'He can't be trusted' - Shadow Treasurer weighs in on Albanese snapping at 2GB reporter
13:02 Share

Good to be with you, Clinton. Now, there's a lot of detail to go through here, and we'll look at some of that. But I've just got to firstly ask you, given so many people have pre-polled and we knew this would happen, why have you left it to the second last day of the campaign to release this?

Well, that's how it's been done by convention. It's exactly what Labor did at the last election. Of course, they put their costumes out a couple of days ago. This is very much in line with history. We could change those conventions, but that's where they stand at the moment. You need to change the convention with that, given that we're seeing more people vote before polling day than ever before. The way we...

The way we go to the polls changes, that people would have needed this information. And you've got something to sell here, so surely it would have been better to release it last week. Well, you know, I've been saying for a long time, Clinton, that our budget position will be substantially stronger than Labor's, and it is. And that we've been, over the course of three years, opposing bad Labor spending, and we have. And there's a long list of things we've said no to. These are the wrong things.

But you know as well as I do, things go in one ear and out the other with a lot of people, right? You've come out today and you've said your budget position is going to be $14 billion better off, okay? So if we're to take that, it's only today we know that figure to go to the polls and say, okay, I'll vote for them. Jim Chalmers, he found $1 billion, but I'm going to take the $14 billion and vote for you.

Well, you know what? We could just talk about it and then people get a chance to actually look at it and see if it's going to affect their votes. We know also, Clinton, the truth is that a large part, a good portion of the swinging voters wait until late April.

in the piece before they vote. So that's important. But the crucial point here is, as I have been saying throughout, and whether people, media channels, want to use these lines or not is up to them, but I've been saying it throughout, that our budget bottom line will be stronger than Labor's. It is. We will reduce debt $40 billion, deficits $14 billion,

billion and that's without a stronger economy and we will get a stronger economy and so we can do even better than that and these are important improvements and they are a bigger improvement in the budget

bottom line than we have seen from any opposition outside of when Bill Shorten wanted to impose $400 billion of taxes on the family home and investment property. So this is bigger than we've ever seen before in comparable circumstances. And we've done that at the same time as being able to make significantly higher investment in defence, in making sure that we're not just fixing their

the government budget that we're helping to support fixing household budgets, which have been absolutely trashed by Labor's homegrown inflation. And we've managed to get that balance right. And it's never easy, but we've been able to do it by saying no to 28,000 kilometres

of transmission lines across our wonderful agricultural land in this country. Saying no to housing policies that haven't put a single family into a new house. Saying no to manufacturing strategies where they are investing in West Coast American quantum companies. I mean, this is not the way we should be spending money. And saying no to a bigger Canberra-based bureaucracy. That's not what we need right now. So, Angus, an extra $14 billion off the bottom line

that we're going to be in a better position over four years. But why is it, and you've confirmed this today, the first two years of a coalition government, your budget deficit would be bigger than Labor's? Why is that the case? Because we're fixing the household budget at the same time as we're fixing the government budget. Labor's decided to give everyone their 80 cents a day in 15 months' time. Well, that's not going to help. That's not going to help. We've said 25 cents...

off fuel taxes, a $1,200 tax offset for 85% of taxpayers. I mean, this is real relief in the short term. So it's got to happen in the first two years, has it? Well, yeah, exactly. So it's got to happen in the first two years. Meanwhile, we're working on bringing spending down and that puts us in a position where we see very dramatic improvement in the budget

deficit, a $14 billion net improvement, a $40 billion reduction in debt. And that's the starting point, not the end point. We won't cut health. We won't cut essential services. But we continue to need to look for getting rid of waste. And you'll understand this, growing the economy at the same time, because the faster you grow the economy, the more you strengthen household budgets, the

And at the same time, the more you strengthen the government budget. The 41,000 public servants who will lose their jobs. Now, I know there's been a change in how that's going to occur. It'll be through natural attrition. A lot of the savings are going to come through that. Why natural attrition? If those people are working in jobs that you have deemed to be unnecessary, as tough as it is, why don't you just make them redundant?

Oh, because it's a lower cost pathway for taxpayers if we do it through natural attrition. I mean, it's pretty simple economics. If you have to force people out, you've got to pay them. So we want to use taxpayers' money carefully. But can you be confident that natural attrition will occur to that extent?

Yes, we are. In fact, I've just heard from the union that it's 7%. That's higher than we've assumed. And look, yeah, we're very confident. Those numbers are very reasonable. We've been working with the parliamentary budget office very closely through the course of this year.

And the public service has got so big now, the Canberra-based public service has got so big that the natural nutrition numbers are significant. 41,000 is the increase since Labor's come to power. We want to get back to the size of government when we were last in power, and we think that's appropriate. Angus, I just want you to hear what your counterpart, Jim Chalmers, has had to say in response to your announcement today. Thanks.

They haven't provided anywhere near enough for their nuclear reactors. They've got their numbers wrong on their job cuts in the Australian public service. They've got their numbers wrong on their long lunches policy, on their petrol policy and on their mortgage deductibility policy as well. Well, I'll just start with the reactors. Have you got your numbers wrong there? Can I just say, these are more lies from this...

who frankly has never had a real job in his life outside of being a treasurer, which is a great privilege and one that I want. But he seriously doesn't understand economics, doesn't understand the economy, doesn't understand business and wouldn't have a clue. But if you go to the nuclear reactors point, there's $400 million in the budget for this. That's what's needed in that timeframe. We're talking about... So what does $400 million buy you? That's just initial planning. Well, yeah, it's just getting...

getting moving on it. And we've laid all this out. We've had independent modelling done on it, Clinton. And you know what? Everything Labor says about this is a lie. So the $600 billion is a lie? Oh, it's just absolute utter nonsense. They just lie. And it's sad that our democracy's got to the point where one side of... Their side of politics, and indeed they're in government right now, thinks...

that it's appropriate and acceptable to tell Australian lies on a daily basis. And what you've just heard from Jim Chalmers, he's just another long list of his lies. This guy is not fit to be treasurer of this country. And this is why I'm so motivated to make sure we work right up till six o'clock on Saturday night to get rid of a bad Labor government that's made Australians worse off. We can't afford another three years of this lot. Look, Angus, I'm not a political advisor.

But I think it's an era waiting until the second last day to announce this because I think you will win support for $14 billion. And a lot of people have now made the decision. If in your role as senior liberal, I can just get your response to this issue today. And I think this is actually one of the most significant issues along with what you've announced today on the campaign.

The father of Jerome Luxarl, the sitting Labor member for Bennelong, made some very poor comments towards a Liberal volunteer. And Jerome has issued an apology on his father's behalf in writing.

But our reporter, you'd know him well, Michael Packie. He's been in the Canberra Press Bureau for about 20 odd years, right? Michael asked the Prime Minister for a response to that today on the election campaign. And just have a listen to how this played out. Prime Minister, I just wanted to know if you've spoken or you're planning to speak to Jerome Luxell over homophobic slurs his father made to a Liberal volunteer. I think it happened yesterday. The story's in the Herald.

that's happened while he was handing out how to vote cards. You want me to speak to people about their family? I keep families out. But do you think it's appropriate? I've answered your question. If you yell, it doesn't mean you get a different answer. But is it appropriate for a waiver candidate? That's the way we work.

what someone's family member. I don't talk about people's family. I don't like people talking about mine. I don't talk about others. I don't talk about Peter Dutton's family. And I would ask you, you haven't asked me any questions about Peter Dutton's family. If you had of, you would have got the same answer, which is I don't talk about people's family. Jerome Laxale is the candidate and he's a great candidate for Bennelong. But do you condemn those comments? But do you condemn the homophobic comments that he's made?

Seriously, people's families should be kept out of it. And frankly, it's beneath you to ask whether I support homophobic comments because of course I don't. Of course I don't. And frankly, it's offensive. But you obviously condemn it though. I don't attack people's families is what I don't do. What I don't do, and I don't think people should,

The Prime Minister with Michael Packie now, Angus, he clearly points out that he doesn't attack people's families. But I should again make the point that it was Jerome Luxell's father who was handing out how to vote cards for Labor and made the comments about a Liberal Party volunteer. So it's Mr. Luxell's father involving himself in politics. What's your response to the way that the PM handled Michael Packie's questions?

Well, it's one set of rules for him and another set of rules for everyone else. I mean, he should have just condemned that straight out. It's not about family. Just condemn the comments. And it's simple. They're inappropriate and he should have condemned them. Is it a sign that the Prime Minister, and naturally he would be under a fair bit of pressure and stress this late in the campaign, because, I mean, things have been going very well for the PM. You guys even admit that.

Well, I mean, the truth of the matter is this is a bloke who falls off the stage and then on camera and denies that he's fallen off the stage. I mean, you know, that's what we're dealing with here. And that's what we've been dealing with throughout this campaign. He cannot be trusted. He just cannot be trusted. He...

He should have just condemned that straight out. And, of course, because it's his tribe and he's highly tribal. I mean, his tribe comes first. I don't see that this is a Prime Minister who's about all Australians and being better off and their aspirations and their hopes. This is a Prime Minister, in my view, and I've got to know him well over the years and see him in action. He's more interested in his job than he is in Australia's.

One last one for you, Angus, and I appreciate your time. There was an article, no doubt you're across it, that was in the Daily Telegraph today from James Morrow that went into what's sort of happening behind the scenes of the election campaign within the coalition and some anger about the timing of the release of policies and including policies that you're responsible for. There was a quote from an unnamed MP that says, Angus had three years to write a tax policy...

He just didn't do it. He was too busy running for the leadership. Is that why you've waited until today to release the costings? Look, honestly, I don't comment on anonymous comments in this paper. It's ridiculous. But I'll tell you one thing. There's only one job I've wanted for three years now, and that's to be treasurer of this great nation, because we can do better than what we've seen in the last three years. We can't afford another three years of labour. It's an anonymous comment, but it's not made up.

Well, look, you know what? You're a journalist. You know that these economists, these anonymous comments are worth nothing. What are they motivated by? Who is it? The truth is I have one goal here and I've had one goal for three years. And I think that's pretty clear. And that's to be treasurer of the country. And that's because the current treasurer is out of his depth. He's out of his out of touch.

and Australia needs a better Treasurer, a better government and a better path forward. All the best for Saturday night. Thank you, Angus. Good on you. Thanks, Lee. Angus Taylor, who's the Shadow Treasurer. So the costings are out there. I still think they should have been released weeks ago because people have been making decisions. The number of voters who've decided to vote early is almost 5 million now. It's astronomical. And Angus Taylor says, well, this is convention. Well, throw the convention out the window. Change the way it's done.