Interview with Jacqui Felgate & Richard Marles, 3AW

26 March 2025

JACQUI FELGATE: The Deputy Prime Minister and Defence minister, Richard Marles and Shadow Finance Minister Jane Hume. Hello to you both.

JANE HUME: Good afternoon. Jacqui. Hello, Richard.

RICHARD MARLES: Hello, Jane. Jacqui, how are you?

JACQUI FELGATE: Well, I'm well. The afternoon after the night before.

RICHARD MARLES: That's true.

JANE HUME: I was going to say the afternoon after the weekend before. Can we please get this over and done with, please? I'm wearing my saint scarf up here.

JACQUI FELGATE: Oh, I saw a photo of you actually wearing your scarf Jane.

JANE HUME: Yeah, well, I mean, look, we can talk about it now. We can talk about it later. Whatever you choose, Jacqui.

JACQUI FELGATE: We'll talk about it later, because I've got a few questions to get to.

RICHARD MARLES: We're not talking about it at all.

JACQUI FELGATE: I know. Look Richard, what I would say was they finished off strongly and that's something.

RICHARD MARLES: They did finish off strongly. There's some hope.

JACQUI FELGATE: Poor Jane. Always has to listen to us bang on about Geelong. Now I want to start, obviously, with the Budget and the Suburban Rail Loop. Should the Victorian government scrap this project, Richard, particularly in light of Infrastructure Australia's findings last week?

RICHARD MARLES: Well, Infrastructure Australia's findings were that we should, that we, the Federal Government should be releasing the $2.2 billion that we committed at the last election three years ago, which is what we did recently when we talked about this on the programme previously. So that's what we're doing. Our focus as a Federal Government is very much on the rail line to Tullamarine. There's an existing five billion there. And then as we spoke about a few weeks ago, we've committed another two billion to that, which is really in respect of Sunshine Station and then there's another 1.2 in terms of an outer metro roads package. So I mean, the focus of the Federal Government in terms of what we are funding lies there, and we'll continue to talk to the state government around its infrastructure priorities. But our priority is in respect of the rail lines at Tullamarine.

JACQUI FELGATE: The announcement that was made or the release that was put out by Infrastructure Australia on Friday was very clear. It cited the need for an exit strategy. It also said that the finances in terms of value capture simply didn't add up. So is it financially irresponsible for the federal government to put in any more money other than what has already been allocated to this project?

RICHARD MARLES: Well, as I say, what we're doing is acting in accordance with the advice of Infrastructure Australia So we've put in we've released the money that we committed three years ago. But our focus, as I've said, is, in respect of the rail line to the airport at Tullamarine and that is obviously an important project. Part of that is Sunshine Station and that's where our focus is at. You know, ultimately, you know, beyond that, um, I mean, the state government need to work out what they're doing. We will continue to talk with the state government, but we are going to be advised by Infrastructure Australia and we're acting in accordance with that advice.

JACQUI FELGATE: Jane, can I ask your response to firstly, the findings of Infrastructure Australia the fact that there's no money for this project in any of the forward estimates other than what has already been allocated. And your view, if you are to enter government, what you'll do with the Suburban Rail Loop?

JANE HUME: Well, we want to see the business case. In fact, we wanted to see the business case three years ago and there was none. I mean, this project, as we know, was put together on the back of an envelope. It was put together on the back of a Qantas napkin. And for some reason, Anthony Albanese, who prides himself as being a previous infrastructure minister, funded it to the tune of $2.2 billion of taxpayer money without a business case. How can that possibly be so? So we've been very consistent with both the Victorian Auditor General and the Federal Auditor General on this one. We want to make sure that this thing stacks up. Every bit of feedback that we get is that this is a boondoggle, that it doesn't stack up for Victoria. It doesn't stack up for Australian taxpayers. I cannot understand if this is what is being said, why it would continue to be funded. Where is the business case?

JACQUI FELGATE: Okay, go ahead Richard.

RICHARD MARLES: Well, I mean, Infrastructure Australia has given the advice that the money that we committed three years ago should be released for that early works. Um, I mean, obviously there needs to be value for money in terms of this or any piece of infrastructure going forward. I come back to what I said, what's in the budget, what's in the Federal Budget in terms of what Federal Labor is funding…

JACQUI FELGATE: Well, it is nothing for suburban rail from the first stage, Cheltenham to Box Hill, Richard.

RICHARD MARLES: Because our focus is on the rail line to Tullamarine, I mean, that is what we see as being the priority in terms of infrastructure here and a key component of that is Sunshine Station. But that is where our priority is and that's what we're funding.

JANE HUME: Do you know that'll be the most expensive station in the world?

JACQUI FELGATE: The world, more than the one in New York.

RICHARD MARLES: Well, what we need a rail line to Tullamarine. The idea that we've got a major airport of the city of Melbourne size not serviced by an airport connected by rail to the CBD makes no sense. And it's been an enduring issue around Tullamarine. Um, this forms part of how you get that rail line there.

JANE HUME: Do you think if it was built without the CFMEU it would be so expensive?

RICHARD MARLES: That is, that comment right there is Jane's happy place to go there. Um, and no doubt we'll hear...

JACQUI FELGATE: Tell you what Richard, the CFMEU is no one's happy place.

RICHARD MARLES: Well that's true. Um, look, I mean, I can go into what we were saying last time. We've cracked down on the CFMEU, actually doing it. But our focus is on, um, is on that piece of infrastructure. It is important there is a rail line to the airport.

JACQUI FELGATE: Now, Jane, the Coalition has slammed the budget as being a cruel hoax. What do you mean by that?

JANE HUME: Well, I mean, there's a $42 billion deficit here. Let's be very clear, up front. After two windfall surpluses, we are now deep, deep, deep in deficit. We've officially hit the trillion dollars in debt. And at the same time, the Government is now spending $17 billion on what they're calling a tax cut but let's be honest, this is simply just an election incentive because it's 70 cents a day returned to you in 18 months time in exchange for your vote. That's what this is. It is an election sweetener and nothing more. There is no tax reform in here whatsoever, but they're spending $17 billion, even though we've got a $42 billion deficit on less. Essentially it's just buying votes. It's disgraceful. disgraceful. I'm so horrified.

JACQUI FELGATE: Richard, just can I get you to respond to Jane saying she's horrified by the budget.

RICHARD MARLES: Well, firstly, we're focused on giving tax cuts. And so this top up tax cut will mean that for. Yeah. But for the average income earner, the combined total of the tax cuts that we've delivered in the last three years will end up being $50 a week. Now, Jane and others can sneer at that if they like, but that's a significant difference to average income earners. And you know, what we saw today in the Parliament was the Liberal Party of Robert Menzies voting against lower taxes in favour of higher taxes.

JANE HUME: You’re crowing about tax cuts that were in the rear vision mirror. What you're offering today. And what you're passing today is 70 cents a day.

JACQUI FELGATE: So why did the liberals vote against it?

RICHARD MARLES: Well, we have put in place we've put in place a series of tax cuts which have given rise to a $50 benefit, um, for an average income earner per week, of which this is the last component. And right now where the Liberal Party is at is actually voting against that. But here's the other point…

JANE HUME: Australians aren't that stupid.

RICHARD MARLES: But here's the other point, Jacqui.

JANE HUME: They're not that stupid.

RICHARD MARLES: Immediately, uh, immediately prior to an election, um, independently, the Treasury, the professionals here do an assessment of the books. And if you look at what was the books as they were audited before we came to power, um, and what they were saying over the period of government that we've just governed, um, we are $207 billion better off than what we inherited from the Liberal Party in terms of the way in which we've managed the budget. That's included two surpluses, which the Liberals never achieved in the time that they were in Government.

JANE HUME: Hang on, you can’t own the surpluses, but disavow yourself from the deficit. You can't say, oh, we did that. They're really good. I mean, the deficit has got nothing to do with us.

RICHARD MARLES: We’re owning it all. You take the two surpluses and the deficit now, which is much less than what was forecast by.

JANE HUME: It’s $42 billion Richard. It’s one of the biggest deficits we’ve ever had on record.

RICHARD MARLES: It's less than what was forecast in terms of what we inherited from the Liberals. But in aggregate, it's $207 billion better off, the country is by virtue of the way in which we've managed the books relative to what we inherited. That means $60 billion in the decade will be saved in terms of interest payments, compared to what we inherited from the Liberal Party

JANE HUME: You know what's really scary, the forecast for inflation has gone up.

JACQUI FELGATE: Jane, I've got to take a break. You two can argue while we have the break. More after this.

(ad break)

JACQUI FELGATE: I am talking to Deputy Prime Minister and defence minister Richard Marles and shadow finance minister Jane Hume Jane, I just want to play a bit of audio for our listeners. This is you and Jacqui Lambie on Sunrise this morning.

(excerpt starts)

JACQUI LAMBIE: Oh my goodness. I cannot wait to see their budget reply on Thursday night. What do they become the Grinch? Have they. Because quite frankly, let's be honest, the opposition treasurer, Angus Taylor, has been an absolute train wreck the last three days. Even Sky is calling it. Seriously, what is in your budget paper? Apart. from you spending $360 billion on nuclear power plant, that is completely going to blow out of proportion. So let's be conservative and say that's going to cost $500 billion, and that is the best plan of attack.

(excerpt ends)

JACQUI FELGATE: So, Jane, things got pretty heated on the tally this morning.

JANE HUME: Yeah, it was kind of an unexpectedly heated interview that one. You know, obviously after the budget morning, only the Treasurer and the Finance Minister and the prime minister and their opposites tend to go out on television, which is why you see us up against Independents who we normally wouldn't be up against. But it was a very strange interview, to tell you the truth. But, you know, Jacqui is a, she's an unpredictable character.

JACQUI FELGATE: So she got quite emotional when talking about public servants. And I just wanted to ask you, what was that about and why was she so upset?

JANE HUME: Yeah. So Jacqui is very passionate about veterans and always has been. Her concern was that when we say that there are not just 36,000 new public servants, there are in fact now 41,000 new public servants. That's a 24% increase in the size of the public service in the last three years alone but it hasn't been delivering better services. That's what she was upset about, because she's very concerned about veterans. Now, I did try to assure her that there are no plans to cut anybody from frontline services. That a bigger public service doesn't necessarily mean better public services. And in fact, what we've seen is a falling in the standards of public services. So, for instance, if you want to apply for an age pension under the Coalition, it used to take about 35 days. It now takes about 76 days. If you want to apply for the low income card, it now takes about three times longer than it used to. It takes about 49 days to process a Medicare eligibility and enrolment claim, but it used to be 19 days under the Coalition. So that's what I was talking about. But I'm not entirely sure that Jacqui understood that.

JACQUI FELGATE: Okay, so Richard, is the public service too bloated?

RICHARD MARLES: Well, I mean, part of those numbers, if we go to Veterans Affairs, is there's an additional 600 people in Veterans Affairs. But when we came to Government, there was literally a waiting list of 42,000 veterans who had not even had their claims looked at. And what that meant was that people were going, on average, 200 days before the claim was even looked at. In some cases, it was more than a year. We've got rid of that backlog now. I mean, people are having their claims looked at within two weeks. As a result of that, we are actually seeing veterans use Veterans Affairs and get the money that they are entitled to. And that means that there are more claims coming through. Now, Jane's saying that the backlog has gone. Why do we need those 500 people still? Well, actually, they are fundamentally important to being able to process the claims that are there. And it is a perfect example where there is a frontline service where this is about veterans getting the money that they are entitled to. Having worn our nation's uniform and having served us in the way that they have, and being owed something back. And this is actually what the frontline, what those public servants are doing.

JANE HUME: I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with frontline services delivering on what they need to deliver. But the problem is we're also seeing things like the size of the Health department has increased by about 40%, but bulk billing claims but bulk billing rates have gone down. The size of the environment and energy portfolio has almost doubled. But at the same time, environmental approvals take forever and longer than they used to. And at the same time, emissions have gone up. So you can see that a bigger public service doesn't necessarily mean better service to the public. We want to deliver better service to the public, but without that additional cost. And let's face it, those additional and that was, this was when it was 36,000 public servants cost $6 billion a year.

RICHARD MARLES: Public servants provide frontline services. That's the bottom line. And whether you're looking at Veterans Affairs, when you look at the response to Cyclone Ex-tropical Cyclone Alfred in Queensland, I mean, what you've got now is a much more efficient response to people in need. The bottom line is that if the Liberals are going to come in and that is their fundamental policy about cutting, and really at the end of the day, in order to pay for their power scheme, their nuclear power scheme, cuts to frontline services is what we are going to see. They've actually…

JACQUI FELGATE: Got to get through a couple of other topics. And Richard, I just want to ask you about SignalGate in the US. Do you use Signal in your day to day role as the Defence Minister?

RICHARD MARLES: Yeah, look I do and so we have um, you know, we use a number of messaging platforms, but we, what we use them for is kind of commensurate with the classification of the information that is on them. So to give to put that in perhaps plain language, if you look at Ex-tropical Cyclone Alfred, um, I had a Signal message from the chief of the Defence Force about what assets, you know, what helicopters are being used, so that I was able to know exactly what was being provided in that disaster relief. Um, I think that's completely appropriate to be giving me that kind of information on Signal. If we were talking about a top secret classified capability of which we have, there's no way that any of that would go anywhere near a phone. And so it, Signal has its use. But clearly you've got to be careful about what you're using it for.

JACQUI FELGATE: Indeed. And just finally, you posted on your social media today you collect snow globes.

RICHARD MARLES: Yes, I do collect. I collect snow globes.

JACQUI FELGATE: You collect debt but you collect snow globes.

RICHARD MARLES: No I do collect snow globes. Yeah, it's slightly embarrassing. I mean, I…

JACQUI FELGATE: You’ve got a lot of them.

RICHARD MARLES: I've got about 600 of them and I had a few.

JACQUI FELGATE: Is it a bit weird?

RICHARD MARLES: Look, it's, the collection breeds is the honest truth. I mean, once people know you're doing it, they come back and give them to you. So I had the Ukrainian ambassador in. Yeah. It was rather earnestly showing him my Ukrainian sub collection. I've got three from Ukraine which was tickling his fancy. And then he's now posted about that. And, um, so that means more snow is going to come in. I like it, kind of, um, uh, it disarms people when they come into my. Let's put it that way.

JACQUI FELGATE: Yes. Jane, what do you collect other than wins against the Geelong Football Club?

JANE HUME: I've just decided I'm going to give Richard my Saint Kilda Football Club snow globe.

RICHARD MARLES: There is one?

JANE HUME: There will be now. There will be now.

JACQUI FELGATE: Great to have you both on the programme thank you.

JANE HUME: Thanks, Jackie.

RICHARD MARLES: No worries, see ya.