Budget battle + gas tax debate | Insiders | ABC NEWS

本站添加: 2026-05-24

[00:00:01]How to handle a budget blowback. The push to change capital gains tax rules for all investments is testing Labour's reform courage. But in some positive news for the world economy this morning, a peace deal between the US and Iran appears to be closer than ever. I'm David Spears. Welcome to Insiders.

[00:00:38]We also have some breaking news this morning. The White House has been placed into lockdown after reports of gunshots fired outside the building. FBI Director Cash Patel says federal agents are on the scene supporting Secret Service as they respond to shots fired near the White House grounds. We'll bring you updates as they come in here on ABC TV and the news channel as well. Well, it began with a social media meme and turned into a flood of complaints, not over changes to negative gearing for property, but over the idea all investments would be hit with new capital gains tax rules. Entrepreneurs and business owners vented their outrage. It was a tough week for the government, but don't expect a complete backdown. Talks have been underway with the tech sector since before the budget about ensuring startups are protected.

[00:01:25]Any carveout, though, will be limited.

[00:01:27]It won't be across the board for all small business. Tomorrow, this battle over the budget will move into the parliament. And coming up, I'll be joined by independent Senator David PCO.

[00:01:37]It's likely there will be multiple bills rather than just one piece of legislation, allowing time for the difficult details to be worked through.

[00:01:50]>> Anthony Albani and Jim Charas pushing on with their big budget cell across the country.

[00:01:56]>> This budget is about giving young people a fair crack at home ownership.

[00:02:02]A new front line in the budget battle has opened up >> as a social media campaign takes off, mocking the prime minister's changes to the capital gains tax discount.

[00:02:12]>> Again, >> claiming he'll grab 47% of the capital gains when they sell.

[00:02:18]>> I think some of them are very flattering and I thank them for picking uh very nice photos of me.

[00:02:23]>> They have a new business partner in Anthony Albani. He's decided to become their business partner. There are four existing concessions and carveouts for small business and we're not changing them.

[00:02:37]>> We all like scared what's going to happen next.

[00:02:39]>> We already pay a lot of taxes. We face every challenge as it comes along.

[00:02:42]>> It's a valid point because that new regime doesn't interact well if you have a really low capital base cuz you've got nothing to inflate off.

[00:02:49]>> They are under assault. They are under assault. I mean the Labor Party clearly doesn't like small business.

[00:02:56]>> Surely there's some metaphor here. The bin fire that is this budget.

[00:03:07]>> A group of 40 young business owners writing to the prime minister rather than back us. You have ambushed us.

[00:03:13]>> You work, you risk, you should get ahead.

[00:03:17]>> Australians looking to start or grow a business do it in New Zealand. No capital gains tax. We announced on budget night that there would be consultation with uh startups and with uh businesses.

[00:03:33]>> Where the bloody hell are you?

[00:03:35]>> New figures have revealed a rise in unemployment.

[00:03:38]>> 18,600 Australians losing their jobs.

[00:03:41]>> What a terrible time to start taxing Australians more.

[00:03:46]>> The New South Wales premier has taken a whack at the federal government for not doing enough to cut personal income tax.

[00:03:52]You're working Monday, Tuesday, and half of Wednesday for yourself and then Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday for the government.

[00:03:59]>> That's not how marginal tax rates work.

[00:04:00]>> Prime Minister says he's changed his mind on capital gains tax. Well, he should give the Australian people the chance to change their mind.

[00:04:08]>> They lied. See, they lied before the election. They said they weren't going to change things, but they lied. The prime minister is reportedly open to changes on a proposal to tax trusts labeled by the opposition as a death tax. And >> there's no measures in there that are going to uh hurt uh inheritances.

[00:04:29]>> What we need now is not a carve out. We need an axe. These taxes must go. Labor is the party of aspiration and we will not allow Australia to become a country where aspiration is only for some.

[00:04:47]>> Well, we are joined this morning by Mark Kenny who is the director of the Australian Studies Institute, the ANU, Claire Armstrong, chief digital political correspondent at the ABC, and Shane Wright, senior economics correspondent at the City Morning Herald and the Age. Very good morning to all of you. There is a bit going on. will keep across those gunshots outside the White House. And we will come to the hopes of a peace deal finally between Iran and the US. I know we've heard it before, but there does seem to be a lot more optimism, at least in Donald Trump's language. We'll get to that, but let's start with the budget fallout. Mark, and made the point that it hasn't really been the criticism around housing and the negative gearing changes for property investment. It's been around startups and small business. Are there legitimate concerns here? Who would be worse off under these changes? Well, I think that what we're seeing and there has been a it is interesting the reaction and as you say, you know, that the sort of housing changes have largely sort of scooted through under a bigger controversy and that >> people knew they were coming and >> yeah, that's true, but we did expect to see a fair bit of friction about it. It still represented a different position from that which they took to the election. Right.

[00:05:49]>> So, um so that's significant in itself.

[00:05:51]But what we're seeing is uh obviously a lot of uh special pleading or or or explanation of how these uh capital gains tax changes are going to affect small businesses and particularly the startup high growth high-risisk tech sector. So I think as you said in your introduction that's that's where most of the activity is at the moment and uh probably it's where there is most likely to be some sort of uh adjustment and CLA the government did flag that on budget night that it had already begun consultations with the sector the startup sector around what to do here carve out some special arrangement so they're not hit by what they're doing to every other capital gain the difficulty I suppose is how you ring fence this where do you draw the time. Uh, and as I mentioned, my understanding is this will be limited. This will be limited. It won't be all small business getting some special deal here. They want to keep this just to the the tech startups in particular.

[00:06:47]>> Yeah. I think to take a step back for a moment here, part of the government's problem, I'm sure we'll get into this more, is in this communications piece, the explanation, because a lot of what we've seen from small business owners being concerned about how this will impact them. it turns out that maybe they already are eligible for a whole bunch of CGT exemptions and and better treatment under the system because of their lower turnover or whatever. So I think that some of this debate is being a bit convoluted. But what we do know is that companies particularly like a ST a tech startup that has a low start like basically starts with zero capital and then grows very quickly if you're being taxed on that gain um that obviously adversely affects you a lot more than um a more traditional style company that has a sort of capital starting point that's not zero.

[00:07:35]>> And is that fair enough Shane people saying why should the tech bros get a special deal here you know compared to a hairdresser caterer someone else starting up from scratch. What is the difference?

[00:07:45]>> Well, I think one of the arguments is that there is some productivity gains or some like to it's early for Canes, but Kane's talked about animal spirits and the animal spirits perhaps are different between those who think they're going to make the technological breakthrough that change the world rather than someone who's setting up a hairdresser down at the local shops. The risk profile is slightly different. Of course, you've got you're listening to all these tech people saying, "I've got the next best thing." the failure rate is between 70 and 90% in the first year of operation.

[00:08:16]So it's you've got that re it's really interesting and it the budget was interesting in the terms of the fact that um that Jim Chararma said we are talking about the fight between income and capital and you saw it again in Albanesey's speech yesterday.

[00:08:32]The one of the arguments of the last 20 years is that this shift towards supporting capital is one of the reasons why there is a lot of angry people in Britain, in across Europe, across the United States because of that shift >> and Labour wants to bring that back so that capital and labor are taxed more similarly. But is there still a need for some sort of incentive to take the risk and put your money into an investment?

[00:08:54]>> I think there is. And I think one of the arguments is is the 50% concession too large >> versus right we'll have to come up with we go back to where we were pre999 and there are whole other arguments around what that does to the housing sector the way that people are very very creative with their tax systems uh and their tax arrangements. We haven't even got on to trusts which is one of the big things but yeah that's what's going on in that >> I just make a a point about this just in terms of the way the debates happen though. I mean, it seems to me a lot of it is predicated on the idea that all of these businesses are sold at some point.

[00:09:26]In fact, that's the intention to start them up, grow them to a point, and sell them. Now, that may be quite common. It may be quite a a frequent thing. But it's also true that people start businesses to draw an income from them, to expand them, to innovate. Mark Zuckerberg didn't exactly get rid of Facebook, did he? And it's worked out pretty well for him. So, um, >> that's true. I think, you know, having a debate where it seems to be exclusively about what happens when you sell a business, I think, it sort of leaves out all of those other options that one might have for innovation, growth, expansion, employment, dynamism within the economy, animal spirits, as you say, that be expressed in other ways.

[00:10:03]>> For for startups in the tech sector in particular, they need investors and investors aren't looking for a payday, >> a pay income. They're looking for when they're going to sell that share. and they want that that business to really take off so that it's going to be worthwhile. And a lot of these startups failed. So they're >> But if you were a startup investor in Facebook, would you have wanted to bail out early?

[00:10:23]>> In hindsight, no, you wouldn't. Or Apple. No, exactly. But I did talk to Kate Cornick. She's the CEO of the um the Tech Council of Australia for the podcast this week. Involved in the negotiations with the government on this very issue. Uh and they have been since budget as well. She makes the point that yes, we need to be attracting global investors into the tech sector here for these sorts of startups.

[00:10:43]>> Successful founders will see their tax rate increase significantly and that is a disincentive to operating and starting and growing a startup in this country.

[00:10:53]So we absolutely need to make sure that we are rewarding that risk.

[00:10:57]>> Rewarding risk I suppose is is the theme here. CLA.

[00:11:02]>> Well, I might be falsely attributing, but this is just the first place that I saw it was in the subject line of a an email from Nationals MP Kevin Hogan, a press release that said, um, you take all the risk and Albanese takes the reward. That's quite a potent political message. I think that is probably where we'll see the coalition who are obviously opposed to these tax changes going. And it's setting up this idea that yes, you the individual do all the work. There's been a lot of talk about how in the early stages of a business or a startup, you're often maybe not paying yourself as much or or trying to reinvest as much as possible to to kind of improve your chances of getting over that risk of failing and then the idea that the government at the end of it comes and and clips the ticket quite substantially. I think that is politically potent. What will be dangerous for the government is going back to ring fencing if they're intent on just limiting this to tech. that in how in in itself do you define tech?

[00:11:56]There are plenty of businesses that might use a lot of AI and innovate in AI um to do sort of what we would call more traditional businesses. What if you're an architect or a construction firm that uses a lot of CAD and AI? Is that a tech startup?

[00:12:10]>> It's a good it's a good point. Settling that definition won't necessarily be easy. And that's why I don't think we're going to see that settled this week. My understanding is they'll introduce the framework legislation on Thursday of this week and hope to pass it through the lower house uh next week, so the following week, the second sitting week, and then in the Senate uh before the end of the the whole session, so later in June. But the details on any carve out for startups can still be worked on. So it won't be in that first bit of framework legislation. You mentioned though this this this campaign that Albanese is going to take half your business or 47% of your business. I just wonder your thoughts on this whole AI meme push that was very effective uh during the week. It was clever. It was funny. Perhaps uh misinformation and misleading, but Mark, it's sort of a new style of cheap effective campaigning to to raise awareness on the issue.

[00:13:00]>> And here lay the future. I mean, this is where we're going. It's going to be really really hard, I think, in this kind of, you know, we talk about distributed energy with, you know, wind farms and solar and so forth. We now have sort of highly distributed politics and political messaging and it's going to be very difficult I think for orthodox politics going forward to kind of progress change to do anything that's complicated. There are always losers when you make change and if losers can run these sorts of campaigns and they're not bound by the normal strictures of >> well there's no truth in advertising for anyone but they're not bound by being you know a major >> conventions of politics which is a pretty loose conventions as we know I mean there's certainly a lot of exaggeration and so forth but you know this was they admitted pretty well up front that the 47% claim or the half of the business claim was was wrong right um they mostly admitted that but they said yeah but it got eyeballs on it and it got people talking about it and and as you say it sort of hides within this sort of broader context of being satirical. Okay. All of those things uh let's let's accept them as as arguments but I think it's going to change politics going forward. I saw a video of Andy Burnham the the you know the putitive possible next prime minister um you know the other day and it it was a fantastical thing with him wrestling with someone and losing his temper and so forth. It it looked completely legitimate. Well, yeah. And um Donald Trump couldn't tell images of himself doing all sorts of things all the time.

[00:14:24]>> Yeah. Yeah. So, it's really really hard, I think, for politics going forward.

[00:14:27]>> I would just take that though and say that Labour are um flying pretty close to the sun, I think, with their instant dismissal of a lot of the criticism being either misinformation, partisan politics, or vested interests. Um, this is something I've been looking at a lot lately, really spending way too much time in the comment section of every uh Backb Instagram account, and there are some pretty consistent concerns and complaints, not just about, and we've talked a lot about the CGT impacts on small business, but on investors and particularly young investors. And I think that ultimately it is actually quite detrimental for the government to be dismissing the concerns of young people whether it's the rent investors, the ETF investors, crypto, whatever it is, to just say you are part of this cabal of of political partisans backed by vested interests pushing misinformation.

[00:15:22]>> I think it's a good point. You know, their other argument this week has been, oh, most young people don't have shares or ETFs or, you know, they don't. And that's true. Um, >> a lot do though. But a lot do and I can't be dismissive people majority like we've had some absolutely crazy numbers thrown out which you would s actually suggest that there are more people in the country under 25 or 35 than there actually are and you go hold on this is like this is getting you >> sure point you can't dismiss >> no you can't dismiss these are these are vested interests and we and this government has said we're going to tax you more like sorry I live through the 2010 2010 budget And the vested interest said they didn't have means. You had Andrew Forest on the back of a a truck out in Perth. And whenever you take on a vested interest, there is going to be something. There's going to be a push back.

[00:16:12]>> Do you accept though, Shane? The government does need to do a better job of explaining, well, for small business, we're doing X, Y, and Zed in the budget.

[00:16:18]You just an asset write off and all these sorts of things. Um, for a lot of businesses, the change we're making, you'll be better off than you were under the existing. They need to do a better job of explaining some of this. goes back to my 2010 example. Sadly, I reread the 2010 budget.

[00:16:32]>> This is the RSPT. You're talking >> the RSPT, the resource profit. So, it paid for a cut to the company tax, a cut to the personal income tax rate, the standard deduction, which is coming back in, investment incentives for small miners, uh a change to the tax system for financing, uh for the financial sector, which was beneficial, plus cuts to interest uh tax on interest, all got swept away. M >> and this is because they said we're going to take on one vested interest and it was a very powerful >> and I think I think the interesting thing there and I think this goes to what you're both saying as well and that is that yes you get the vested interest and those vested interests can be very powerful and in the RSP case it it was decisive right but I also felt even back in 2010 that there are a lot of people who didn't really understand the detail but they saw the government was trying to apply tax and I think this goes to CLA's point too that people who who perhaps don't even use exchange traded funds or anything else are are looking at this and they're seeing it as as as a government kind of reaching in and and they feel ambitious about it even though they perhaps don't. I tell you what, I want to show you this. I want to show you this, right? Because if if the government can convince people this is a tough decision in the national interest, there may be a way through this. Uh this is a poll from JWS research that even if it's a broken promise, if it's seen as making a tough decision in the national interest, 50% say thumbs up. Uh 37% say we'd still rather them stick to what they promised at the election. But it's about if they can convince people this is a tough decision. And that's why bottom line, I know there's been a lot of focus CLA on oh they're going to back down. They're going to back down on this or that. I think largely they're going to tough this out is is the impression I get from talking to senior folks in the government. Yes. Um they're negotiating on the tech carve out. Yeah. Um and trusts they're going to take a bit of time towards the end of this year to get that right. But I think largely they're going to hold the line here.

[00:18:22]>> I agree. I think the issue that they are going to have though is um you know people hate the reductive analysis of budgets as looking at winners and losers but the language around I mean 12 days ago or whenever the budget was this was a tough budget that was well and truly overwhelmed by the positives in Labour's mind like this was their message of young people getting into a home. So obviously we are not talking about that at all. Um, and I'm not sure that even if we were talking about that, the government would necessarily be winning that argument. It would would have been a contested space. But they have essentially got themselves into a position where they won't acknowledge that what they are doing is a tough decision that a lot of people are going to pay more tax. And they're trying to talk about these vague winners that they haven't defined. They haven't given examples. There have been no cameos, no case studies. I think the only one that I've seen is someone like Andrew Charlton talking about apartment buildings in Paramata that haven't gone up in value very much or at all in the last 5 years and under the new CGT arrangement where you only have to um pay tax on the real gain you'd be better off. Where is the example like that in every electorate in every sector in every income bracket?

[00:19:34]>> Maybe you've just given them a suggestion there CLA that we'll see them roll out.

[00:19:37]>> I think it's because they didn't expect to get attacked on this. We're going to move on. just to update you on the White House situation. Uh the lockdown has been lifted. A suspect we understand has been um detained and taken to hospital.

[00:19:49]Uh so that's the the latest on that and we will come to what's happening in terms of a peace deal between the US and Iran. Time now though to talk to independent Senator David PCO who's been at the forefront of a campaign pushing for a new 25% tax on gas exports. It is proving to be a popular idea. Well, now One Nation has also put forward its own plans for the gas industry.

[00:20:12]energy policy takes center stage.

[00:20:15]>> I have a vision for this country and I think it reflects my gas policy.

[00:20:20]>> We need to get busy digging and drilling.

[00:20:23]>> Pauline Hansen is tapping into voter concerns >> today. unveiling a plan for the government to fund gas exploration in exchange for part equity >> for a 10% tax on offshore gas and oil while the government would take a 30% stake in future projects >> and divert profits into a sovereign wealth fund.

[00:20:42]>> Australians will have real ownership of their resources.

[00:20:45]>> The best time for Australia to have invested uh in that part of the industry was 30 or 40 years ago. So that moment has passed.

[00:20:53]>> This has been a policy that I've thought about for a long time. It was based on also what Norway did. It just speaks to their lack of knowledge of our gas system.

[00:21:03]>> Thank you.

[00:21:05]>> Shut up.

[00:21:06]>> We're done.

[00:21:07]>> Did you just say shut up?

[00:21:08]>> Yes, I did tell you to shut up.

[00:21:10]>> Look, I did ring Sarah after that and uh apologize for the um shut up comment. It obviously wasn't didn't come from me.

[00:21:19]the proponents of a new form of gas tax, they're getting cut through in the general election.

[00:21:26]>> I I don't I don't support uh putting more taxes on oil and gas.

[00:21:32]>> We have already made our position clear on gas exports.

[00:21:35]>> Senator David KCO and the Greens Party continue to call for an industry destroying 25% tax on gas exports. It is our gas and we want a fair return when it's exported.

[00:21:48]>> These activists simply want to destroy our gas industry and push their green agenda scan. They want gas stopped.

[00:21:59]>> Senator PCO, welcome to the program.

[00:22:01]>> Thanks, David.

[00:22:01]>> Well, Pauline Hansen there says you want the gas industry stopped. Is she right?

[00:22:06]>> I don't. I just want a fair return on the exports of our gas. And we've seen wide recognition that we're not getting a fair return. There is such broad public support for this. And I think, you know, One Nation's announcement at a gas industry conference, which I think is is a bit of a red flag if you're getting um the red carpet from an industry that's just spent 11.2 million plus stopping a 25% gas export tax. It's recognition that we're not getting a fair return.

[00:22:33]>> Well, that's the difference, isn't it?

[00:22:34]Pauline Hansen, One Nation, want to help the gas industry expand, open new projects grow. You don't, do you?

[00:22:42]Because I mean, you you have said over the years uh since you've been in parliament, you want to stop opening new fossil fuel projects. So, you don't want any new gas.

[00:22:50]>> Well, the reality is is that people are moving away from gas. And so, if you look at International Energy Agency, uh Department of Industry, all of the projections show a declining demand for gas. We're one of the biggest gas exporters in the world right now. My argument is we should be getting a fair return from the export of that gas and also lowering the price of gas here in Australia. We're constantly being told that we have some sort of shortage of gas. We've got manufacturers here paying more for Australian gas than Japan is buying our gas for. We can solve that through a gas export tax and I think it solves a lot of those issues.

[00:23:24]>> But I guess that's the question here. Is your motivation here speeding up the end of the gas industry?

[00:23:29]>> No, it's getting a fair return right now. And the thing, you know, the talking points we hear from the gas industry is exactly what they've said in Norway. If you have any sort of mechanism to get a fair return, we won't invest. If projects stack up, they will still invest. They will still export gas. They'll still make a profit, but they'll actually pay the Australian people for that gas. And you know, I think this actually leads into part of the big problem with the fallout from the the budget is that right up to budget night, we heard one, we're not changing any um anything when it comes to tax. And two, we couldn't possibly change the tax settings for multinational gas companies that are making, you know, tens of billions of dollars exporting our gas. Turns out you can change the tax settings for everyday Australians. You just can't change the multinational gas companies. You mentioned Norway and yes, they do collect a lot of tax from gas, but they also uh invest a lot of taxpayers money in gas and this is the the model that I guess Pauline Hansen's talking about as well, the government taking an ownership stake in gas. Um in Norway, they fund exploration and development. They remove regulatory barriers. A couple of weeks ago, they offered up to 70 new 70 new oil and gas drilling permits. That's not the model you're supporting, are you?

[00:24:40]>> It's two very different models, Australia versus no oil. haven't seen that sort of political leadership over many decades. But the core principle is that a resource belongs to the people and when it is extracted you should receive a fair return from it.

[00:24:56]>> But also for the people to invest in that industry and expand that industry.

[00:25:01]Is that what you're suggesting?

[00:25:02]>> Well, we haven't done that.

[00:25:04]>> Do you think we should? I think if you look across across the board um looking at gas and doing that for gas I think that ship has probably sailed and we need to get a fair return going forward but we should be looking at things like data centers AI you know that is the that is the future where we're seeing these huge tech companies putting tens of billions of dollars of investment into Australia at the same time minimizing their tax year and paying very little tax on revenue I think that is what we should be looking at and that's >> what in terms of government ownership is that what you're saying >> a mechanism to actually get a fair return. I don't know what that looks like in terms of is it governor ownership or is it tax arrangements where you can't profit shift where you can't you know deduct all sorts of payments to tax havens u and minimize your tax here but I think we need to get a fair return from the export of our gas right now but we need to be looking at all these other industries that we're told are the industries of the future critical minerals AI data centers how do we get a fair return from that as Australia >> so what's what are you suggesting there that there should be government ownership of critical minerals and data centers >> well we're already seeing a lot of money being put into critical minerals. Um, data centers, I think, is a big conversation that is is is coming at us.

[00:26:13]Um, when there's money on the table, how do we actually ensure that Australians get a fair fair return? Because everything I hear the question, but what's what you're the politician.

[00:26:21]What's the answer here? Is it government ownership?

[00:26:24]>> Well, I don't have the specific um, you know, solution to it, but I think it's the it's the principle of how do we get a fair return on resources that belong to the Australian people. Coming back to Norway though, just to be clear on this, Norway really tries to speed up gas exploration and development uh through government ownership.

[00:26:44]Are you suggesting that that's what should happen here?

[00:26:47]>> Well, we have done that in the past. If you look at the West Australians government's submission to the recent Senate inquiry now, there were billions and billions of dollars that they put into the Northwest Shelf. We've seen $1.5 billion for middle arms. So, it's not like this is an industry that hasn't had support from the government. The only different difference is between Norway and and Australia when it comes to the principle of whether or not this belongs to the Australian people is that we're happy to get fleeced. You if you look at >> But the other difference, just back to the question, the other difference is that government ownership and involvement in speeding up the the expansion of the gas sector again. Is that what you're suggesting?

[00:27:23]>> That's not what I'm suggesting. No, I think we should have a 25% gas export tax to actually get a return from the gas that is currently being exported.

[00:27:30]And we're we're in an energy crisis.

[00:27:32]these companies are making wind for profits and the government isn't even willing to put in something like a windfall profits tax.

[00:27:38]>> So just I mean to your point the existing uh PRRT petroleum resource rent tax here's what the budget papers showed it's collected uh it's going to be $1.4 billion in the current financial year it does go up to 1.9 then you can see it does drop down over the the coming years. So what would your 25% gas tax raise?

[00:27:56]>> A 25% gas export tax, you're looking at $17 billion a year more in an energy.

[00:28:02]>> So 10 times >> prices. Yep. Um and the other thing it does is it it lowers the cost of gas.

[00:28:08]Australian gas sold to Australian manufacturers, businesses, and households. That is a very good thing.

[00:28:12]And that would happen almost immediately when you have a gas export tax. The thing that the thing that really annoys people about the PRT is that you've got the prime minister and others saying, "No, don't worry. in the future we're going to get a fair return. You look at the budget papers this year was $100 million less than they'd projected.

[00:28:26]>> Out to 2030, $1.25 billion. What does beer excise do? It just keeps going up.

[00:28:32]2030 we're paying $3 billion in bureitis. Like Australians know that we're getting duted and yet we see a government, both major parties, who are willing to change taxes for all of us, but not for multinationals that have had good for so long.

[00:28:46]>> Do you think Labor will shift on this?

[00:28:48]because the treasurer Jim Charas has said a couple of times this week when he's been asked about it that um the government's priorities for the time being are a domestic gas reservation policy and and making sure the two-way supplies with Asian partners is secured, but you know, for the time being is interesting language. Do you see Labor moving on this?

[00:29:05]>> Well, this isn't going away and I think they're going to have to move on it. As a country that is so reliant on personal income tax, Australians feel that and yet we're willing to give away big chunks of our gas and not actually do something that is wildly popular. across the board. Every single voting cohort supports a 25% gas export tax.

[00:29:23]>> Let's move to what we saw in the budget where the government is making some tax changes. What do you think about changing the capital gains tax regime for all investments, not just property?

[00:29:33]>> Well, I've campaigned very hard to change it for property and I think the case has been really well made by the crossbench over a number of years now.

[00:29:40]Australians understand that we have had a system that incentivizes investment in something that we desperately need to be accessible and affordable. And so I think there's broad recognition that that needs to change. The case hasn't been made to extend it to all asset classes. I think that is now the challenge for the government given that they've up to budget night said we're not going to make any changes. They made a change to housing that I think has broad support at least understanding but the rest there's a lot of detail and and you know I think your podcast with the tech council CEO kind of pointed out just some of the details that need to be be worked out.

[00:30:15]>> Do you think that that sector has a point that they deserve a complete carve out or some sort of special deal? I do and you I really welcome the government's changes to to property and their ambitious ambition to actually change our tax system which is you know overly generous to capital and and tax people's taxes people people's income really hard and I think just as they've suggested and as myself and many others on the crossbench have pushed them to do to use the tax system to incentivize new supply so you get the the the capital gains tax discount um you can negatively gear new supply I think when it comes to businesses, we want to be using it to incentivize startups, not just to start here in Australia, but critically to actually stay here as they scale >> and just tech or do you think there needs to be uh some change for other small business, other business investments as well? Where where would you draw the line?

[00:31:08]>> Well, I think this is something that really needs broad consultation. I think to to CLA's point earlier, we do need to be looking just more broadly than just tech. I think there's some very good reasons that we do want people to be taking a chance and actually building businesses that solve the big challenges of of today, but then critically to get them to stay here in Australia because we've se seen so many Australian businesses a good idea gets gobbled up moves to the US.

[00:31:32]>> So you would you would actually have a carve out what go back to the existing 50% capital gains tax discount for all business investments? I would love to see a a very solid Senate inquiry to actually look at this because it's very uh complicated. You know, you just have to read Tom Crowley's explainer during the week to realize there is a there is a lot going on here.

[00:31:54]>> Yeah. So, you're openminded on on this at the moment. You want to have a proper inquiry to get a better sense of where to draw the line.

[00:32:00]>> Yeah. I've you met with the CRA Business Chamber. I've heard from a number of startups. The ACT has the most startups per capita in the country. So, this is something that we've we've really got to get right. So, I'll engage in good faith and I think the onus is on the government. One to make the the case for the changes they're suggesting, but I think two to really engage in good faith and I think that is through a lengthy Senate inquiry where you actually delve into the detail and grapple with some of these trade-offs to ultimately land on a piece of legislation that is going to work.

[00:32:26]>> Well, they want this passed in roughly 6 weeks by the time parliament rises for the winter break in July. Is that too fast?

[00:32:32]>> I think it is. We've seen this worrying trend in in in politics where things are just rammed through parliament rather than actually taking the time to get it right and and in my experience in the last term of parliament when you do take things a bit slower. Sure, it may get a bit messier, but you end up in a better place because you hear the wide perspective of Australians um who are uh directly impacted and just more generally what their view is on these changes and then you can land on a place that you say, "Yeah, this actually makes sense for us as a country." When it comes to this broken promise element, you've been uh one of those campaigning strongly on integrity. You've said government should keep promises made in the leadup to elections. Does that apply here or do you think this was a promise worth breaking?

[00:33:17]>> Well, as I said, I've campaigned really hard on on housing. Like when we talk about Australians cost of living challenges and our future, you cannot go past housing. We've got a housing system that is not working. So, I really >> that but you've also campaigned on integrity. I'm just wondering how you would square the two.

[00:33:32]>> Well, without a doubt, it's a broken promise and that's for them to justify and you only have to look at the stage three tax cut changes in the last parliament where again the crossbench really led the charge and actually saying these are tax cuts that are not in the best interests of our future. We have to change them to make them fairer.

[00:33:50]The government then did that and now claim that as a huge win. Um they point to this the s tax cuts as something that they delivered for Australians. So I think when it comes to housing, the crossbench has done that work.

[00:34:01]>> Now that I've extended across the board, it's really up to the government to make the case for for why that's a good thing.

[00:34:05]>> So David PCO, I'm interested uh to turn to how you're viewing the political landscape right now, which has been shifting a lot uh even since the election 12 months ago. Um I want to show you this how the House of Reps looks right now. That's after last year's election. And then this rather extraordinary red bridge poll that the Australian Financial Review published yesterday. You can see their one nation just taking a huge chunk of seats. Some from Labor, which would be reduced to, you know, barely a majority, but a a huge amount from the coalition nearly wiped out. You know, whether that poll is accurate, it's one poll. Um, but it's undeniable the rise that we've seen for One Nation. What do you put that down to?

[00:34:45]>> I think there's a lot of frustration and not just frustration, but anger out there in the community that our political system is not working for Australians. I think there's this recognition that actually on so many of these big challenges we're facing, it's not necessarily left versus right. It's actually vested interests and their strangle hold on the major parties versus the Australian people. And you know, two perfect examples of that are are gambling and gas. We're on both things. You have the vast majority of Australians saying, "Hey, we can see that banning all gambling ads and just getting on with it, protecting our kids, is in the best interest of us. It's something we want you to do. We've got a a prime minister who bows to vested interest. Same thing's happening on gas.

[00:35:25]So I think people are saying how is the system not working for us. It's the major parties who aren't delivering.

[00:35:30]>> But do you honestly think it's gas and gambling that's driving that one nation surge or is it migration?

[00:35:35]>> No, I think those are I guess symptoms of this problem where we haven't had political parties willing to actually engage in good faith on big challenges that we're facing. And you know to to migration in the last parliament I put up uh terms of reference for a center inquiry multiple times to say let's actually have this conversation about immigration. We currently have no plan.

[00:35:56]We have no plan when it comes to immigration and population. No long-term plan. We've got no plan when it comes to housing and homelessness. No wonder we're lurching from crisis to crisis where everything is about, you know, threeear election cycles rather than saying, "Okay, what's good for us for the next 10 years, for the next 20 years?" And what I've seen is major parties who aren't willing to engage in that in that debate.

[00:36:16]>> What are you willing to do looking at where One Nation is going? Do you remain an independent? I mean, you've clearly got a national following now and a lot of support on some of these issues like gas. Do you see this moment as a moment where independents like you should be forming a party or is staying independent more important to you? How do you think about your own future here?

[00:36:36]>> Well, I think it's a you a big question in the current political climate. um as an independent. How do you be part of >> changing our country for the better? For me at the moment, that is serving people in the ACT, engaging on each issue, bringing solutions, using whatever power I have in the Senate to actually work on behalf of the people that have have sent me there. As to what that looks like in the future, who knows? I think we're in a real time of of flux politically. And there's people actually looking for candidates who are going to come to CRA and actually put them first, put them ahead of vested interests.

[00:37:11]>> Well, that's interesting. So, at the next election, can you see the prospect of running as part of a party?

[00:37:19]>> At the moment, the thing I'd love to see at the next election is every electorate actually having a a viable independent, someone from the community who the communities has said, "Hey, this person will go in there and put us first >> as an option." That is good for our democracy when we actually have choice at elections. And I think, you know, we saw that here in the south side of Campbo, a safe Labor seat. Um Jesse Price, a midwife, well respected in the community, not that well known, but got around and people said, "Hey, this is someone who'll put us first."

[00:37:48]>> Would you run for the lower house?

[00:37:50]>> Well, I think at currently in in the Senate, um there's plenty to do and there's really good opportunities there.

[00:37:56]That's my focus.

[00:37:57]>> That's not a no.

[00:37:59]Well, I don't know why you'd rule something out, but certainly at the moment, I'm I'm committed to doing >> what I'm doing. And my hope is that there will be really great candidates.

[00:38:07]And, you know, I think David, that's the thing that I've seen in um my short four years in politics, is that it's just really about having people who are willing to engage in good faith and put their community first. It doesn't have to be about personality and being able to make great speeches, etc. It's it's actually about getting in there and doing the hard work. And what I've seen is community independence being able to do that.

[00:38:29]>> But just just finally on this, I mean, are you talking to other independents, some of those in the lower house, about whether dealing with what One Nation is doing on the right is better done as part of a party.

[00:38:42]>> Yeah, there's plenty of conversations going on all the time. I mean, this is something >> and you're open to this.

[00:38:48]>> Yeah, I'm always I'm always happy to chat about the future of our country.

[00:38:51]You know, I think there's so many people in politics for the right reasons. And when you're in there, you want to say, well, how how do we actually ensure that people can elect people that are going to come here and really deal with the root causes of the problems that we're facing? Because we haven't seen that.

[00:39:05]You know, you only end up in a crisis because you don't see a challenge and say, "Okay, how do we genuinely deal with this?" You just say, "Well, let's put it off. Let's try and sell some other little things." And then all of a sudden, you're in a housing crisis.

[00:39:16]You're in a biodiversity crisis. You're in an energy crisis. Like, Australians are sick of it. They can see that short-term decision-m is not working for us.

[00:39:24]>> Senator David PCO, thanks for joining us today.

[00:39:26]>> Thanks, David. Cheers.

[00:39:27]>> Well, coming up, migration policy has again become a bit of a flash point for the Liberals in particular. The divide between the moderates and the conservatives on the show. First, let's get back to our panel. We're joined once more by the A&W's Mark Kenny, Claire Armstrong from the ABC, and Shane Wright from the Age and Sydney Morning Herald.

[00:39:44]Uh, interesting comments at the end there. Uh Mark, this has been a bit of a um perennial question for a while, hasn't it? Will independence form a party? David PCO clearly does have a fair bit of popularity and and and following now nationally beyond just the ACT where he represents. What did you make of his openness, I suppose, to forming a party?

[00:40:05]>> Well, I think it's fairly consistent with the way he he presents himself generally. That's the first thing. So, at one level >> open to considering things.

[00:40:11]>> Yeah, sure. But at one level, we can see it as a kind of a fudging answer. you know, do are you having these discussions? Well, I'm always happy to discuss the future of our country. You know, those sort there's sort of there's there's a kind of a political there's a degree of artifice there, but I think it's less than we get from general politicians. So, you know, he seems to me to be frank and open and he's he's he's says, why would you rule things out? I I I you know, I'd ask the question, why would you do it if you have I mean, he's already a successful brand. He already has quite a lot of sway. I mean, the numbers in the Senate will determine the extent to which he's pivotal at any one time, admittedly, but you know, I I'm I'm struggling. I mean, there is the point about if he forms if he's part of a party, they can get names above a line on on the Senate ballot paper and so forth.

[00:40:55]>> Um, perhaps that's advantageous. I don't know. I just think at some level the parties and and media generally are >> are kind of obsessed with this idea of are the independents a party? They're independent, right? And yes, they they have that is their appeal. And if they become a party, I think it makes them it it may present some organizational conveniences and economies of scale and these kinds of things, even branding.

[00:41:21]But it's probably also going to bring some downside.

[00:41:24]>> Unless Claire, it's to represent um particularly in in relation to those TLMPs, independents in the in the lower house. Uh you know, what the Liberal Party used to be and we we'll come to where the Liberal Party is going on migration. You heard there from David Pock a concern about business. You know, ACT has most startups in the country.

[00:41:42]Want to make sure that there's a wide carve out here, not just for tech, but for for business generally. It's a pretty, you know, pro business line compared to labor. Um, that that's kind of a space where you could see a party having some appeal in urban areas in the country. Well, I mean, we know that it has appeal because the Liberal Party used to exist in that space and appeal and win majority governments. Um, which you have to say sounds a bit far off at the moment. I suppose in a world where you look at the trends in other democracies, um, particularly in Europe that have shifted away from a sort of two party system. Um, the emergence of a of, you know, essentially like a fourth party, I guess, that's like a center right but progressive on environment and other issues. I mean obviously there's electorally space for that. Um I'd be interested to see like whether the the public um even if it got a taste of that kind of coalition making that happens often after an election where there are multiple parties that have got 20 or something to that effect percent of the vote. If after one round of that the public went oh actually we we like the old system. I'm I'm not saying either way, but I do think that we are closer to that kind of potential experiment happening electorally than we would have been 10 years ago.

[00:42:57]>> I think and the red bridge poll goes exactly to that point. Like it's not just the fact that the Liberal Party has 12 seats um with it Danten's the probably the most senior remaining Liberal in the House.

[00:43:12]>> Angus Taylor would lose Angus Taylor.

[00:43:15]Yeah. And Andrew Yeah, Andrew Hasty is gone. But you get into the Senate where they consume the one nation like uh everybody else. So Matt Canavan actually loses his seat under what those sort of numbers suggest like you are going back into the collapse of the UAP and its replacement by the Liberal Party in the 40s >> which is where the Teals might have that presence and maybe that's where you could rebuild.

[00:43:42]>> Anyway, we'll see.

[00:43:42]>> I think the independents just need to remember what their appeal was originally. was that they were not parties.

[00:43:48]>> You're going to lose you're going to lose some by by making that move. But what do you on the other side? Let's talk about gas. Uh Shane, hopefully you can enlighten us. The differences between the 25% gas tax that David PCO >> uh and others, the ACTU were in fact the first to to suggest this. And Labor at the moment are >> well, they're not shutting the door completely, just not now. And then you've got Pauline Hansen's idea as well, which is somewhat different.

[00:44:10]>> Somewhat different. It's interesting because uh Senator PCO saying, "Oh, we'll raise $17 billion from $1.9 billion." Like you people complaining about how the tax hit from the CGT is going to wipe out. I'm sorry. Increasing the tax take on top of company tax outside of that you go 15 billion a year, >> 17 billion a year. Well, but the extra on the but of course it he ignored the issue which is what actually stopped the government going down this path is and you just have to look where Anthony Albanese Albanesei went last month which was to Singapore talking to China talking to the South Koreans talking to >> we had the Japanese PM here >> that's right there is an absolute big political issue international political issue which is you go down this path the chances of getting fertilizer, of getting diesel, of getting jet fuel because >> because the export task is is passed on in full. Is that the argument?

[00:45:09]>> Well, the argument is you'll break you are changing the arrangements and this is the issue that got brought up with Albanese with by these other countries saying hold on you are changing an arrange we have a contract with you and you're going to change the arrangements right now. Well, we might have to change our arrangements with our supply. I think it is at once not as simple and not as complicated as the kind of entrenched sides of this debate say to previously reference the comment sections of every MP at the moment. Most of them if not about CGT and trusts are about well you've gone after CGT and trusts and not gas. Um so that issue has absolutely not gone away for a huge part of the electorate and it's not just young people watching Instagram reels and Tik Toks. It's it's really permeated. Obviously, Pauline Hansen has picked that up. She said at the start of her speech this week that Australians are quote rightly angry and upset at the way that they are not currently getting a good deal out of their resources.

[00:46:10]She's also two from two on saying right in saying that this idea that the Norway model of just taxing um is a solution is actually not really the full picture because Norway obviously drill drill drill and fund a lot of that and take a lot of the risk on onto the taxpayer in order to then reap that reward.

[00:46:29]>> Say if you want to do Norway let's do Norway.

[00:46:31]>> I think broadly for the government um there are going to be a lot of hurdles still with the roll out of their east coast gas reserve. I do not think that that is going as steadily along as they would like you to imagine. They tried to do some consultation. I think it was last week and the stakeholders essentially went consult on what you've given us a lot of detail.

[00:46:50]>> There was supposed to be more detail to then build on cons consultation like it is not set and I think they have to deal with that before they even get to a tax.

[00:46:58]>> Can I just ask one question? Why why is the 25% gas tax debate conducted different from pretty well every other debate when we talk about rates? It's it's either 25% or nothing. What's the logical >> I'm not sure because there is an existing tax system and that that includes PRT. It does include in some cases royalties and there's a difference between onshore offshore and you've got the company tax system >> like Chevron is paying like as much as some the critics like to complain Chevron is paying a lot of tax company tax. out of it. And you you can actually see like you had your figures there 1.4 to 1.9 billion in PRT. That's because right we're assuming that the oil price gas price goes up and then comes straight down.

[00:47:42]>> So much is depending on Donald Trump and the >> We'll get to that. We'll get to that. Um no, it does. So much of um the economy depends on what's happening there. I just want to touch on migration though.

[00:47:51]Uh while the coalition clearly had been having a field day on the tax front and seemed to have a bit of get up and go for the first time in a long time on you know looking after investors migration was the other element of the budget reply Mark from Angus Taylor we're going to you know have a historic cut to migration we're going to take welfare payments away from non-citizens or new non-citizens. Um but within the Liberal party this week we've seen a a bit of push back over that. Yeah, we have um particularly from Andrew McLolin, the South Australian senator, who's rejected some of the um the language that's around some of this. Um and I think there is uh there are concerns uh in remnant sections, remnant moderate sections of >> not large swaves of the Liberal Party.

[00:48:35]No, no, but there are still some people who justify the tag of moderate in the Liberal party and McLolin's certainly one of them who have uh you know genuine concerns about what's being promoted here and a lot of it is so vague anyway, right? We we we've got this tying immigration numbers to uh to housing and we've got this, you know, the this restriction of uh entitlement to welfare and so forth. But the the sort of pinning it all together is this idea of Australian values and the Australian way of life which is a very kind of subjective amorphous sort of construct and uh it means different things for different people but basically um it's a way of avoiding any sort of detail really and as we saw from Senator Nampa Jim Price it can uh it can be you can make it specific and not in a good way.

[00:49:25]No, she had to insist she wasn't being discriminatory or racist when she went on a podcast to talk about with the host who was talking about um you know different groups and flooding Australia and so on. So you can see the the risks when you start heading down heading down that path. Look, I I do want to talk about what's happening in terms of US Iran here quickly as well. Um here's what Donald Trump posted on on Truth Social after a round of talks with leaders in the Middle East. Uh he was sounding optimistic. An agreement has been largely negotiated subject to finalization. Details of the deal are currently being discussed and will be announced shortly in addition to many other elements of the agreement. The straight of Hormuz will be opened. Uh so yes, we've we've we've seen hopes raised before only to see disappointment follow, but he's held a whole lot of talks, including with Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu. He's sounding very optimistic. The the FAR news agency from Iran, though, is saying the straight of moose would remain under Iran's management according to the latest exchanged uh text between Iran and the US. So Iran might still manage the straight. We'll see how that pans out.

[00:50:26]>> Well, I would just add that further to that that um it's dismissed US president's announcement as incomplete and inconsistent with reality.

[00:50:35]>> Okay. Well, we'll see where that goes.

[00:50:37]And from the reporting in the US, it would be a three-stage uh formal end of the war straight for Moose opens and then deal with the tricky thing of Iran's nuclear stockpiles. And let's not forget this all what the idea of ending this with a tollway for the straight of hormuz is an utter failure.

[00:50:55]>> It would be a humiliation the Iranians would argue otherwise.

[00:50:58]>> However they as far as the global economy is concerned and the Australian economy and the Australian budget and our inflation rate which the government's very attuned to right now.

[00:51:06]This would be great news, wouldn't it?

[00:51:08]I'd temper that because we know how long look I very cynical about anything because what is it next week is the third month anniversary of when Donald Trump said this will be over in four to 5 weeks. So putting that in putting a pin on that is that we know how long it is going to take for the f flow of fuel to come back through the amount of damage that has been done to uh the facilities LNG facilities particularly Katar is really struggling in that space getting fuel back into the refinery system properly and it may be I think the assumption was always you'll still have oil at around 80 bucks >> for sure but if the straight opens that oil price is going to start coming down slowly but is going to start coming down.

[00:51:52]>> I love that you're a glass. Give me something.

[00:51:56]There'll be some confidence, right?

[00:51:57]There'll be some confidence, right?

[00:51:59]Because we've seen the price come down when when people thought there was a deal coming before. If there is actually a deal, then I guess you're right to an extent. There'll be some sort of moderation.

[00:52:08]>> Confidence is in so far as Iran now have a bankable playbook on how to completely the world. Exactly. And that that now has to be factored into all considerations in the future.

[00:52:21]>> Yeah. All right. Just quickly to recap too on the other breaking news this morning. A lockdown has been lifted at the White House in Washington after a number of shots were fired near the building and journalists working there reported hearing a series of gunshots.

[00:52:32]They were ordered to seek shelter inside. Officials in the USA gunman has approached a checkpoint near the White House and opened fire. Police say the suspect's been taken down and is in hospital. and uh Donald Trump was in fact inside the White House at the time apparently. All right, our panel Shane Wright, Claire Armstrong, Mark Kenny back very shortly with some final observations. Time now for Mike Bows talking pictures.

[00:53:06]I'm Mike Bowers and I'm photographer at large for the New Daily. I'm talking pictures this morning with EP of arts and entertainment for the ABC, the one and only Zoe Norton Lodge. And a very warm welcome, Zoe.

[00:53:17]>> Thanks for having me again.

[00:53:18]>> Budget week is usually the crazy time for the government, but uh this year it was the week after budget week.

[00:53:24]>> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

[00:53:25]>> Brett Lethbridge has uh has got the budget jalopy in pole position here, which the wheels have come off the budget jalopy.

[00:53:32]>> They have. And you know why? The negative gearbox is buggered in that car. Well, it's funny that they got had a head-on collision when they're going full throttle in reverse from their policy, but I don't really know much about cars.

[00:53:45]>> I did love this Mark Knight channeling the Joe Hockey Matias Corman budget.

[00:53:50]Beautiful.

[00:53:50]>> Um, people are comparing our budgets reception with Joe Hockey Shocker back in 2014.

[00:53:55]>> I don't see the comparison. This is just this smoke is just promises going up in smoke. It's nothing to do with cigars.

[00:54:02]>> Uh, John Spooner is channeling the pork heating from 1990. This is a recession that Australia had to have.

[00:54:08]>> This is the regression that we promised Australia didn't have to have.

[00:54:11]>> Yeah. Yeah.

[00:54:12]>> I'm just impressed that John Spooner got a hold of their passport photo. There's something sad and passporty about it.

[00:54:18]You know, like no one looks good in a passport photo.

[00:54:20]>> No. Um Kathy Wilcox, Prime Minister, would you rule out ever making another promise even if we badged you to make one about something you couldn't possibly foresee?

[00:54:30]>> I get it. I feel for him. I'm breaking promises left, right, and center. It's like he should just stick to promises he can definitely keep. Like there will be no elephant invasions in Australia whilst I'm prime minister.

[00:54:41]>> Beautiful, beautiful David Ro cartoon.

[00:54:44]It's like some dystopian political Halloween, isn't it?

[00:54:48]>> I know. I can actually see this as like, you know, the new iteration of Halloween costumes. Like come as your favorite scare campaign.

[00:54:56]>> That's right. Death, taxes, and scare campaigns. There's only three certainties in political life. I love the little subtle two-faced album.

[00:55:04]>> I know. Yeah. And the little Jim there being like, I don't want to play with them. I don't want to play with death again.

[00:55:13]>> Lovely Matt Golden cartoon. Um, Liberal Movie House with the horror double feature of the 2019 election death tax and the 2026 budget death tax.

[00:55:21]>> Why are we doing this? Everything's got to be a rehash. Like, do something original. We've had the death taxes.

[00:55:26]>> I know. Uh, the 2019 version was way more scary. But honestly, with the cost of popcorn and a chalk in a movie ticket, >> who can afford to go to the movies?

[00:55:34]>> No, >> Zoe, it seems like One Nation has gone from a minor party to a major problem for you major parties, hasn't it?

[00:55:42]>> I know. This one to me really just reminded me of that, you know, that Dolly Parton song Pauline.

[00:55:47]>> Yeah. Yeah.

[00:55:48]>> You know, Pauline, Pauline, Pauline, Pauline, I'm begging of you. Please don't take my major party status.

[00:55:54]>> Was a huge hit. owned and occupied has um Barabby here is measuring the drapes.

[00:55:59]>> Yes, he is. And he hasn't measured his pants.

[00:56:01]>> No. Matt Golding's cartoon. I like her because >> he says >> what she thinks. It's it's very pointed this. It is >> always a good look when your national security minister is uh is seen triumphing over prisoners, let's say. I did love Kathy Wilcox's uh penny here.

[00:56:19]Yeah, we call on the Israeli government not to treat the Sumud Flotilla activists the way they treat Palestinians.

[00:56:27]>> I mean, it's amazing she's included real photographs in this one, isn't it? You can't really look away.

[00:56:32]>> Yep. Fiona Katowskis, one is hellbent on further damaging Israel's reputation and the other is trying to deliver aid to Gaza. There's the fertil crew and the >> and Benny Gavir waving the flag.

[00:56:43]>> It actually looks like a political cartoon in action, that image, doesn't it?

[00:56:47]>> It really does. Zoe, it's been a great pleasure um picking events this week, even though the events have been pretty ordinary.

[00:56:54]>> Indeed.

[00:56:54]>> I'll let you the honors.

[00:56:56]>> Back to you, Spizzy.

[00:56:57]>> Thank you, Zoe. Thank you, Mike. Time for some final observations. Just a quick one. Treasury Secretary Jenny Wilkinson is giving a speech uh and taking questions on Thursday in an event at the Australian Business Economists. I reckon there'll be a lot of attention on the Treasury Secretary in going through the details of what's in this >> and and I will be there. Um this this week unemployment rate came in at 4 and a half and it scared everybody because it went up and there was a drop of about 18,000 jobs. The market pricing for an interest rate rise this year has almost evaporated. Like it's down like we have to wait till December. Now there's a 66% chance of rate cuts in the second half of next year. The global economy is getting worried about Donald Trump and a war and Iran and what it's doing to growth. Interesting. clear.

[00:57:44]>> Uh I'm going to zoom out and put my international relations undergrad to a bit of use. There is uh an Ebola outbreak that began in the dem Democratic Republic of Congo. We've seen reports about 170 suspected deaths, 750 cases according to the World Health Organization. Aid agencies already linking the sort of blindness to the emersion of this outbreak to huge cuts to aid, particularly US aid, the US withdrawing from the World Health Organization.

[00:58:11]uh we spent a lot of time in recent months talking about middle powers and the contribution that they can make. I don't think anyone over the age of 12 in the world needs to be reminded the impact that something like a pandemic can have um on their own lives on the security and economy of their own countries when um I think this budget Australia has donated about 5 billion which is only about 0.2ish% of our gross national income. The UN target is 0.7. It's a lot higher than 0.2. All right.

[00:58:43]>> Uh this week we got a glimpse into the way Israel treats prisoners. It was an appalling uh some appalling vision. Uh the the cruelty of it. Uh the the lack of uh the breach of human rights and so forth was astonishing. I think we're past the time where we should be describing Israel as a liberal democracy. I mean there are plenty of supporters of Israel and I would say I'm one of them. But uh you know the the response from Netanyahu to say that he doesn't support this extreme minister Ben Gavir but not do anything about it I think says everything about where Israel is. Thank you all very much for joining us this morning. Plenty to chew over uh as the budget fallout continues.

[00:59:19]Finally, there were plenty of hard hats and high viz vests for Anthony Albany and Jim Chararma selling the budget.

[00:59:25]Richard Miles tried to pull his weight too but not all photo ops are easy.

[00:59:30]We'll leave you with that. Thanks for watching. Yeah, >> I'm doing it the wrong way.

[00:59:39]>> I'll help you.

[00:59:40]>> Down to the chest.

[00:59:42]>> Yeah, >> that's it. So, you just pull straight down to the chest. That's fantastic.

[00:59:47]>> Absolutely fantastic. LOOK AT THE ARMS.

[00:59:50]GET IN THERE. GET HIM UP THERE.

[00:59:51]>> I'VE got arms. Yeah, that's awesome.

[00:59:54]>> You're making us all feel very excited about being here.