Senator Dean Smith
Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury
Liberal Senator for Western Australia
TRANSCRIPT – ABC PERTH DRIVE WITH GARY ADSHEAD
Topics: Federal election; anti-Semitism; Production tax credits; Nature Positive; Coalition simpler meal tax deduction for small business; Gaza.
E&OE
GARY ADSHEAD:
Alright, let’s get to our segment, the campaign, as the Federal election heats up and Parliament is sitting. My two guests are Madeline King, the Labor Resources Minister, and Liberal Senator Dean Smith, who are in Canberra in our studio over there. Hello, you two.
MADELEINE KING:
Good to hear from you, Gary. It’s great to be here with Dean as well in this tiny little studio here in Canberra.
DEAN SMITH:
I was just sharing with Madeleine, Gary, that we are lucky we’re both Dockers’ supporters. It’s very cozy in the ABC studio here in Parliament House.
GARY ADSHEAD:
Ah, both Dockers’ supporters. Well, we’ve found that out about you then, haven’t we? Let’s find out some more. Hey, look, obviously question time today there was no doubt where the Opposition wanted to go with this, and that’s asking the Prime Minister questions about when he was told about the issue of the caravan which was found with explosives. Why won’t the Prime Minister just answer the question, Madeleine?
MADELEINE KING:
Well, I think he’s been very clear on why certain details don’t get discussed in Parliament or at press conferences, and that’s about the national security and about letting the security forces do the work they need to do to catch the people responsible for that particular incident, where there is this seemingly abandoned caravan with explosives, with hate speech on it. So, it’s pretty plain that that’s the reason why, and that makes a lot of sense. I think everyone understands that sometimes you’ve simply got to let security forces do their bit, and having Prime Ministers or Ministers or other members of Parliament just chip in without warrant or need doesn’t really help the investigators.
GARY ADSHEAD:
But the question is really whether or not the PM was briefed like the New South Wales Premier was, and it seems like the Prime Minister just doesn’t want to say whether he was or wasn’t. That’s what doesn’t add up here.
MADELEINE KING:
Well, the questions in question time, which obviously I was there for, were more about specific dates and sometimes those specifics aren’t particularly helpful. Also, not helpful for how security forces deal with future incidents like this, and briefings of members of our national security committee and, also, of course, the Prime Minister himself.
GARY ADSHEAD:
It won’t go away though, will it?
MADELEINE KING:
Well, the main priority is to catch the people responsible and make sure they pay the penalty for what fear they have created in the community. And that’s my priority. It’s certainly the government’s priority and I’m very sure that that’s the security forces priority as well.
GARY ADSHEAD:
Dean Smith, can you give us an idea as to why Peter Dutton and the Opposition keep pursuing this line as to when the PM was told?
DEAN SMITH:
Absolutely I can, Gary. Of course, I was sitting in Senate question time on the red leather and not on the green leather with Madeleine. But I think this case is a pretty simple one. At a time when we’ve seen a rising escalation of anti-Semitism in this country, in our own state, which will come as a surprise to people, we argue that there has been a lack of clear national leadership on the issue since the events of the 7th of October. That has made the situation very perilous across our country. As the national leader, Australians would expect that Anthony Albanese would take a high level of interest in these matters. Of course the speculation is this, that he did not know about the caravan incident in New South Wales for several days. People would find that unacceptable for the national leader to have not inquired, to have not been told for a number of days. And we are still yet to determine exactly how many days, about what could have been a mass casualty terrorist attack in this country.
GARY ADSHEAD:
That’s not his fault though, is it? That wouldn’t be his fault if he wasn’t told by the AFP or whoever might’ve been the responsible agency to tell the PM or brief them. That wouldn’t be his fault. He would be asking questions himself, wouldn’t he? I mean, he be saying why wasn’t I told?
DEAN SMITH:
I’m sure Peter Dutton will continue in this line of prosecution. Five questions, Peter Dutton asked the Prime Minister today, and the Prime Minister did not provide a clear answer at all. To what is a simple question. What was the date? When we know the date, we might be able to ask other sorts of questions about when the inquiries were made. What effort did you, the Prime Minister, make to make yourself more appraised of these events? So, I think at a time when we are expecting our national leadership to be hypersensitive to risks to our safety in this country, to risks that give rise to further antisemitism, this is another example we would argue of Anthony Albanese asleep at the wheel.
GARY ADSHEAD:
Alright now I’ve got in the Canberra studio talking to me, Madeleine King, the Labor MP for Brand, of course Resources Minister and Dean Smith, WA Liberal Senator, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury. 1-300-222-720 if you’d like to ask a question as we obviously step up the Federal election campaign, feel free to do so. I just do need to get a quick reaction from you too, because it, when we talk about the Middle East here in Australia, obviously there’s a lot of contention and there’s been a protest in the street about what happened in Gaza, et cetera. Now we do have the President of the United States saying that the US will take over the Gaza Strip and do something with it. Take a quick listen to something that he said today.
(RECORDING) PRESIDENT TRUMP:
The only reason the Palestinians want to go back to Gaza is they have no alternative. It’s right now a demolition site. This is just a demolition site. Virtually every building is down. The US will take over the Gaza Strip and we will do a good job with it too. We’ll own it.
GARY ADSHEAD:
What’s your reaction to that, Madeleine?
MADELEINE KING:
Well, it wouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that the President of the United States will make statements about such a significant part of the world with this extraordinary conflict that’s going on. And I expect over the next four years of his term there will be many statements the President makes. And just like with the Presidents before him, it’s not really helpful for Ministers like me to just keep commenting on everything he says. So, I really have nothing to add to what the President has said. He has put forward some propositions and I’ve no doubt those in the region, the Israeli Government, of course Netanyahu has been in Washington this week, will be engaging in those discussions as will of course those in the leadership of the Palestinian people. And that dialogue will continue. Our focus is to, you know, really focus on the need for that conflict to entirely deescalate. I think it’s of immense importance that Hamas return the hostages that they took so brutally on October seven, the year before last. Our focus is on continuing full implementation of the ceasefire and also, you know, making sure we pursue a continued peace in the Middle East. But, you know, that’s very difficult to see if those hostages are not returned.
GARY ADSHEAD:
Alright, Dean Smith, it’s taken a lot of people by surprise that he would suggest that the US could take over Gaza.
DEAN SMITH:
Madeleine’s quite right. I would hope all of us would agree that our first priority is to release every hostage that is still held captive by Hamas. That should be our national effort and that should be the international effort. Secondly, let’s wait to see the detail of what President Trump is actually proposing. I think at these early stages of his Presidency, it’s perhaps more important to see how people react to his comments rather than what his comments actually are. If he’s sending a message to other Middle East nations that they need to be doing more to support the refugee crisis in the occupied territories, that I think that is a very good message for him to be sending into the Middle East. We know, or many of us would argue, that Egypt and other nations need to be doing more than they currently are. And we are hugely disappointed at the lack of active engagement they have over the humanitarian issue. So, let’s just wait and see. I noticed that Prime Minister Netanyahu was polite and didn’t argue against the President’s position. I’d characterise his responses as lukewarm. But, if I could just make this point, I thought what was more interesting in President Trump’s conference today was his clear statement that the United States, with the support of its allies, would be more aggressive in putting sanctions on Iran. That is something that I hope that Australia would be able to support. Many of us know now that Iran is just not a menace to the Middle East. It’s a menace to global cooperation and global security. So, I think that was perhaps a more important comment and one we might be able to galvanize around.
GARY ADSHEAD:
Alright, it’s Gary Adshead on Drive and I am talking to Madeleine King, the Member for Brand for the Labor Party, and of course Dean Smith, the Liberal Senator. Let’s get back onto some of the things that have come up in relation to the campaign. Now listen, Dean Smith, how much is this long lunch for corporate Australia going to cost the taxpayer? Is it $125 million or is it $1.6 billion? Which one is it?
DEAN SMITH:
I can give your listeners a high degree of confidence, Gary, on this. The policy has been costed by the independent Parliamentary Budget Office. The official costings will be released in the normal way as part of the election costings process. So, if the election is the 12th of April, like we’ve speculated, people won’t have to wait too long to find the exact nature of those costings. But let me just make this point. When I go to Darch Plaza, when I’m at up at Kingsway Shopping Centre, speaking to cafe owners, everyone knows just how difficult it is to run a hospitality business of any kind at the moment. 52% of small businesses are not making any profit at all. So when I see this policy mocked by those in government, it says to me that perhaps they’re not on the ground as much as they really need to be. Why wouldn’t we want to incentivise the owners of a business to reward their staff or to retain their staff? I think it sort of speaks to the fact that the depth of the cost of living challenges, the depth of the cost of doing business challenges for small businesses aren’t fully appreciated by the government.
GARY ADSHEAD:
But I mean, there’s such a divergence in opinion Madeleine King, in relation to how much this will cost.
MADELEINE KING:
Yeah, that’s right. And I’ve not seen the opposition’s costings and, we saw the commitment when it was first made by Peter Dutton recently, and the Treasurer Jim Chalmers had, that costed in our estimates that it is a much higher expense to the taxpayer if everyone claims what they indeed able to claim, which is estimated at $10 billion a year.
DEAN SMITH:
But Gary, if I might interfere. What is happening here at the moment, let’s just be clear about this. Madeleine just said Jim Chalmers’ costings, they are not the Treasury’s costings and the Treasury, the people who really understand these things were forced to come out today and say they had not costed it. So this is Jim Chalmers working on the back of an envelope in his comfortable Treasurer’s office here in Parliament House. I think people should just treat the government’s commentary around costings with a grain of salt.
MADELEINE KING:
It’s a, it’s not the hardest thing when you say $20,000 to each business and there’s a certain number of small businesses in this country, and if everyone claimed what they had sold, and we still don’t really know…
DEAN SMITH:
But it’s the turnover cost.
GARY ADSHEAD:
A turnover is 10 million, isn’t it? Is it 10 million, Dean?
MADELEINE KING:
That’s a small business definition, but if all of those small businesses claim what they’re able to claim, this is a potential cost to the budget.
DEAN SMITH:
I would note an alternative way for Jim Chalmers and others to have approached this would’ve been to say, look, we hear what you’re saying. We understand there’s a cost of doing business challenge in our country. It’s hurting small businesses particularly hard. Here are our ideas. But this is a Labor idea-free space at the moment.
MADELEINE KING:
Sorry, Gary, this is Dean not really admitting that this hits the budget and it hits significantly. We are trying to get through the Parliament at the moment tax incentives to create a whole new industry. The costing for that is $7 billion over 10 years. This is $10 billion per annum. So, I mean, I’m trying to create a new industry in critical minerals. And these guys want more lunch.
DEAN SMITH:
And we’re trying to keep some industries alive.
MADELEINE KING:
I don’t doubt the intention, but it’s a bit wacky
DEAN SMITH:
No, no, Jim’s costings look wacky
MADELEINE KING:
Well, you know what’s wacky is…
DEAN SMITH:
We will soon see the true numbers
MADELEINE KING:
The unknown cuts to, you know, public funds. Will you…
GARY ADSHEAD:
Hang on. So, one thing I’ll say here, Dean, and get your reaction to it, is that you heard Madeleine talk about production tax credits, critical minerals, why if you’re such a friend of, of corporate Australia in the mining and resources sector, wouldn’t you jump on board with this one?
DEAN SMITH:
You’ll be very surprised to know Gary, and your listeners will be surprised to know, and this is how I would characterize it, Madeleine might have a different characterisation, but I sat on the Senate Economics Committee inquiry just last week into this bill. I delivered a speech in the Senate this morning on this bill. When we come back on Monday, here in the Senate, I suspect we would debate exactly this issue. What Madeline and Labor do not talk about is the duplication in environmental processes, the lack of clarity that sits inside what are called the community benefit principles. And, in fact, I think on closer scrutiny many of the minerals and resources, peak industry associations, while they like the idea of a tax credit, they’re highly sceptical about how the community benefits principles work. And that is effectively the gateway that you need to walk through before you get the tax incentive. I say to West Australians, this is not what it looks like. I think this is best characterized as a subsidy for high project costs in Western Australia. And we argue that a better way to deal with those high project costs is to have better environmental processes with lower costs for projects, better industrial relations laws to lower the cost for projects, better arrangements for land access. That is the way that we build a more competitive and sustainable competitive industry in Western Australia. That is the Coalition’s point of difference.
MADELEINE KING:
Gary, I think if Liberal Senators speaking in the Senate today don’t want to support the development of an emerging resources sector in Western Australia through the production tax incentive when the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies and the Minerals Council of Australia, the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia and many others all support it. In fact, it’s an industry driven policy. I’ve worked for a year with industry to develop this policy and that’s why I’m very confident it does exactly what they say. And I’m happy to go into the community benefit principles. This is taxpayer’s money. When you have a tax incentive, this is exactly what it is. And the taxpayers deserve to have some benefit out of it. And it’s similar, not dissimilar to the public benefit principles that we apply in the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, which the coalition want to make permanent and I’m really glad about that.
DEAN SMITH:
And we support that, of course.
MADELEINE KING:
Yes. But the thing is, there’s this fictitious, you know, simply made-up proposition that somehow a union agreement has to be a part of it. And union agreements aren’t a bad thing, they really aren’t…
DEAN SMITH:
But Madeleine, that is actually not made up.
MADELEINE KING:
It is made up.
DEAN SMITH:
It is the nature of the questions I put directly to Treasury officials last week.
MADELEINE KING:
It is not in the bill before us. It is certainly not.
DEAN SMITH:
In the Senate Hansard, you’ll see, crystal clear, Treasury officials saying that your comments on this, and Jim Chalmers comments on this, were incorrect.
MADELEINE KING:
Dean, I have been through the Senate Hansard this afternoon. I think you mentioned critical minerals three times in your speech and two other Liberal Senators only mentioned it in the title of the bill. So no one is really focused on the challenges of the critical minerals and rare earths industry in Western Australia and Queensland and right around the country. The thin markets, the need to develop this industry for our national security, to create sovereign capacity and refining and chemical processing of critical minerals.
DEAN SMITH:
The expenditure of huge sums of public money and, of course you’ve got…
MADELEINE KING:
You’ve got $10 billion on long lunches, Dean. Come on….
DEAN SMITH:
And projects will not be eligible, projects will not get the money for a number of years. We say, a better use of everyone’s time and effort is to genuinely tackle those environmental planning laws, the land…
MADELEINE KING:
I actually think Dean supports this, but Angus Taylor went out too quick and said no too quick, on the night of the Budget.
GARY ADSHEAD:
All right. Well, let’s listen to this next question. So you’re listening to, of course, 720 ABC. I’ve got Madeleine King and Dean Smith in the Canberra studio. Are you glad Madeline, that the Prime Minister has again knocked back the Nature Positive legislation to make sure that people on this side of the country that know it won’t rear its ugly head?
MADELEINE KING:
I think we all understand environmental law reform is important. The former government of which Dean was a part of, invested a lot of time in that and we have too. We need to make reforms work better for industry and the environment. We’ve invested, I think, it’s $130 million into making approvals go faster through the system and we’ll continue that investment. It is, I think, a shame that the Greens political party kept making some pretty outrageous demands that we would never agree to. And it’s also a bit of a shame that the Coalition didn’t want to engage on how we could work together on this.
GARY ADSHEAD:
I mean it just seemed bizarre, like it was coming back together again then, all of a sudden, you know, had to be, had to be quashed again by the PM.
MADELEINE KING:
I won’t pretend that I know the, and pardon my words, Dean, the witchcraft of the Senate…
DEAN SMITH:
Or the wizardry.
MADELEINE KING:
The wizardry of the Senate, pardon me. How that appears on the Senate notice paper.
DEAN SMITH:
Not by accident.
MADELEINE KING:
The agreement could not be reached, there’s no doubt about it. I had hoped we would get to better environmental reforms, but that being the case, we have to deal with the parliament the people voted in and…
DEAN SMITH:
But Madeleine, the Labor Premier of Western Australia says this is a bad idea. The mining and resources industry in Western Australia says this is a bad idea. They wrote to the Prime Minister last time to pressure him, this was at the very end of last year, to pressure him to pull the bill and he did, under pressure. And then the bill appears again.
MADELEINE KING:
Well, you’ve seen the notice of motion today.
DEAN SMITH:
I have. Under pressure. So…
MADELEINE KING:
No, I think it’s making a clear statement to everyone.
DEAN SMITH:
No, no. There’s no clear statement. On again, off again.
MADELEINE KING:
The reason why we can’t get through this legislation…
DEAN SMITH:
Oh, okay. So if you have control of the Senate, then Labor will introduce and pass the Nature Positive…
MADELEINE KING:
Oh, no, no. You were verbaling me there, Dean, and you know it, so I did not say that at all.
DEAN SMITH:
If Labor has control…
MADELEINE KING:
We will commit to environmental. Of course – you know this. You tried to do it in the last Parliament as well.
DEAN SMITH:
Not the Nature Positive bill.
MADELEINE KING:
The Environmental Reform is very important.
DEAN SMITH:
We are talking about the Nature Positive bill.
MADELEINE KING:
We know we need to reform these laws to make it better for industry and the environment. And I think everyone heard Premier Roger Cook loudly and clearly and I’m glad about that.
DEAN SMITH:
So it sounds like the nature positive Bill will reappear after the 12th of April.
MADELEINE KING:
What’s happening on the 12th of April? What do you know, Gary?
DEAN SMITH:
Gary and I have agreed the election is the 12th of April.
GARY ADSHEAD:
Me, me and Dean already worked that out. Is it dead, buried and cremated?
MADELEINE KING:
Well, the legislation is not going before the Parliament again in this term.
DEAN SMITH:
And this term ends next week.
MADELEINE KING:
No, no. We are committed to environmental law reform. Whether…
DEAN SMITH:
Are you committed to the passage of the Nature Positive bill in the next parliament?
MADELEINE KING:
Well, we, I can’t say that, I’m not the Environment Minister, but I also know…
GARY ADSHEAD:
She can’t get it up.
MADELEINE KING:
I also know that environmental law reform is important. Industry wants this better. We, we need to…
DEAN SMITH:
Industry doesn’t want this bill.
MADELEINE KING:
And we’ve listened and we will talk to them more. In my personal view, you can never have enough consultation around these things. And that’s how I built the Future Gas Strategy, by a lot of consultation. And I’ve no doubt in the next parliament, we’ll look at how we can expand that and make sure the environmental law reforms do exactly what we want them to do, which is work better for the resources and other industries. We know there’s many other industries that are affected by this and road building, all sorts of things. So it’s a mammoth undertaking and I think the coalition understand that given that they were unable to reform the environment laws after the Samuel Review. So we will obviously keep looking at it. I make no commitments.
GARY ADSHEAD:
Well, okay, I appreciate you both being, making yourself available today. We’ll speak more of course, on the campaign trail. Thanks very much for joining us from Canberra.
MADELEINE KING:
Good to see you at the ABC, Gary.
DEAN SMITH:
Great to be with you. Thank you.
ENDS