since we came to office. But we do expect some upward pressure here. I’ve been speaking with the insurers about their workforces, for example. They expect a little bit of upward pressure on building costs as well, but hopefully we can keep them contained because we’ve made a lot of progress together on that part of inflation and on inflation more broadly over the last couple of years.
Connell:
You saw a lot of this upfront. One of the big concerns of people ongoing in these areas is insurance. We spoke to people in southeast Queensland who said it’s just beyond them, that cost. Has seeing this upfront and talking to people made you think about whether or not there are elements or parts in Australia where insurance just isn’t going to be affordable, and is there a government role for that?
Chalmers:
Obviously it’s a key concern. We were talking a moment ago about the drivers of inflation and insurance costs is one of those drivers. And unfortunately, it does mean that some people will opt out of the insurance that they need, particularly in areas which are frequently hit and hardest hit. I’ve been in pretty regular contact with the insurers, particularly Suncorp, RACQ and some of the others, to make sure that for people who do have a policy, that they are being dealt with quickly, expeditiously, but I also know that it’s important more broadly, the system.
One of the things which hasn’t got a lot of commentary about this natural disaster is that the Cyclone Reinsurance Pool that’s managed by the federal government is an important part of dealing with what we’ve seen. It is an important backstop. It has had a little bit of an impact on premiums. We’d like it to have more of an impact on premiums, but it’s one of the things that the federal government is doing.
My colleague Stephen Jones is also doing a heap of other work, as have people like Daniel Mulino, who runs the committee process for us, to see what else could responsibly be done. But I don’t want to pretend that we have this insurance market perfectly fixed. We’ve done some meaningful things. We’re working closely with all of the stakeholders, but it is still a big driver of inflation. It still is a big concern for us.
Connell:
Yeah. The other part, inflation, of course, a big driver of that. Alright, so we’re a week and a bit from you delivering another Budget. I know expectation management is important. Do you want to just say, once and for all, is there any chance at all of another surplus?
Chalmers:
There won’t be a surplus this year, I think that’s pretty clear from the Budget we’ll hand down next week. There have been 2 surpluses for the first time in almost 2 decades. As you know, we’ve engineered the biggest ever nominal improvement in the Budget, around $200 billion. We’re paying down liberal debt. We’re saving on interest costs. We’ve made a lot of progress in the budget. And even if you think about the deficit for this year, it will still be a deficit, but it will be much, much lower than what we inherited from our predecessors. And so, we’re making progress, even where we’ve been able to.
In 2 years, we’ve been able to turn big Liberal deficits into Labor surpluses. This year we’ve been able to turn a big Liberal deficit into a smaller deficit and that will be demonstration, really, of our responsible economic management and the progress we’re making together as Australians in the Budget, but also in the economy more broadly.
Connell:
And for Australians as well, we’ve got, of course, the default market offer released on energy prices up to the highest increase, 9 per cent. Does that mean not continuing with the energy rebate, $300 energy rebate would be untenable given how much prices would go up by overall?
Chalmers:
I think when it comes to the energy bill rebate, it’s important to remember in the last year that we have data for, electricity prices went down about 25 per cent. They would have still gone down about 1.5 per cent were it not for our rebates. It shows the important role that those energy rebates have played in taking some of the edge off these power prices. The Default Market Offer that you’re asking me about is a forward‑looking thing. It reflects unreliability in the existing coal fired generator market, part of the market.
And that’s why it’s important we get more cleaner and cheaper energy into the system, and to do that in the most reliable way that we can. There are 2 things which are absolutely mad when it comes to electricity prices. One, our political opponents didn’t support energy bill rebates, so Australians would have been much worse off. Energy prices would have been higher if they had their way.
And the second bit of madness is nuclear reactors, which would leave the unreliable parts in the system for much longer while they built these reactors. And then when they were built, they would push up energy prices because they’re such an expensive form of new energy.
Connell:
But if you think of those customers in NSW, for example, facing a 9 per cent increase, could they also face the removal of that subsidy on July 1?
Chalmers:
I’m not going to pre‑empt the Budget. I think you’d understand why I wouldn’t do that. Our focus is on rolling out the cost‑of‑living relief that we’ve already budgeted for, including those energy rebates which are helping people take some of the edge off these cost‑of‑living pressures. That’s what they’re designed to do and that’s what they’ve been doing. It beggars belief that the Coalition didn’t want people to receive that bit of help.
Connell:
I know you’re short on time. Just briefly, the Coalition hinting it’s fair to say, income tax cuts in the next term. Is that something you’re looking at as well?
Chalmers:
I see Angus Taylor’s on a little tour of marginal electorates. While he’s doing that, Tom, he should tell millions of Australians that he didn’t want them to get a tax cut in the first place. As I understand it, this whole brouhaha about tax today, he’s using numbers which are calculated before our tax cuts came into place, before they came into being.
And so, he should visit every marginal seat and he should tell millions of Australians he didn’t want them to get a tax cut. He didn’t want them to get help with their electricity bills. He wants them to have lower wages. These are the reasons why Angus Taylor and Peter Dutton pose such a risk to household budgets, it’s because people would have been worse off to here, and they’ll be worse off still if they win.
When it comes to income taxes, we’ve shown that we are cutting income taxes right now from the first of July last year, a very important decision that we’re very proud of. It means average tax rates come down. It means people get a bit of tax relief that they need and deserve to deal with these cost‑of‑living pressures that they’re still confronting.
Connell:
So, given how recent that last tax cut was, is the indication they’re not coming anytime soon, the next tranche or the next move on that?
Chalmers:
I’ll say the same thing I’ve said on every other occasion, Tom, that I’m asked about this. Our focus is on the tax cuts which are rolling out right now. They’re rolling out in the economy right now. They’re helping every Australian taxpayer with a tax cut that the Liberals and Nationals didn’t want them to get, millions of Australians would have missed out. So, that’s really an important thing I think, the important role that the existing tax cuts are playing in the system.
The fact that we are nowhere near the tax to GDP cap that Angus Taylor is talking about today, the fact that they opposed these tax cuts, which would have meant people would have been worse off, that’s our focus. There are already tax cuts rolling out in the system. They’re an important part, but not the only part, of the cost‑of‑living help that we’re providing in a substantial but also responsible way.
Connell:
Treasurer Jim Chalmers, thanks for your time.
Chalmers:
Appreciate it, Tom. All the best.
Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry
Stephanie Dalzell:
Treasurer, thanks for joining us. You’ve confirmed the government will be handing down a deficit in the upcoming Budget. How bad is the Budget bottom line? What’s the number we’re talking about?
Jim Chalmers:
Oh, good afternoon, Stephanie. Well, first of all, I’ve been saying that for some months that the Budget this year is in deficit, but that deficit will be much smaller than what we inherited from Peter Dutton and Angus Taylor. It will show that we’ve made some very substantial progress cleaning up the mess that we inherited in the budget but as I’ve said on a number of occasions for some time now, those first 2 surpluses that we delivered, the first 2 surpluses back to back in almost 2 decades, they will be followed by a deficit, but the deficit will be smaller than what we were left.
Dalzell:
Treasury have put the cost of Ex‑Tropical Cyclone Alfred at $1.2 billion. What pressure will that, and disaster support more broadly, place on the Budget?
Chalmers:
Well, this will be a key influence on the Budget that we hand down in 8 days’ time. Not the only influence. The global economic uncertainty will be a big part of the story, cost‑of‑living pressures, but also the progress that we’re making getting inflation down in our own economy. These will be the main influences. But when it comes to natural disasters, we will be provisioning another $1.2 billion to respond to Ex‑Tropical Cyclone Alfred. That will take the total of assistance and rebuilding and recovery costs in the Budget from natural disasters to something like $13.5 billion.
Now, you played a grab a moment ago, grabs before from Peter Dutton and Angus Taylor. Remember when they talk about our Budget, they consider things like natural disaster funding as wasteful spending. This is the reason why they won’t come clean on the cuts that they intend to make to the budget because they pose a big risk to people including in these natural disaster affected communities.
Dalzell:
I’ll come to the Coalition’s figures in a minute. But just staying on the Budget for now, we’re expecting the second round of Trump’s tariffs next month. The impact for Australia could be huge. Not just the tariffs themselves, but the global consequences of them. How are you accounting for that in this Budget?
Chalmers:
I think you’re quite right the way you’ve summarised that in the question. There are really 2 sets of impacts on Australia when it comes to these escalating trade tensions coming out of DC, but also retaliatory tariffs from around the world. There are the direct impacts on Australia from things like a tariff on steel and aluminium, but there are also the broader economic consequences in a world where we’re seeing these escalating tensions. I’ll have a bit more to say about this tomorrow when I’m at the Queensland Media Club.
But what we’ve said before is that we have modelled these impacts on the Australian economy. We expect the immediate direct impacts to be relatively manageable. We’ve got wonderful exporters, they will diversify, they will find other markets, but the broader consequences will be much more significant. Particularly when you consider the impact of these tariffs on the big economies, the US, China, Canada, Mexico, Europe, we expect the impacts of those to be much more substantial.
Dalzell:
Just for people not as intimately involved in the Budget as you, which is probably everyone, how do you model those impacts? Is it an initial scenario of tariffs? Can you just walk us through how you’re possibly managing to model something that is just so unclear at the moment?
Chalmers:
Well, what the economists do at the Treasury, and they’re professionals, they model all kinds of scenarios and they try and forecast in the budget the best sense that they can get of the likely impacts of these sorts of policy changes out of DC, but also out of Beijing and elsewhere. And what they do is they have a look at the size of the industry that’s impacted, they look at the likely impacts on that industry, and they come up with an informed and a concluded view. So again, I’ll say a bit more about this tomorrow, but really, you’ve touched on 2 of the big influences on this Budget. We’re 8 days out now. There’ll be extra money for cyclone recovery. there will also be an attempt to quantify the economic impacts of these escalating trade tensions and between them, those 2 influences will be quite significant when it comes to the Budget.
Dalzell:
Now, we heard the Coalition before. They say the average Australian worker paid $3,500 more tax last financial year than before your government was elected. How do you plan to address bracket creep here?
Chalmers:
Well, those guys have got a lot of nerve talking about tax cuts when they tried to prevent almost 3 million people getting the tax cut that Labor is delivering and they tried to prevent 84 per cent of taxpayers getting a bigger tax cut, or 90 per cent of women taxpayers getting a bigger tax cut because of the steps that we took and implemented in the middle of last year. So if they want to talk about tax, they should explain to those millions of Australians why they didn’t want them to get a tax cut in the first place, that’s the first point I would make about that.
What we saw with our tax cuts is every single Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut because of this Albanese Labor government. It means people are earning more and keeping more of what they earn. That is one of the central objectives of our economic policy, making sure that wages are growing which is one reason why the tax take is up, but also making sure more people keep more of what they earn because of the tax cuts that our political opponents opposed.
Dalzell:
It seems like the Budget is still relying on upside revenue, on iron ore and coal. Is this economic management or is it economic luck?
Chalmers:
A couple of things about that. First of all, we’re not expecting big, significant revenue upgrades in the Budget. We’re expecting any revenue upgrades in this Budget to be smaller than in the other Budgets we delivered. But what really matters when you do get those upward revisions to revenue is this Labor government in a very responsible way has banked most of those upward revisions to revenue, our predecessors used to spend most of those upward revisions to revenue and that’s the big difference.
That’s one of the reasons why we’ve engineered the biggest improvement in the Budget in nominal terms in the history of this country, around a $200 billion improvement to the Budget. Two surpluses for the first time in almost 2 decades, we’re paying down Liberal debt, we’re saving on the interest costs on that debt as a consequence and that’s really the overarching message I would leave your viewers today, Stephanie.
People are looking for hints in the fourth Albanese government’s Budget, the hints for the fourth one are in the first 3, a Budget defined by economic responsibility, responsible economic management, making our economy more resilient in the face of all of this global economic uncertainty. Those will be the major focuses of the Budget tomorrow week.
Dalzell:
Well, if the hints are in the first 3, does that mean that in this Budget, we can expect an extension of that federal energy subsidy, giving households $300 for electricity bills this financial year? Will that continue?
Chalmers:
Look, as you’d understand, I don’t intend to announce any cost‑of‑living help that will be in the Budget next week. What we have said consistently really for some time now is where we can find an affordable and responsible way to provide some cost‑of‑living help, recognising that people are still under pressure, of course we will try and do that where we can. Again, we have done that in the first 3 Budgets, and we will try to do that again in the fourth.
The Budget is really about managing the nation’s books in the most responsible way that we can so that we can provide that cost‑of‑living relief when we can do that in an affordable way so that we can invest in building Australia’s future and so that we can continue to clean up the mess that we inherited from the Liberal and National parties.
Dalzell:
I also wanted to ask you about breaking news that we’ve had this hour that US President Donald Trump is set to call the Russian President Vladimir Putin about the war in Ukraine on Tuesday, discussing land, power plants and dividing up certain assets. Are you concerned about those words, dividing certain assets?
Chalmers:
Look, I haven’t seen those comments, I haven’t seen those stories that you say have broken in the last little while. I’ve been on video hook ups about the Budget and about other things. So I’ll go through the language that has been used here. We’ve made it very clear we support the people and the leaders of Ukraine. They have been incredibly brave and courageous in the most difficult circumstances. Vladimir Putin and Russia have been the aggressors here and we’ve made clear our position. Beyond that, I’m happy to go through the language that’s been used by President Trump and no doubt we’ll have more to say about it in due course.
Dalzell:
A Labor Party rank‑and‑file campaign to scrap the AUKUS submarine project is intensifying. Concerns are growing about the future of the US alliance under President Donald Trump. Is it time to jump ship? Pardon the pun.
Chalmers:
Oh no, I don’t believe so. And again, I’ve got the most respectful view of people who have other opinions about this, all the way from former Prime Minister Turnbull to some of the branch members that you mentioned there. Obviously, we listen respectfully when people have different views, but we don’t share those views.
AUKUS is in Australia’s national interest. It also has, in my view, big industrial and economic benefits, and we support it for those reasons, understanding that something as big and often controversial as this will attract a whole range of views right across the political spectrum.
Dalzell:
When we talk about the next round of tariffs, how concerned are you that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme will become a focus for the Trump administration in this next round?
Chalmers:
That remains to be seen and I’m reluctant to speculate about that. I will say this about the PBS – this is one of the most important features of our health system. We’ve got universal Medicare, we’ve got the PBS, which means massive savings for people accessing often life‑saving drugs. And so it’s something that we’re very proud of. It’s something that we will defend, of course. That’s the position we’ve had for a very long time. Beyond that, I don’t really want to speculate about what may or may not be part of the next pronouncements that President Trump or others make out of Washington DC.
Dalzell:
Well, in terms of the current tariffs then on the table, steel and aluminium, Trade Minister Don Farrell has said he’s not sure what America wants in terms of negotiating. How do we make an offer? In that context, what can we offer?
Chalmers:
Well, there have been discussions for some time, as you would expect. We’ve all been engaged at different levels with different counterparts with the US administration. We’ve made it very clear, I think the Prime Minister was very strong in making it clear that these tariffs are not the actions of a friend. They are disappointing, they make no sense, and they are a recipe for slower growth and higher inflation wherever these tariffs apply, including in the US, so we’ve made our view very clear. But we’ve been engaging in the ways that people would expect here in Australia with our American counterparts pointing out that this is an economic relationship of mutual benefit. We have a lot to offer the United States and vice versa.
Dalzell:
Thank you. Treasurer, thank you so much for your time today. Sorry to cut you off. We really appreciate you taking the time but we’re running out of time. That’s Afternoon Briefing.
Source:
To apply for a private ruling about a demerger:
To lodge a class ruling about a demerger:
Check first whether your question is answered in Demergers.
A request for a private or class ruling about a demerger must:
If it applies to:
So we can identify the demerger group, we require (see note):
Note: We recognise that for widely held entities some of this information may not be known.
In determining the information required to be provided, you should have regard to Taxation Determination TD 2020/6 Income tax: what is a ‘restructuring’ for the purposes of subsection 125-70(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997?
In addition, to ensure the demerger requirements are met we require:
So we can determine the CGT consequences for the shareholders or unit holders of the head entity, we require:
For many demergers, shareholders or unit holders of a head entity may be able to work out the CGT consequences resulting from the demerger by using the demergers calculator.
So we can determine if dividend relief is available for shareholders or unit holders of the head entity, we require:
You need to address all the circumstances in subsection 45B(8) of the ITAA 1936 to enable us to consider the application of section 45B of the ITAA 1936 to the demerger benefit or capital benefit.
We recognise that all shareholder or unit holder information may not be known for widely held entities.
The circumstances in subsection 45B(8) of the ITAA 1936 include, but are not limited to:
So we can determine the CGT consequences for demerger group members, you need to provide:
Source: Reserve Bank of Australia
16 July 2024
Whilst the 2024-25 Federal Budget did not feature the big-ticket announcement of hundreds of thousands of Fee-Free TAFE places or billion-dollar TAFE specific investment like last year, it did include over $600 million of new skills investments on top of existing commitments to the National Skills Agreement signed in the last year, and the establishment of Jobs and Skills Australia and the VET Workforce Blueprint Strategy. It also included select measures that will influence the operation of TAFE and impact the working lives of TAFE teachers into the future.
Future Made in Australia
The headline priority area for skills in the budget is the government’s “Future Made in Australia” package, designed to be a nation building investment in renewable energy and the transition to net zero, at a total of $22.7 billion over the next decade.
A large proportion of the total investment is aimed at incentivising private investment in net zero industries, however, there are still several measures under the Future Made in Australia banner that directly fund the vocational education sector:
$91 million over five years from 2023–24 to support the development of the clean energy workforce, including through addressing vocational education and training sector trainer workforce shortages, and funding new and existing training facility upgrades across a range of clean energy occupations.
$55.6 million over four years from 2024–25 to establish the Building Women’s Careers program to drive structural and systemic change in work and training environments. This program will fund partnerships between training providers, community organisations, employers, and unions to improve women’s access to flexible, safe and inclusive work and training opportunities in traditionally male-dominated industries of national priority, including clean energy sectors.
However, there is little detail available about how funds from the Building Women’s Careers program will be deployed, beyond the assertion that the program will provide around 10 large grants and several small-scale grants over the next four years.
Announced before the Budget was $88.8 million over three years from 2024–25 to support 20,000 new fee-free training places. This is an expansion of the existing Fee-Free TAFE program with 15,000 places specifically for courses relevant to the construction sector and delivered through TAFE and industry registered training organisations.It also includes 5,000 Fee-Free places to increase access to pre-apprenticeship programs.
Connecting pathways
The Budget also included funding to implement recommendations from the Australian Universities Accord including $27.7 million over four years from 2024–25 (and an additional $32.8 million from 2028–29 to 2034–35) to develop initiatives that “break down artificial barriers and harmonise regulatory, governance and qualification arrangements between the higher education and vocational education and training sectors.” It is expected that this funding will be used to help streamline recognition of prior learning in TAFE and vocational education for students enrolling in university, and to ensure that pathways through vocational education and tertiary education are more clearly defined and accessible.
There were also a number of smaller skills-based measures in the Budget including:
$10.6 million over four years from 2024–25 (and $1 million per year ongoing) for the implementation of a reporting solution for the Australian Skills Guarantee
$9.5 million in 2024–25 in additional funding for Jobs and Skills Australia’s continued provision of advice on Australia’s labour market, skills and training needs
$6.1 million in 2024–25 in additional funding for the National Careers Institute to continue its role in supporting Australians to access targeted careers information
$2.9 million in 2024–25 in reallocated funding for continued implementation work with the states and territories on the 5-year National Skills Agreement that commenced on 1 January 2024.
$4.4 million in 2024–25 to support delivering the VET workforce required to meet Australia’s future skills needs. This will include delivering strategic communications to increase the appeal of VET for students, parents and teachers, and extending community awareness of Fee-Free TAFE courses in areas of high skills needs which has ensured strong uptake of Fee-Free TAFE places to date.
$10.6 million over four years from 2024–25 (and $1.0 million per year ongoing) for the implementation of a reporting solution for the Australian Skills Guarantee
$9.5 million in 2024–25 in additional funding for Jobs and Skills Australia
$6.1 million in 2024–25 in additional funding for the National Careers Institute
$3.9 million over four years from 2024–25 to train TAFE teachers to deliver courses relevant to key professions within the nuclear-powered submarine enterprise.
Further support for the Australian Apprenticeships Incentive System
The government has promised $265.1 million over four years to adjust previously scheduled Phase Two Apprenticeship Incentive System payments “to provide further support for apprentices, trainees and their employers in priority occupations, while the Government undertakes the Strategic Review of the Australian Apprenticeships Incentive System.” These changes are welcome and will increase payments to apprentices from $3,000 to $5,000 and will increase payments to employers from $4,000 to $5,000.
Improved subsidies for apprentices are important, but so is ensuring that apprentices receive a longer term commitment from their employers. The position of the AEU is that this subsidy should therefore be dependent on apprentices having their employment maintained for at least 12 months from the conclusion of their apprenticeship.
Minimal capital investment
A nation building investment in TAFE campuses and equipment was not forthcoming in the Budget. This Budget, centred on the nation building potential of a Future Made in Australia Initiative, lacked a similar bold vision for the future of TAFE campuses and equipment. A new Capital and Equipment Investment Fund, totalling $50 million over three years has been described as part of a co-investment with states to “to ensure that TAFE facilities are equipped and ready to deliver cutting-edge training in clean energy qualifications and support more students to undertake this training.”
Whilst all capital investment in TAFE is welcome, it was nonetheless disappointing that the Albanese government did not manage greater ambition than the Coalition who had budgeted for a very similarly sized short term $50 million TAFE campus upgrade fund in their 2021-22 Budget. If TAFE is to truly be at the heart of vocational education in Australia, state-of-the-art campuses, equipment and facilities are needed.
Time to turbo charge investment in educators
Although the large investment and commitment to TAFE made by the Albanese government through the National Skills Agreement and the expanded Fee-Free TAFE initiative is very welcome, there are still significant concerns among TAFE teachers and support staff on workload, job security, and the level of support required by students accessing the expanded Fee-Free TAFE program.
The AEU’s State of Our TAFE survey showed that students enrolling in Fee-Free TAFE have significantly higher levels of additional needs including mental health, digital skills, literacy and numeracy and English language needs than the overall TAFE student cohort, and that TAFE institutes are generally not currently resourced to support those needs.
The only Budget measure for more teacher support was “Turbocharge the Teacher, Trainer and Assessor Workforce” which will provide $30 million to the states to support existing initiatives and new measures to rapidly upskill teachers, trainers and assessors involved in the clean energy, manufacturing and construction sectors. “Rapidly upskilling” the remaining TAFE workforce is not enough –a comprehensive and long-term TAFE workforce strategy is needed to restore the sector.
Missed opportunity
As the AEU’s 2024 State of Our TAFE survey shows, TAFE workers are chronically overburdened to the point where many are planning to leave the sector. A clear majority of workers said that both their working hours and the pace and intensity of their work increased over the last year, and they are working almost a day a week in excess of their contracted hours.
As a result of these pressures, more than two thirds of TAFE workers had considered leaving the sector in the last year, 45 per cent plan to remain for less than five years and only one quarter plan to spend their entire career in TAFE. Additionally, more than three quarters said that workload has a major impact on the recruitment and retention of TAFE teachers from industry.
The 2024-25 Federal Budget presented the government with an opportunity to provide the support to TAFE students and to help retain TAFE teachers to ensure that the Fee-Free TAFE initiative is a long-term success. It also offered a chance to regenerate the TAFE workforce following a decade of cuts and attrition due to excessive workload and poor pay. Whilst there is a substantial investment in skills in this Budget as the underpinning of the “Future Made in Australia” plan, the opportunity to recognise and prioritise the importance of TAFE workers in that plan was not taken up.
By Jonathon Guy
This article was originally published in The Australian TAFE Teacher, Winter 2024
Source: Australian National Party
As part of ACT Government’s ‘One Government, One Voice’ program, we are transitioning this website across to our . You can access everything you need through this website while it’s happening.
Released 17/03/2025
Most ACT Government irrigated sportsgrounds will close for a two-week maintenance period from Tuesday (March 18) to prepare for the winter sport season.
Minister for Sport and Recreation, Yvette Berry said this two-week period provides a good opportunity for the Sport & Recreation facilities team to get grounds ready for a variety of winter sport.
“This includes, top dressing surfaces, installing goal posts, line marking ovals, upgrading turf, fertilising and in some locations adding coconut fibres into the soil to help with better water retention on ovals,” Minister Berry said.
During the maintenance period, 25 ovals will remain available for booking to accommodate the need for pre-season training.
“The ACT Government continues to receive positive feedback from sporting peak bodies of this approach in keeping some grounds open during the two-week maintenance period. These 25 playing fields will receive maintenance later in 2025,” Minister Berry said.
The traditional sportsground maintenance period is carried out twice yearly at the beginning and end of the summer sport season.
All grounds will re-open on Tuesday 1 April 2025.
The 25 fields (listed below) that will remain open over the next two weeks include:
Bonython (2 fields)
Hughes (2 fields)
Cook (1 field)
Isabella Plains (2 fields)
Giralang (1 field)
Latham (3 fields)
Gowrie (5 fields)
Pearce (2 fields)
Holt (7 fields)
Woden Park (athletics) will remain open as well as synthetic grass fields at Holt (1 field), Nicholls (2 fields) and Pearce (1 field).
– Statement ends –
Yvette Berry, MLA | Media Releases
Source: New South Wales – News
Woodville Gardens man Bill Frangos was murdered more than three hours before his Essex Street home was set alight in a bid to destroy evidence, Major Crime Investigation Branch detectives have revealed.
In a significant development in the murder investigation, detectives have also revealed they believe those responsible for the murder returned to the scene in a distinctive grey Holden Commodore shortly before lighting the fire.
CCTV has revealed just after 3.30am on 7 November 2024 the grey Commodore – which has a silver front bumper panel, damage to the front passenger door and a black tyre rim on the front passenger side – was parked on Ridley Grove at Woodville Gardens, a short distance from Mr Frangos’ Essex Street house.
A man wearing a backpack was seen walking from the grey Commodore towards the Essex Street house and a short time later CCTV captured it erupting in flames.
The vision also shows what detectives believe to be the same man then running back to Ridley Grove and leaving the area in a southerly direction in the grey Commodore.
In December detectives released CCTV of a red Ford Falcon XR6 utility leaving the vicinity of the murder. New CCTV footage reveals two people returning to this vehicle before it leaves. Investigations have revealed these two people are male of African appearance.
This vehicle has been seized by detectives as part of the investigation.
This new CCTV footage captured the two men walking between Mr Frangos’ address and back to the utility parked in nearby Parker Street on a number of occasions between 10.30pm and midnight on 6 November 2024.
Detectives believe the same two men are responsible for Mr Frangos’ murder and the subsequent arson attack on his home. It is believed the two men and Mr Frangos were acquainted and the murder is not random.
Major Crime Investigation Branch Officer-in-Charge Detective Superintendent Darren Fielke appealed for anyone with information on the whereabouts of the grey Commodore or who knows of any individual associated with it to contact police.
“It is a distinctive vehicle, particularly with the silver front bumper panel, that people will certainly recognise,’’ he said.
“The investigation is now moving rapidly, but we are still seeking information from the public to obtain more evidence that will assist us in rebuilding the full picture of what happened that night.
“We are confident there will be a resolution in the case as investigations continue. The net is closing in on those responsible for Bill’s murder. Now is the time to come forward with information.’’
Anyone with any information on the grey Commodore or those associated with it during the evening of Wednesday 6 November and the early hours of Thursday 7 November are urged to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.