Thursday 1 August 2013

Senator Penny Wong, TOPICS: BANKING SECTOR, BUDGET, FRINGE BENEFIT TAX


SENATOR THE HON PENNY WONG

LEADER OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SENATE

MINISTER FOR FINANCE AND DEREGULATION


TRANSCRIPT


PRESS CONFERENCE – CANBERRA


E&OE - PROOF ONLY

WONG: I’d like to respond to a few of the comments which Tony Abbott has made today about the car industry. First, let’s be really clear about the Government’s fringe benefits tax measures. First, it doesn’t affect existing contracts. Second, it’s based on a very simple principle: if Australians are to get a tax concession for business use of a vehicle then the vehicle should be used for business use. It’s a bit like saying you want a child care rebate then obviously your child needs to be in childcare.
But I have to say the vision of Mr Abbott running around as if he’s some great defender of the car industry is a joke. Because let’s remember, Tony Abbott has said very clearly – confirmed again by Joe Hockey just this week – ‘we will take $500 million from the car industry in the next two years and we will not make any commitment beyond 2015 to the car industry in Australia’.
So Tony Abbott is crying crocodile tears here for the car industry because he is the man were he ever elected Prime Minister who has said to all of the people who rely on the auto industry for work, ‘I am going to take away the direct support that Government gives to assist your industry, in the next two years – in the here and now – $500 million and my pledge to you is nothing more than zero beyond 2015 unless circumstances change’. Well, that doesn’t add up to much support for the car industry.
So he might try and jump on to the fringe benefits tax issue as much as he likes but the facts simply demonstrate that the Coalition are not supporters of the car industry.
Happy to take questions.
JOURNALIST: Are you considering a levy on the bank sector?
WONG: Well, I’ve seen some of the speculation on this and it reminds me of the pre-budget speculation we always have. I’d make a couple of points. The first is I think the Treasurer today has referenced the fact that the IMF and the RBA have put a view to the Government about the need for a fund to cover deposit protection and the Treasurer has made clear he’s consulting on that. But as I’ve said to you before, before a budget or budget update there’s always speculation. A lot of it is not true, a lot of it is inaccurate and I’m not going to be commenting on that speculation ahead of the economic statement.
JOURNALIST: You could put us all out of our terror, and the banking sector which has been reflected in the ASX today, by just saying ‘yes’ or ‘no’…
WONG: As I said, I’m not going to comment any further on speculation. You’ll have to wait until these decisions are announced and finalised in due course.
JOURNALIST: If a levy is there to protect against future shocks would it be responsible to claim it as recurrent revenue or would it be wiser to put it in a separate fund?
WONG: Well, I think that’s asking me to comment on the speculation. I’d refer back to my earlier answer that there’s always speculation, a lot of it is inaccurate. A lot of it is inaccurate. And I’d invite you to wait until further discussions occur.
JOURNALIST: But there is no alternative than to ask you about the speculation -
WONG: No, well of course you’re entitled to -
JOURNALIST: … given what’s happening on the ASX -
WONG: David, you’re entitled to ask me, you are. But I’m also entitled as the Finance Minister -
JOURNALIST: Regardless of what’s happening on the ASX?
WONG: I’m also entitled, as the Finance Minister, to make sure that we take a responsible approach and if announcements are to be made to do them in a methodical way and not to respond to every speculation that was out there.
JOURNALIST: Is it time for the banks to repay the Government for some of the guarantees that were given to them during the GFC?
WONG: I think that is inviting me to comment on the speculation. I would make the point though, as I’ve said – this is something that has been discussed previously and has been raised, as I said, by both the IMF and the RBA.
JOURNALIST: Are we going to see the update tomorrow? It keeps getting put back from day to day –
WONG: Well, no. Your speculation about it keeps changing, I think. In the near future.
JOURNALST: Is the Government still forecasting an $18 billion deficit for this financial year?
WONG: Look, when the economic statement is released all of our figures will be there to see. And I’d make this point: it puts us in stark contrast to the Coalition. I think the Australian people do deserve to know what decisions political parties will make after an election, what decisions they are making to ensure that the budget is in good shape. And let’s remember, for all of Mr Abbott’s running around saying ‘we’ve got a budget emergency’, we’ve got a AAA credit rating with a stable outlook from all three credit rating agencies. So he’s simply wrong on that. The facts don’t back him up.
But I would say this: you’ve got Tony Abbott making a lot of promises which he hasn’t funded. A lot of promises that he hasn’t funded. $1.8 billion on the Fringe Benefits Tax – well that’s as much as we spent on the Road to Recovery program over 5 years. Is he going to tell Australians what he’s going to cut?
We already know that he’s going to take money off schools. He’s going to take $16 billion off Australia’s schools, meaning larger classrooms, less individual attention. We already know that when he was Health Minister he took $1 billion out of public hospitals. Well, where are the cuts going to be? Because we know in the Liberal DNA it’s always to hit hard those who can least afford it.
JOURNALIST: Is the Government too obsessed with finding a surplus given that you’ve got forecasts that the economy is going to continue to be weaker? NAB says unemployment 6.25 percent early next year. Is there too much of a focus on getting back to an arbitrary date for a surplus?
WONG: There’s nothing arbitrary about how we manage public finances. We look very carefully at what’s happening in the economy. We’ve taken decisions in the past, as you know, to make important savings but also not to chase revenue down for precisely some of the reasons you’ve outlined. You have to run your budget reflecting the economic circumstances and you also have to run your budget prudently and make responsible savings. And that’s what you’ll see, and will continue to see, from this Government.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) unexpected consequences from the FBT changes and are you considering any variations to that to compensate for it?
WONG: Look, we’re always happy to talk to the auto industry about continued operations in Australia because we’re supporters – unlike Tony Abbott – of the car industry.
JOURNALIST: But does this affect charity workers? People who package their salaries and in return get a very, very low rate of pay?
WONG: Well I’d make a couple of points. First, the measure itself doesn’t affect the other FBT arrangements for charities and the Not-for-Profit sector. It does affect those who take vehicles in the same way it affects any other Australians.
But we saw Tony Abbott today talking about school teachers. Well, has he talked to the school teachers about the billions of dollars he’ll take out of Australia’s schools?
We saw Tony Abbott today talking about nurses. Well, can he commit to not cutting funding to public hospitals the way he did when he was previously Health Minister?
I mean, let’s understand: Tony Abbott is all about cuts which hit health and education and services to families. And he’s not prepared to tell Australians what he’s going to cut to pay for these promises.
Thank you.
ENDS

No comments:

Post a Comment