Transcript: Julia Gillard, Press Conference, Canberra
Julia Gillard
posted Thursday, 2 September 2010
E & O E – PROOF ONLY
Subjects: Agreement with Mr Andrew Wilkie; Coalition costings.
PM: As you are aware Andrew Wilkie has today signed with me an agreement which means that Mr Andrew Wilkie, as the new Member for Denison, will support the Gillard Government. This agreement extends to supporting the Gillard Government in matters of obtaining supply and in the face of no confidence motions.
I thank Mr Wilkie for the decency and diligence with which he has negotiated this agreement. I thank Mr Wilkie for bearing in mind at all stages the national interest. He has clearly been motivated to enter this agreement based on his views of the national interest.
First and foremostly, Mr Andrew Wilkie asked us, and I have agreed, to build on our health reforms. As a Government we’ve created the health and hospitals fund. We did that because we recognised that hospitals around the country needed assistance with infrastructure. And of course, under our health reforms we agreed that the Commonwealth should step up for funding of 60 per cent of the health system. We had agreed through COAG processes that there would be a further round of applications for funding from the health and hospitals fund. However, we had set no date as to when that further round might be. As a result of Mr Wilkie’s advocacy I have agreed with him that we will have a further round, a further call for applications for the health and hospitals fund.
In particular of course, Mr Wilkie is concerned with the hospital in Hobart, with the Royal Hobart Hospital. I do note that the Tasmanian Government made application on behalf of this hospital in an earlier health and hospitals fund round. At that time they made application for a very limited amount of money for repairs. And In response, of course, the health and hospital fund at that stage indicated that they would prefer to consider a full development proposal rather than a patch up job. Since that time the Tasmanian Government has made some decisions about how it wants to redevelop the hospital and particularly has made a decision about redeveloping the hospital and its current site. In these circumstances I have agreed with Mr Wilkie that the monies will be made available earlier. $100 million to enable construction work to start on the Women’s and Children’s Hospital and that an application on behalf of the Royal Hobart Hospital will be considered in accordance with the proper evaluation criteria of the health and hospitals fund.
Now I do note that the total cost of this proposal is $565 million. Of course, from the point of view of the Federal Government we would, if this application is successful, look to meet 60 per cent of the cost. This of course we believe is the responsible approach in accordance with proper processes.
Mr Wilkie, of course, is also a passionate advocate on behalf of those who experience problems with gambling. The Government, during its last term, acknowledged that problem gambling is an issue that presses on the minds of many Australians. Many Australians know someone who has a problem with gambling. Because of that we commissioned the Productivity Commission to provide expert advice on how best to address problem gambling and we made a first instance response to the Productivity Commission before the election. We said that we would work through the Productivity Commission’s recommendations. As a result of Mr Wilkie’s advocacy, his passionate advocacy, and I do note of course that he joined Senator Nick Xenophon in this Parliament and Nick Xenophon has also been a passionate advocate of reform in this area. I have agreed with Mr Wilkie that the Commonwealth will work to achieve major reforms in the area of problem gambling. Particularly the implementation of full mandatory pre-commitment technology which enable gamblers themselves to control the amount of money that they are going to gamble. The Productivity Commission identified this as a major step forward for problem gamblers and it indicated that it believed there are around 160,000 Australians with problems with gambling.
I’ve agreed with Mr Wilkie that we will work with States and Territories to deliver this reform but I’ve also agree with him that the Commonwealth will act if the agreement of States and Territories is not forthcoming. I have agreed with him that we will obtain a comprehensive legal advice about the Commonwealth’s constitutional competence to legislate in this areas and we’ll obviously be guided by that advice.
So I do thank him very much for his decency and diligence for working through with the Government on these questions. Can I also say, of course, that discussions continue with Mr Windsor, with Mr Katter and with Mr Oakeshott, the three Independents in the House of Representatives.
I would say to Mr Katter, Mr Windsor and Mr Oakeshott, I believe they have done the nation a great service by ensuring that Mr Abbott has finally had his election policies costed by Treasury.
Now during the election campaign, of course, many Australians were asking themselves what Mr Abbott had to hide, why he wasn’t putting his policies in for proper Treasury costing. Well now, of course, we know he has 11 billion reasons why he wanted to keep those costings secret. 11 billion reasons.
Yesterday, of course, Treasury briefed the Independents and they have now talked publically about the Treasury costings, and what they show is a huge black hole. And in view of this, Australians would be asking themselves the question: how can they trust anything that Mr Abbott says about these matters or indeed any other matter? I note that Mr Abbott now says, somehow, that they will try covering this huge black hole with funding cuts. What we already know from Mr Abbott’s election campaign is that if he is to become Prime Minister, medicines will be more expensive, there will be no more GP Super Clinics, there will be no more Computers in Schools, there will be no more Trades Training Centres. Now of course Australians will be asking themselves what more savage cuts does Mr Abbott have in mind? Is he going to not proceed with Regional Cancer Centres even though they’re desperately needed in rural and regional Australia. Is he going to engage in further cuts? Cuts that cost hospital beds, cuts that hack into schools, what does Mr Abbott have in mind as he talks about further cuts to desperately try and cover up this $11 billion black hole?
Of course I will continue to work over coming days in having discussions with the Independents but let me conclude where I started, by thanking Mr Andrew Wilkie for his support as indicated today and thanking him for his decency in the process of discussions.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, Mr Wilkie says that he also will use the power of his vote to try to change Labor’s asylum seeker policy. Are you be prepared to look at changing your asylum seeker policy in any way?
PM: No, Labor’s policies are Labor’s policies.
Phil Coorey.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: There’s $1.8 billion in the Health and Hospitals Fund. The agreement with Mr Wilkie is an agreement that any expenditure will be properly offset under our Budget rules. I am able to make a $100 million available to Mr Wilkie because, as verified by Treasury costings, we are more than $100 million in front of where we need to be to offset commitments made during the election campaign. Any applications that are agreed to by the Health and Hospitals Fund and agreed to by the Government will be the subject of offsetting by the Government. Under us, the Government is bringing the Budget back into surplus in 2013 as promised. Of course, it’s Mr Abbott with the $11 billion black hole.
JOURNALIST: Can you clarify Ms Gillard, you would offset the full $1.8 billion?
PM: We would offset any amount expended from the Health and Hospital Fund.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Well of course not, because we’ve committed to them, and we’ve committed to them from the Health and Hospitals Fund. We will work through to make fiscal room as necessary but we’re talking about the following process: A round being opened under the Health and Hospitals Fund, applications coming in, proper evaluations in the national interest, working through with the Health and Hospitals Fund to get the benefit of expert advice and then of course, the Government working through to make the room necessary to fund any proposals. That’s the responsible thing to do. We’ve shown, across the election campaign, day by day, as we released transparently our costings, ticked off by Treasury and our savings. We’ve shown day by day in the election campaign and in the Budget and in the Budget before that, that we can abide by fiscal rules and we can find savings. We’ve done it before. The person who cannot find savings, who is carrying an $11 billion black hole, who would cut Budget surpluses having campaigned to Australians deceitfully on the basis that he would increase Budget surpluses, is Mr Abbott.
Dennis Shanahan, yes.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, Mr Wilkie said that you will bring forward the spending of $1.8 billion as part of an equitable and ethical agreement so that all other hospitals would have an opportunity to do so –
PM: To make applications –
JOURNALIST: To make applications. So when is this money going to be spent? What are you actually undertaking to bring forward the spending of that $1.8 billion that he says you have?
PM: Well, let’s just settle down a bit and follow the process in accordance with the Government’s Budget rules which we always abide by. There are $1.8 billion on the Health and Hospital Fund. Whenever you expend money from that fund it hits the Budget bottom line. Of course Mr Abbott knew that but in putting his costings together for the election campaign, to try and deceive people, when they made expenditure from this and other Nation Building funds they didn’t account for it on the Budget bottom line - a deliberate attempt to deceive. No one could have been confused about that. So, what we will do is we will do what we’ve done before. We will have a call for applications, our experts will assess the applications against the criteria we have set, they will recommend proposals, the Government will work through to fund proposals in accordance with our Budget rules. Can we do it? Well of course we can because we’ve done it before.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) have you guaranteed it funding over and above the initial $100 million and also, the pokie reform, how much will they cost and who will pay for them?
PM: Well let’s – I’m glad you asked that question, that gives me the opportunity to be very clear about the figures. What we have promised is we have promised Mr Wilkie that we will make available immediately $100 million. We are able to do that, because of course, when the Treasury looked at our savings in the election campaign, we are more than $100 million in front. Then we will work with the Tasmanian Government, work with it, to get its proposal in the best possible shape to submit to the Health and Hospital Fund. Obviously there are key criteria against which it will be judged and it will be judged by experts. The total amount required for this hospital is $565 million. The Commonwealth share, in our view, is 60 per cent of that. Mr Abbott, in an extraordinary, extraordinary way, completely in keeping with his absolute lack of regard for dealing with the Commonwealth’s Budget, dealing with tax payers’ money properly, promised Mr Wilkie a billion dollars for a hospital that costs around half that amount. The Commonwealth’s contribution being 60 per cent of the half, that is, Mr Abbott was prepared to give Mr Wilkie a billion dollars for a proposal that should properly cost the Australian Government about a third of that. Now, doesn’t that tell you everything that you need to know about Mr Abbott’s credentials to be Prime Minister and why he got himself in an $11 billion black hole and why he’s cutting into the Budget surplus.
JOURNALIST: Isn’t that reason enough for you to be a bit nervous about days ahead if he’s got this billion dollars that’s been rejected by Mr Wilkie, he could build one super duper hospital in Mt Isa?
PM: He doesn’t have a billion dollars he has an $11 billion black hole, and presumably what he’s saying to the Australian people and to the Independents is ‘let’s just keep spending, Budget surplus - don’t care. Campaigned against debt and deficit, I want to make both of them bigger.’ That’s presumably what Mr Abbott is saying, he doesn’t have a billion dollars, look at the Treasury numbers.
Patricia.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, in providing a rationale for why he was supporting you beyond these proposals you’ve put to him, Mr Wilkie also said that he recognised that his seat was a very safe Labor seat for many years. Now these three Independents that you’re hoping to woo now, all represent seats which are quite conservative in terms of their demographics. How will you counter that and the perception around that, the fact that people in those electorates don’t want those people to sign on with your Government?
PM: Well I watched Mr Wilkie’s press conference and what I understood him to be saying both at his press conference and it absolutely mirrors the things he said to me, is he was making a decision on the basis of who he thought could provide the most stable and effective government and obviously a number of things played into his decision, his view of the national interest about health and hospitals, his view of Tasmania and his own electorate’s interests in the Royal Hobart Hospital. His view of the national interest about a better way of addressing problem gambling. His view of the national interest about competence, effectiveness and stability – these are the things that Mr Wilkie said guided his decision. For the three Independents obviously, they will take into account the factors they believe are of importance to them, I do not speak for them. But I imagine that amongst the things they will consider, and they have said this publically, is the ability to provide stable and effective government.
JOURNALIST: Standing here at the moment do you know of any sort of authority, that the Commonwealth can override the States if the States stand you up on the gambling (inaudible) that you’re proposing? As I understand this agreement, you’re yet to take legal advice-
PM: Well we’re in caretaker-
JOURNALIST: Yes, but do you know confidently that the Commonwealth has the power to override the States because it seems to me to the very unlikely that the States will agree to these reforms.
PM: Look obviously we need to take comprehensive legal advice, that’s not something we can do in caretaker. I am a person with some familiarity with the legislating on the corporations law, I’ve done it before, and had the ability to lose many hours of my life hunched over legal opinions about trading corporations, the outer limits of trading corporations who the workplace relations law applied to because we were legislating on the corporations law, what that meant for not for profit sector, what it meant for local government and if you’d like me to give you the six hour lecture I could but I suspect you don’t.
So I’ve got some familiarity with this. What that seems to me to imply is that there are some abilities to use things like the corporations law and some challenges. Mr Wilkie has obviously studied this matter himself, he’s been campaigning on better regulation, a better way with dealing with problem gambling, he understands that there are legal complexities here, which is why we will get a legal advice to look at the limits of constitutional competence for the Commonwealth to act. Now that is not something that we can do in caretaker, what is happening at the moment obviously is I’m working my way through a set of discussions to see if I can create the next government. If I am able to create the next Government, then we will work through with Mr Wilkie with this legal advice.
JOURNALIST: Does that extend to them asking the likes of the Labor Party in the ACT to divest itself of its interests in problem gambling, it takes money from problems gamblers (inaudible) will you ask them to do that?
PM: No it doesn’t and they’re not the matters I’ve agreed with Mr Wilkie as you would see. What we have agreed with Mr Wilkie is obviously, working through with States and Territories, so we would be dealing with the ACT Government, with States and Territories to better address problem gambling, particularly with the full implementation of pre-commitment technology. The answer to the question I gave here is if we can’t reach agreement, on what powers can we legislate, that’s a question of legal advice.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) if the Labor Party takes money from problems gamblers?
PM: Well look I think people will run, people from various perspectives will run gaming establishments and there are many Australians who, on a night out, will have a fun spin and are not in any way susceptible to problem gambling. But there are problem gamblers and of course I am concerned about problem gambling, the Government was concerned problem gambling, that’s why we asked the Productivity Commission. The way to address, for the nation, problem gambling, is not to address a question of some clubs in the ACT, it’s to get the regulartory framework right, and to introduce this pre-commitment technology, that is the best advice to us from the Productivity Commission, that’s what I’ve agreed with Mr Andrew Wilkie to work through and do.
We’ll just go here first.
JOURNALIST: Pubs and clubs will claim that these reforms will cost jobs and lead to club closures, are you prepared for those to be the inevitable results of this?
PM: Well let’s just be a little bit careful here, a little bit careful. Pubs and clubs have indicated in the past that they too are concerned about problem gambling, and pubs and clubs had the opportunity to make submissions on pre-commitment technology, and obviously pubs and clubs would be looking at this, they would be saying ‘will we get a say, will we be able to have our voice heard?’ Yes they will, as we work through on the specifics and details of this pre-commitment technology. But many of them would recognise that if this pre-commitment technology delivers a solution to problem gambling, that it is a good way forward compared with more heavy handed legislative approaches.
JOURNALIST: What does it say about the level of commitment that the previous Government that you led for a while, its level of commitment to actually helping people who are problem gamblers, that you took no policy to the election on this matter. It’s taken your passion to cling to power for you to actually promise to do anything?
PM: Well pity about the facts so let’s just go through them. Because we were concerned about problem gambling, we asked the Productivity Commission for advice. We received that advice, we gave a first response and said we would create a COAG mechanism to work through with States and Territories. That’s the policy that the Government had as we moved into the election period. What of course Mr Wilkie has done, with the strength of his advocacy, is he has accelerated that agenda, he’s accelerated those discussions, he’s turbocharged them, there’s no doubt about that, and I thank him for that. It’s a move forward on a very important issue of problem gambling. The Government had got the Productivity Commission report, we had issued a first response to it, we were intending to work through, through a particular and specific COAG mechanism.
JOURNALIST: Given the way the numbers are going, would you like to see your, do you foresee a need to change the rules how the Speaker operates and if you are able to form government would you like to appoint, would you like to see a Liberal MP appointed to the speaker and what is your understanding of the concept of an Independent speaker?
PM: Look, I mean I think we’ve had good Speakers of the Parliament, we’ve had good Speakers of the Parliament in the time that I’ve been here and they’ve been people from the governing party. Of course, I think, people are also saying in this period of Parliamentary reform, that we should open our eyes and our minds to more independence from perceptions of party-political influence in the Speaker. Now, I do say perceptions advisedly, because I think speakers who have come from governing political parties have acted very independently. But there’s a perception that associates with people coming from the governing political party.
I’ve indicated to the Independents and I’ve indicated publically that I am open to ideas and suggestions that could deal with greater independence for the Speaker.
JOURNALIST: Have you approached or has anyone in the Labor Party approached any Liberal MPs to do the role?
PM: Well certainly I haven’t and not to my knowledge no.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister can I clarify-
PM: Very naughty last question, yes.
JOURNALIST: I like to break the rules. The Treasury in their document released last night, I think says that your Budget bottom line improves by $106, $108 million. Have you just spent a hundred of that, so it’s now down to eight or six million?
PM: Yes we have, because we have announced more savings than expenditure. So let’s just be absolutely clear about this, we went into the election campaign and said we would offset all expenditure, we came out in front. We did more saving than we needed to do, Mr Abbott came out $11 billion behind. That’s the tally.
JOURNALIST: Any other deals that you’re going to do in the cost of pokie reform, or anything else, has to cost less than $6 million, or (inaudible)
PM: What you should expect to see from the Government is what we’ve delivered, day after day, announcement after announcement, if we spend, we save in matching order. The person incapable of doing that, the person with an $11 billion black hole, the person who didn’t tell Australians the truth about this during the election campaign, who hid his costings until the extraordinary period we’re in now forced them into the light of day, is Mr Abbott.
Thank you.
Attachment: Gillard-Wilkie Agreement