Interview with David Speers, Insiders

15 September 2024

DAVID SPEERS: Jane Hume, welcome to the program.

JANE HUME: Good to be with you again David.

DAVID SPEERS: So what is the Coalition supporting and what are you still unsure about in this bill?

JANE HUME: David, the Coalition made an offer at the beginning of this term of Parliament to the Government and said that we would work with them to create a sustainable aged care system, because we knew that that was going to be an increasing pressure, not only on the budget but also to make sure that we have a sustainable system that works for Australians in the future. And that's exactly what we've done. We worked with them, particularly on the financial framework that is part of this Bill. But that is only one chapter. There is far more to this Bill than just that. That was what was needed to bring this Bill on, so that it can then be subject to the normal scrutiny. Stakeholders can have feedback, and the Senate can do an inquiry. We can understand exactly what all the implications are of this Bill. But we do believe that we've got to a good place in the financial framework, and that's a good start.

DAVID SPEERS: So just on that main financial point, that self funded retirees will pay up to $13,400 a year more. You're supporting that?

JANE HUME: Well, we said that from the beginning that we would work with the Government to get that financial framework to a point where we were comfortable. There were important elements to that, and you mentioned some of them already. Things like grandfathering, so that people that are already on their aged care journey will not pay a single cent more. That was fundamentally important. We also wanted to make sure that there were caps in place, that there were appropriate tapering rates. These are fundamentally important. But there were also other aspects too, that we have worked with the Government on. We wanted to, for instance, make sure that there was no criminal penalties within the system for aged care workers, because that would essentially drive workers away. So these are part of the negotiations that allow the Government to bring that Bill on. Now we'll go through our regular processes to understand exactly how it's going to affect Australians.

DAVID SPEERS: Okay, but if there is blowback from self funded retirees over that impost that they'll face. Are you hedging your bets on that, or are you locked in? You'll back that increased fee for self funded retirees.

JANE HUME: We've said that when we support the financial framework going forward, but there are other aspects to the Bill that need to be considered, and that's what bringing it on will allow it to do. The Government was delaying bringing it on, it delayed bringing it on for months and months. But it does need some scrutiny, and we want to see that feedback from those of the participants.

DAVID SPEERS: Anything you oppose at the moment in the Bill?

JANE HUME: Not that we've seen. We are concerned about the workforce strategy we've been calling for some years now for a National Care Workforce Strategy. That's something we are yet to see, because we might need to make sure that there is the workforce there to support the reforms that have been put into place.

DAVID SPEERS: Looking at spending more broadly, beyond just aged care, you've been criticising the Government for increasing spending by $315 billion. Will the Coalition cut spending?

JANE HUME: The Coalition have committed to going to the next election with a credible alternative budget, and that's exactly what we will do. The Government has spent an additional $315 billion since coming to Government that the Coalition would not have committed to and didn't commit to back at the last election. Some of that spending has been undisciplined and unnecessary. So of course, you'll see us go through and make sure that any wasteful or unnecessary or undisciplined spending that is pushing inflation up further, making inflation be higher for longer, and therefore pushing interest rates to be higher for longer, is wound back. We've made that clear. There's been elements that the Government have put forward, policies that the Government have put forward that we have pushed back on.

DAVID SPEERS: The government says, though, that this means you'll be cutting into spending on the age pension and health. Can you clear that up? Will you cut spending on health or the age pension?

JANE HUME: That's just Labor talking points and total nonsense. And…

DAVID SPEERS: So you won’t?

JANE HUME: -you can understand why a panicked government might say something so idiotic. Of course, we're not going to cut back on the age pension. Of course we're not going to cut back on the essential services that Australians need and deserve. Of course we're not going to cut back on social safety nets. But if this government thinks that there isn't undisciplined or unnecessary spending in their budgets, well, they're fooling themselves. There's $13.7 billion of production tax credits going to miners to do what they were already doing. There's a billion dollars to support solar panels that even the Productivity Commissioner says are never going to be competitive. There's half a billion dollars to go towards batteries that the Treasury Secretary says we don't need. There's $620,000 to a speechwriter for Bill Shorten to be more empathetic. There is plenty in this budget. There's plenty in the Government's coffers that is unnecessary or undisciplined spending, that is pushing inflation up further.

DAVID SPEERS: So no cuts to health or the age pension. What about childcare?

JANE HUME: We've said we will not be cutting essential services. We will not be cutting…

DAVID SPEERS: Does that include childcare?

JANE HUME: -social safety nets that people need. Well, that's a social safety net, that's an essential service…

DAVID SPEERS: So no cuts to childcare.

JANE HUME: -we have no intention to cut childcare.

DAVID SPEERS: Okay, so no cuts to childcare, health, the age pension. The cuts would be where you mentioned, the Future Made in Australia. The miners so they actually need that tax incentive to do critical mineral processing. You won't offer them that?

JANE HUME: Well, there are plenty of ways to support the critical minerals, rare earths and other sectors in the mining industry that need support. And the first step would be making sure that we have a productive economy that has an industrial relations system that is flexible, not just for employees, but also for employers…

DAVID SPEERS: What does that mean? Does that mean…

JANE HUME: -that we have lower energy costs...

DAVID SPEERS: does that mean you get rid of the…

JANE HUME: -red tape and regulation, and that we have lower and simpler, fairer taxes. This is the productivity agenda that the Coalition will take to the next election. That's what miners are crying out for…

DAVID SPEERS: So what does that mean?

JANE HUME: Not simply a production tax credit for what they're already doing.

DAVID SPEERS: When you say industrial relations, getting it back to basics, will you scrap the Same Job, Same Pay legislation?

JANE HUME: Well, we'll certainly look at multi employer bargaining, because we believe that multi employer bargaining, going back to that old patent bargaining system of the 1970s is a regressive step that actually reduces productivity and competitiveness of our sector. We've said that we'll redefine casual back to its original definition, because that's actually adding inflexibility to our workplace practices, not improving it. And the right to disconnect laws are something that will need to be considered, because, quite frankly, this is stuff that can be negotiated between an employee and an employer. These are unnecessary laws that’re adding more complexity to our system, rather than removing it.

DAVID SPEERS: But the question was the Same Job, Same Pay laws. Will you scrap those?

JANE HUME: Well there will be elements of that that we will certainly have to consider, because, as we said, those industrial relations reforms that the Government have implemented are wrapping up our big businesses and our small businesses, but particularly our small businesses, in red tape that they simply cannot afford, which is why we're seeing productivity in this country go backwards. By 6.3% in the last two years alone, you cannot have economic growth and lower inflation sustainably unless you improve productivity. There is no productivity agenda from this Government. In fact, it's an anti-productivity agenda.

DAVID SPEERS: Okay, so you will look at the Same Job, Same Pay laws. Do you think miners, airline workers and so on, who are on labor hire with labor hire firms. Do you think they should be paid less?

JANE HUME: Well, I've said, no, of course not. Of course not. That's a ridiculous question, David. We will look at all of the industrial relations laws to make sure that they are fairer, both for employees and for employers, but most importantly, that we inject productivity back into the system. We all want higher pay, but Philip Lowe, the previous Reserve Bank Governor, and indeed this Reserve Bank Governor, Michele Bullock, have reminded us that you simply cannot have wage rises without corresponding productivity growth. Otherwise it's inflationary…

DAVID SPEERS: Ok but just to be clear you’ve just said there-

JANE HUME: -and we cannot afford for inflation to stay higher for longer.

DAVID SPEERS: Alright but if you're employed by a labor hire firm, you should get the same pay if you’re doing the same job.

JANE HUME: I’m not going to get into the details of industrial relations, that's not my portfolio. But what I will say is that if we don't have a more flexible industrial relations system, we are going to see productivity continue to go backwards.

DAVID SPEERS: With respect Senator, this is what, when it comes to the detail. This is what a lot of those workers are worried about. Are they going to get a pay cut? When you talk about all this, simpler, more productive. Are they going to get a pay cut?

JANE HUME: We want to see sustainable wage rises that are backed in by productivity.

DAVID SPEERS: But will you repeal that law, and will they have a pay cut as a result?

JANE HUME: We’ll be reviewing industrial relations laws. And Michaela Cash has made this very clear. Peter Dutton has made this clear, we'll be reviewing industrial relations laws to make sure that we improve the productivity of our economy…

DAVID SPEERS: -and that would be in government?

JANE HUME: -not just provide…

DAVID SPEERS: -the review would be in government. You’re not going to say, before the election, what you’d do on this?

JANE HUME: Well, we've been very clear about elements of the industrial relations system that we would review.

DAVID SPEERS: And that would happen in government. So post election, this would be reviewed.

JANE HUME: Well, I'm afraid that changing industrial relation laws from Opposition is impossible, David. So of course it would happen in government, but we want to make sure that people get their pay rises. That's no no doubt about that. But you cannot have pay rises without corresponding productivity, or you have inflation. If you have inflation, all Australians suffer.

DAVID SPEERS: But going to the election, there will be a question mark, then for a lot of workers, as to what's going to happen to their pay. You'll review all of this after the election.

JANE HUME: David, I think we're going around in circles here. We’ve said that…

DAVID SPEERS: I’m trying to just get a direct question for those who are worried about their pay.

JANE HUME: Well, they shouldn't be worried about their pay. But they should be worried about the state of the economy, and they should be worried about inflation. Because if we haven't got a growing economy, then we can't afford to spend more on the essential services we need. If we have inflation that's going to eat away at your pay, it's going to erode your savings, and it's going to reduce your standard of living and your quality of life. We have to get the balance right here, and injecting productivity back into our economy is fundamental to that.

DAVID SPEERS: What will your plan for nuclear power cost? Have you worked that out yet?

JANE HUME: So the government has, sorry, the Opposition has been very clear on this one from the beginning, that we believe that in the long term, having nuclear as part of our energy mix is the way to get those emissions back, down to net zero emissions. But more importantly, having a reliable and efficient and affordable energy mix…

DAVID SPEERS: But the cost is the question.

JANE HUME: -and nuclear will be part of that. Well, everywhere around the world, we've seen when nuclear power is part of that mix, that energy prices come down. At the moment, Australians are paying around 56 cents per kilowatt hour. In places like Ontario, where nuclear is part of the mix there…

DAVID SPEERS: Well a lot of other parts of the world than Ontario, and a lot of them have higher prices.

JANE HUME: and Tennessee…

DAVID SPEERS: Quebec next door. But what's the cost going to be of your policy?

JANE HUME: Well, hang on, I think the most important thing here, David, is that when nuclear is part of the energy mix, we see energy prices come down. And in places like Ontario, they have 14 cents per kilowatt hour…

DAVID SPEERS: Well with respect Senator-

JANE HUME: In Tennessee…

DAVID SPEERS: a lot of experts would challenge that.

JANE HUME: -it’s around 18 cents per kilowatt hour.

DAVID SPEERS: What's the cost going to be and when? When are we going to see this?

JANE HUME: Well, we'll make our announcement on the cost of our nuclear policy in due course, but in advance of the election.

DAVID SPEERS: This year?

JANE HUME: The most important thing here, well in advance of the election, if the election’s this year, well, of course that is the case. But according, if you listen to the Prime Minister, you'd think that the election was going to be, potentially even nine months away. But the most important thing here, David, is that when we do announce our policies, our costings on our energy mix, it's about the energy mix. You've got to make sure you're comparing apples with apples. So we want to compare our energy mix, proposed energy mix, with Labor's proposed energy mix. Our energy mix is going to include renewables and gas and in the long term, but it will also include nuclear.

DAVID SPEERS: And those renewables investors. Should they be continuing to invest now? Or should they wait and see what you're going to do with nuclear power? Because that will affect their investments.

JANE HUME: Well, renewals are inevitably going to be a part of that energy mix.

DAVID SPEERS: So keep investing?

JANE HUME: We'll have more to say. We'll have more to say about our renewables policy very soon, and indeed our gas policy as well, but making sure that we cost the entire system, as opposed to just one element, is fundamentally important if we're going to compare apples with apples.

DAVID SPEERS: Look, what's the Coalition's position now in reforming the Reserve Bank? Do you think there should be two boards, a governance board and a monetary policy board?

JANE HUME: Look, we have worked with the Government for a number of months now in good faith on the reforms that they proposed, but there were two elements which we thought were fundamentally important. One of them was maintaining the independence and the stability and the confidence in the Reserve Bank. But the other was that there was continuity between that monetary policy board from the existing board. Maintaining stability, and continuity on that board is fundamental for fighting inflation, and that should be the Government's number one priority. That was the Government's sticking point. Now, bizarrely, the Treasurer then went into war with the RBA and essentially tried to undermine their independence, which we found very confronting.

DAVID SPEERS: Just back to the question, do you want two boards or stick with one?

JANE HUME: Well, quite frankly, I think that it's time that the Government moved on…

DAVID SPEERS: But do you have a view? What’s your view?

JANE HUME: The most important thing they could do- well if they wanted two boards, they needed to have stability…

DAVID SPEERS: What do you want?

JANE HUME: -and continuity between the Monetary Policy Board and the existing Board who are making those decisions.

DAVID SPEERS: Post election, if you're in government, do you want two boards or one?

JANE HUME: I think we're beyond this now.

DAVID SPEERS: What does that mean?

JANE HUME: I think that the Government, well, the government won't negotiate on that piece, on maintaining that.

DAVID SPEERS: No, I understand that. What's your position if you win the election, would you move to two boards or just one?

JANE HUME: We feel that this is no longer something that needs to be talked about. It's no longer on the table.

DAVID SPEERS: So stick with the current arrangement.

JANE HUME: You stick with the current arrangement because you need that continuity and stability of the current board. That's the job that these people were hired to do. They were hired to do monetary policy, and they should continue to do monetary policy. If the government doesn't want to countenance that, if they want to go and do a deal with the Greens. Well, I think that speaks volumes of their motives…

DAVID SPEERS: I’m just asking about the future, you would stick with the current structure of the Board?

JANE HUME: We are not going to allow them to sack and stack the monetary policy board…

DAVID SPEERS: No but in government, if you’re in government…

JANE HUME: -in order to put their own folk on there.

DAVID SPEERS: Okay, I understand that. But in government, you'd stick with just one board.

JANE HUME: We're comfortable with the board that we have that are dealing with monetary policy as they are. That's the best way to get inflation down, which should be the number one priority.

DAVID SPEERS: Final one, your colleague, Karen Andrews, who's leaving at the election, says her view on quotas for women in parliament has softened over the past decade. The Liberals need to do better she says, in boosting the number of women in parliament, has your view on quotas shifted at all?

JANE HUME: David, it’ll come as no surprise to you, as one of the authors of the review after the last 2022 election, that my view hasn't changed. The Party has set targets. Targets over three elections in 10 years to reach 50% of female parliamentarians…

DAVID SPEERS: How’s that going?

JANE HUME: But more importantly, more importantly, also 50% new female members and 50% women in elected positions in office bearing positions within the party, because that's how you build that pipeline organically and make sure that genuine change, that genuine cultural change occurs from the bottom up.

DAVID SPEERS: Is it working?

JANE HUME: Well, the Liberal Party is not an authoritarian structure. You know, quotas will only work to change the culture, if the messaging comes from the top down. That's not how the Liberal Party works. We're a bottom up, grassroots organisation, and we want to make sure that the culture change is organic. That's how you create it, real and lasting change.

DAVID SPEERS: Would you say it's working?

JANE HUME: Well, I've been working with a heap of our female candidates for the next election, and I'm very excited by who we've got out there. Katie Mullens in Parramatta and Ro Knox in Wentworth and Maggie Forrst in Ryan and Katie Allen and Chisholm and Amelia Hamer and in Kooyong and Mary Aldred in Monash. I mean, there's amazing women. They're amazing women, and I am so excited to have them join the team, because they are going to make a real difference.

DAVID SPEERS: Senator Jane Hume, appreciate you joining us this morning. Thank you.

JANE HUME: Thanks, David.