INTERVIEW WITH KIERAN GILBERT ON SKY NEWS

‍Subjects: Labor’s superannuation tax, net-zero targets, government transparency

E&OE………

Kieran Gilbert

Let's go live now to Liberal Senator Andrew Bragg, who joins us as the Coalition continues its response to the election and its results in trying to land a Coalition agreement. Senator Bragg, thanks for your time. Before we get to the difficult issues facing the Coalition, to me, it seems a no-brainer that you should mobilise around that superannuation tax plan. Surely it's something that you will all agree on.

Senator Bragg

Well, Kieran, good afternoon. The unrealised gains issue and the indexation issue of the very unfair tax will be at the focus of our effort. But there's also a massive integrity issue here that the Treasurer has not included, specifically the Prime Minister's scheme in the legislation. It does exist in some form in some regulations, but the Senate should be able to see the bill in total, including an idea of what the Prime Minister will have to pay.

Kieran Gilbert

Okay, so the government says that those on defined benefit schemes, including Prime Ministers and long term MPs, they will be caught up in it. It's only state MPs, some state MPs, Premiers and officials that won't be because of constitutional restrictions. You don't buy that.

Senator Bragg

Well, this is a massive conflict of interest. Jim Chalmers is saying he wants to set the Prime Minister's pension arrangements, subsequent to the Senate debate on the bill. I think that is ridiculous. He should put the Prime Minister's scheme in the bill with the detail, the calculation methodology, but also be able to tell people how much tax Mr. Albanese will be paying once this is enforced, if the Senate agrees to it.

Kieran Gilbert

When you say the Prime Minister's scheme, it's not just him. There are many Liberals who would also be caught up in that.

Senator Bragg

Well, he's the Prime Minister of the country. He wants to introduce a new tax. And apparently, his Treasurer will subsequently set the tax arrangements for his own personal arrangements. This is a howling conflict of interest. And the only way it can be resolved is to see the tax arrangements for the Prime Minister and our politicians to be put into the bill itself before the Senate.

Kieran Gilbert

Okay, so first of all, you don't have the numbers to block it. So how do you put the heat on the government to say, 'don't just wave this through with the Greens. We want greater transparency'?

Senator Bragg

Well, this is a massive integrity issue, and I'll be talking to my Senate colleagues about this because I don't think it's reasonable that the Senate would be asked to consider a bill without the arrangements for the politicians' tax. I think it's very unfair that for Australians at large, their arrangements will be set in the primary bill, largely, but for the politicians, it will be done in the regs sometime in the future. I think that's very crooked.

Kieran Gilbert

On the issue of unrealised gains, if you can already tax larger accounts at 15% - the concessional rate which currently exists - why can't it simply be increased at a certain point, $3 million in this instance, to 30%, which the government still argues is concessional on the same basis.

Senator Bragg

Well, it could be increased. And in fact, the government may want to increase the rate or lower the threshold if they are to do a deal with the Greens to pass this through the Parliament. And once the principle of unrealized gains is a feature of Australian tax law, I think it's a very dangerous position for the country because we risk losing more investment and new ideas.

Kieran Gilbert

Do you think this is a deliberate attempt to try and keep a lid on how much concessional treatment of super there is in the system and essentially get people to pay more tax via removing their funds, their nest egg, out of superannuation before it hits the three million mark?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think the main issue here is the Budget is out of control. You've got 10 years of deficits. This is the government's primary new tax measure. Because of the failure to index it and because of its application to unrealised gains, it is going to yield a large amount of revenue. And that's why it's very important that this very bad tax be significantly changed, at worst, because it would inject a huge amount of risk into the economy, which is already pretty anaemic. I mean, private investment is pretty flat in this country. So, the prospect of a new tax is a very serious one.

Kieran Gilbert

Do you believe that the point that's been made, and Andrew Clennell reporting the last 24 hours about this, that state MPs can't be caught up in the scheme because of constitutional restrictions? Do you accept that?

Senator Bragg

Well, there are constitutionally protected schemes that won't be subject to this tax. But I don't think Mr. Chalmers has actually read the detail here because it's very unclear how it would apply to certain judges, be they federal or state. Apparently, federal judges won't pay unrealised gains while they are employed. But that's an open question as to whether that also applies to the politicians like Mr. Albanese. So, it is very muddled.

Kieran Gilbert

When you say it's an open question, you don't believe the government in saying - because I had Don Farrell on earlier, the Trade Minister- reiterating that federal politicians, where it's applicable with the defined benefit scheme, including the Prime Minister, will be hit by this. You don't accept that. You don't believe it.

Senator Bragg

Well, if it's true, then put it in the bill. Amend the bill and show us the calculation method. And separately, the Treasurer should be able to say how much tax the Prime Minister would be paying in year one of his pension. Now, he says that he doesn't know what the pension would be. But in his own explanatory memorandum to the bill...

Kieran Gilbert

If it's true. You're saying if it's true.

Senator Bragg

If it's true, he has five different examples of how the tax could work for different people, different balances, varying in number of accounts. So the Treasury and the Treasurer can do this analysis.

Kieran Gilbert

So you don't believe them?

Senator Bragg

Why are they hiding behind all this detail and bureaucracy? They should just put the primary information in the bill, and then separately say how much tax it would cost.

Kieran Gilbert

Let me ask you about net zero. Should the Coalition maintain a commitment to net zero by 2050?

Senator Bragg

Well, as you know, this is under review, but the primary task here is to reduce emissions, but also to ensure that you can get stable and reliable power to industry and households.

Kieran Gilbert

What do you think? Should you keep that commitment?

Senator Bragg

Well, we're a trade exposed nation. Being part of international agreements to reduce emissions has been a long feature of Australian policy. But we have to resolve that the implementation of net zero or any other commitment is in Australia's interests. And that's why we respect...

Kieran Gilbert

Do you think it is? Do you believe net zero by 2050 is in the national interest?

Senator Bragg

If you want to reduce emissions, you need to do it as part of a global compact. So, of course. But you need to do it in a way that suits your own domestic conditions. And under Labor, what we've seen is skyrocketing power prices. So, we need to look at how we actually achieve it.

Kieran Gilbert

So no question of pulling out of Paris in your mind. There'd be no way the Liberals would countenance that?

Senator Bragg

Well, how else would you cut emissions? I mean, you've got to be part of a global agreement if you want to cut emissions. And then you've got to ensure that you can implement that agreement in a domestic way which suits your own conditions.

Kieran Gilbert

Andrew Bragg, thanks for your time. I appreciate it. We'll talk to you soon.

Senator Bragg

Thanks Kieran.

[Ends]

‍