It’s been a huge day, a huge week. I want to bring in my political panel. Julian Hill is the Assistant Minister for Multicultural Affairs, and LNP Senator Paul Scarr is a shadow counterpart in the same area for multicultural engagement. Welcome to both of you. So we’ve had this economic reform roundtable today, a real focus on tax Aruna Sathanapally did a big presentation. She basically made the case that there was too much intergenerational inequality. She provided examples of this. She makes the case that there needs to be new, you know, tax reform. So I’ll put to you first Julian Hill as an Assistant Minister. Is the government going to embrace tax reform to provide intergenerational fairness for younger taxpayers?
Julian Hill
Well, I think it’s a terrific thing that we’ve actually got people in the room together having these discussions about the future, and the Prime Minister’s been clear just so there’s no misunderstanding. Our first focus, our primary focus over the next six months is delivery and bedding down the commitments that we took to the election. I promised I’d spare you laundry lists. But the summit, is about bringing people together, the round table, bringing people together, leaders of industry, business, civil society. We even invited the Shadow Treasurer. He turned up. Everyone in the room thinking about the future. What do we need to do in the next months and years to set the country up for wealth and continued prosperity and success. So all ideas are welcome. We haven’t ruled out ideas, but the Prime Minister made a really important point before the round table commenced. We run a cabinet government, and the government will determine.
Patricia Karvelas
Do you think this idea of intergenerational tax inequality has now been well established and needs, you know, reform to follow it?
Julian Hill
Well, it’s an issue right across the developed world. Right across the western world is concentrating inequality. You know, I got through, I’ll admit it here. I got through about the first third of Thomas Piketty capital a few years ago. I’ll leave it to the economists. But that concept that over years, without intervention, without redistributive mechanisms, be they family payments, be they Medicare, be they social safety nets, be they tax and transfer. Without those redistributive mechanisms, inevitably we see rising gross inequality that leads to instability, political instability in society, and social outcomes which Australians will not accept. So I’ll stand by Labor’s record over successive governments, over decades of being a party that’s prepared to tackle those things, I’ll finish on that point. I know you want to talk about tax, but you need to put it in the broader context, Medicare, cheaper medicines, universal child care, those things are part of it.
Patricia Karvelas
I get all that. Paul Scarr, independent economists are making the case that our system is not built for the future, essentially, that young people are bearing too much of the burden because of all the tax breaks that exist for if I could be frank, and I like a lot of them, but you know, baby boomers, do you think that you need to be more open minded as an Opposition about embracing some big change?
Senator Scarr
Well, PK, our values, our beliefs, will guide us in relation all of these policy issues. And at this point in time, when we’ve got government spending up at 27% of GDP, which is a substantial increase, and it keeps increasing. I think we’ve got to look at the spending side of the equation as well as the revenue side. And in relation to intergenerational equity, I think in terms of conversations I have with young people, one of the biggest issues is housing. And you had the Housing Minister on earlier, the cost to housing, the barriers to actually acquiring your first home, the cost of rent, I think that is really one of the biggest issues we’re facing at the moment.
Patricia Karvelas
OK, so I want to move now, if I can, to things that we need to do on the spending side. The NDIS is obviously key, but Julian Hill, the government made an announcement. We played a whole bunch of state ministers, premiers, saying we weren’t told. Why wouldn’t you get them on board? Also parents who are the parents of kids with autism, they’re also concerned. They’re worried their kids are going to be kicked off. Did the government get this approach wrong?
Julian Hill
Well, I heard Clare O’Neill, the Housing Minister, before, and she made a really important point. Clare and I represent parts of South East Melbourne, including some very disadvantaged areas. Before the NDIS, things were horrible for many Australians in parts of the country, but particularly in suburbs without the services. People often live miserable lives, and the NDIS has transformed the lives of many people for the better. But, right now the design is not working. It’s not working for a lot of communities. And Paul is the Shadow Minister for Multicultural Affairs. You can look at the data. There’s communities that don’t get their fair go because of the design. We’re approaching a situation where nearly half the people on the NDIS are kids. And it’s really obvious when you visit schools, when you visit childcare centers, when you talk to families that we’re not providing those supports in the most appropriate and the most efficient way. Yeah, the numbers are well known. OK, it’s not sustainable for the country. I think everyone has agreed that the rate of growth is not sustainable. But the message that the Minister sent that Mark Butler sent yesterday, he sent it this today in the media and will continue to say is it’s not about pulling the supports, the supports need to be there. It’s about redesigning the most efficient and effective way to provide that support, that early intervention. And as a previous guest said, it may not need to be there for life if you get it in early.
Patricia Karvelas
No. Paul Scarr, the Opposition has been a bit wary about the change, but the system is very expensive. You’ve been calling for spending to be under control. Why criticize it?
Senator Scarr
Well, we have been calling for expenditure to be under control in that respect. And whilst the Coalition was in government, we actually moved proposals which the Labor Party blocked in terms of reforming the system. I want to make this point though, PK about the state ministers being blindsided. That is no way to embark upon a major reform of the NDIS. I don’t understand why the Federal Minister was not consulting and giving a heads up to the state ministers, and it’s quite ironic that in the Senate, we’ve been trying to get access to documents in relation to the financial sustainability of the NDIS, and the argument put forward by the federal government was we can’t provide the documents on public interest immunity claims because it will prejudice our relationship with the state ministers. And now we have the situation where the state ministers are being blindsided by the Federal Minister, I don’t think that’s a good start to this process. We will be constructive. I agree with many of the points that Julian made, especially in relations to people in disadvantaged areas, but this was no way to start the process.
Patricia Karvelas
OK, I just have one each for you both. First. Still to you. Paul Scarr, if I can, why did Ted O’Brien go and have a barney with the treasurer, when all of these people who hate barneys really they’re just there to talk about their ideas. What’s going on?
Senator Scarr
Well, one person’s barney is another person’s exchange of passionate views. So you know, if you’re going to have a round table, I don’t think you can invite someone and expect them just to sit there mutely and not contribute to the debate. And a lot of people sitting around that round table be passionate about the debate, and I’ve got a great deal of regard for Ted, and I’m sure his intent was to engage in good faith in the round table, and there should be a rigorous, a vigorous exchange of ideas around any round table that’s discussing matters such as this.
Patricia Karvelas
You heard Clare O’Neill commented on that a little before. So your side of politics has already commented on my show. I just want to ask you, though, Julian, because we’ve talked about homophobia on this show, and I’ve written about it, and the way it’s impacted you as well. Adelaide star Isaac Rankin has been given a four match ban for his use of a homophobic slur during the crows win over Collingwood. This issue of homophobia in the AFL has been huge. There’s been a lot of debate about it. You’re a Melbourne man. I’m not sure what your team is. It should be Collingwood, but we’ll just pass.
Julian Hill
Go doggies. Go doggies.
Senator Scarr
The lions. The lions!
Patricia Karvelas
Okay, everyone’s got their teams. But is this an appropriate penalty or and how do you reflect on this big, big reckoning that the AFL has been having?
Julian Hill
Look, to be honest, I’d rather talk about Ted’s tactical tantrum.
Patricia Karvelas
I knew it, but I asked you, because we’ve talked about it before.
Julian Hill
I know, instead of bringing in an idea, he had a tantrum, and magically, the media knew about it. But anyway, here we are, at least he wasn’t Matt Canavan at the front of the parliament with his little, you know, round table by himself, talking to no one. But look, I haven’t seen the story. Obviously, sport, like many of our great cultural institutions, is a really important place in our society where we set social norms. You know, I’ve been down. I was down at a footy club a couple months ago, and we’re reflecting. They’ve got a fantastic program about violence against women, reflecting on the role of sport, be it community sport or elite sport, in evolving social norms. You know, if you think about 30 or 40 years ago, you know, frankly, driving home pissed, tanked as anything on a Saturday night after the Cricket Club was acceptable. Well, it’s not now, because we’ve gradually changed that conversation and culturally, the work that sporting clubs are doing around violence against women is also really important to set those normative frames. And you know, I’m seeing clubs right across the suburbs, in my community and elsewhere, start to bring in pride matches and conversations that you know. So if Sophie down there is gay or, you know, Fred’s got a boyfriend who cares. It’ll take time to evolve, and cultures change slowly, frankly, but I think the role of sporting codes in setting those societal norms. You can pass all the laws you like, and they’re important. The legal frameworks are important, but we need our cultural institutions and sporting clubs to work with society, to have those conversations at a deeper level and set the tone for what’s acceptable, and it’s really important stuff. I’m not going to get into penalty or what’s right. That’s up to the tribunal.
Patricia Karvelas
They sort that out, but a lot of people will have opinions. I want to thank you both. It’s been a good panel. Thank you.
