Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Ali France:

It will come as no surprise to anyone here that cost of living is the biggest issue for people in my electorate of Dickson, paying the bills has been a real struggle. Labor went to the election with a really great plan to address cost‑of‑living issues and part of that was supporting wage increases.

I was really, really pleased to see the figures this week that showed 18 months of real wage growth, and that’s all down to 3 years of really hard work by Jim and his team.

We know that under the Coalition that wages were falling and that people were going backwards. So it’s really great to have the Treasurer here today in Dickson, as well as all of my other Queensland colleagues, and I’m now going to hand over to Senator Chisholm.

Anthony Chisholm:

Thanks Ali, it’s great to be with you, and the growing Northside Labor team in Emma and Corrine, and we welcome Jim from the Southside to the Northside.

Ali, Emma, Corrine and myself are all based on this side of town and in outer suburbia. We understand that the Petrie and Dickson electorates and those on this side of town are full of people who work hard every day, want to provide for their families and get ahead in life.

A defining feature of the Albanese government in the first term has been support for wage increases. We saw it during the 2022 campaign, and we saw it during the 2025 campaign as well, and I think it was a defining element to us receiving a good vote like we did here in Dickson and Petrie to help us win these seats to be part of an Albanese Labor government.

So I’m really pleased that the Treasurer is here today to talk to us but also outline the role the government is going to play supporting those people on award wages to get ahead in life. They work hard, they deserve a decent pay as a result of that, and it’s important that the Albanese government supports them in that endeavour as well. So thanks, Treasurer.

Jim Chalmers:

Thanks very much, Chis, and it’s great to be here in Strathpine with really important parts of our much bigger, much better Queensland team now in the Albanese Labor government.

I wanted to thank and congratulate Ali France on her stunning victory here in Dickson – similarly, Emma Comer in Petrie, we’re really looking forward to working with Corrine Mulholland when she joins the Senate in July, and I also congratulate Anthony Chisholm for being sworn in as a frontbencher in the Albanese Labor government as well.

Wages and the cost of living were front and centre in our first term, they were front and centre in the campaign, and they will be front and centre in the second term as well.

Decent pay, better wages, decent conditions, great jobs, these are Labor’s reasons for being, and you can see that in the progress that we’ve made together on wages, on jobs, in the labour market and the economy more broadly, and you can see it in the submission that we are lodging today.

Today we are lodging our submission to the Fair Work Commission’s Annual Wage Review, which is all about recognising that millions of Australians on awards need and deserve decent pay so they can work hard and provide for their loved ones.

The most important feature of today’s submission is we are seeking an economically sustainable real wage increase for Australians on awards.

This is all about ensuring that 3 million Australians can get the decent pay that they need and deserve to provide for their loved ones.

We’re very proud to be making this submission today, because it builds on the progress that we have made together when it comes to wages and jobs.

This submission is responsible, it is fair, and it’s consistent with our efforts to provide tax cuts for every Australian taxpayer as well.

This Albanese government is all about ensuring that Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn, and our submission today to the Fair Work Commission reflects that objective.

It does build substantially on the very encouraging progress that we have been able to make together on wages and in the labour market more broadly.

Already, people on the minimum wage are earning $143 a week more since Labor came to office. Australians on the medium wage are earning $206 a week more since Labor came to office. We’ve created 1.1 million jobs since we were elected. Participation is at or near record highs. Average unemployment has been historically low.

Just this week, as Ali said, we got very encouraging news on wages, 18 consecutive months of annual real wages growth, the strongest real wages growth for 5 years. Another 89,000 jobs created in the data that we saw just yesterday. This shows we have been making progress together, and the submission we lodged today is about building on that progress.

If you look more broadly across the economy since we came to office, real wages were falling sharply when we came to office, we’ve turned that around, but we’ve made progress more broadly on the economy as well.

Inflation is down very substantially, real wages are up, unemployment is very low, growth is rebounding in our economy, we’ve got the debt down, interest rates have started to come down earlier in the year as well.

We know that there’s more work to do because people are under pressure, and that’s why this submission today seeks a real wage increase for millions of Australians. We have made a lot of progress together, and we seek with this submission today to build on that progress so that Australians can earn more and keep more of what they earn, and so Australians can earn more to provide for their loved ones when they work hard and get ahead.

Happy to take a few questions.

Journalist:

What do you mean by ‘economically sustainable amount’, is that in line with inflation, or is there a figure on that?

Chalmers:

Consistent with our earlier submissions, we don’t put a number in our submission, that’s been our practice for really quite a while now. What we are seeking is an economically sustainable real wage increase for millions of Australians on awards – and ‘economically sustainable’ reflects the fact, and you can see that in the detail of our submission, is that we want to make sure that this real wage increase is provided consistent with our other economic objectives, by getting inflation down and our other economic objectives as well.

We’re obviously very focused on the fight against inflation, we have made a lot of progress there, but it’s not mission accomplished because people are still under pressure.

I consulted with the Reserve Bank Governor as we finalised this submission. The Treasury also consulted with, I think, the Assistant Governor of the Reserve Bank to make sure that what we are proposing is responsible, it’s sensible, it’s sustainable, and it’s consistent with inflation being sustainably in the Reserve Bank’s target band, and I’m really confident that it is.

Journalist:

How will you avoid a budget black hole if your super tax goes through and people take capital offshore?

Chalmers:

A couple of things about that. What we’re proposing here is still very concessional treatment for Australians with very big superannuation balances, so we’re taking the current concessional treatment and making it slightly less concessional, but still concessional.

This is a very modest change to the taxation of very large superannuation balances. It reflects about half a per cent of people. We announced it more than 2 years ago, we’ve done a bunch of consultation on it, it’s been in the Parliament for a big chunk of that time, and it means that there is still concessional tax treatment for people with big balances, but slightly less concessional.

This is an important part of our efforts to make the budget more sustainable, and to fund our priorities, including strengthening Medicare, providing cost‑of‑living relief, the tax cuts for every Australian taxpayer. It’s responsible, it is modest, it only applies to a tiny sliver of people in superannuation, and it’s still concessional.

Journalist:

Why won’t you index, just with that indexation, start modest, and then creep up, and become [indistinct]?

Chalmers:

This is consistent with the treatment in a whole range of areas in the tax system. There are a lot of thresholds in the tax system and more broadly that aren’t indexed, and what that means is that governments of either political persuasion into the future can take decisions to lift the threshold; we’ve seen that, as I’ve said, in other parts of the tax system.

Some of this analysis that you see about the thresholds in 30 or 40 years’ time, that assumes, I think wrongly, that no government of either persuasion would change that threshold.

Journalist:

Treasurer, can you –

Chalmers:

We’ll just go here and then to you.

Journalist:

On childcare, should taxpayers pay for these pay rises or parents out of pocket, and is that fair?

Chalmers:

We’ve provided billions of dollars to make sure that the early childhood educators who are doing such an incredible job for young people and for families in our communities, that they get the pay that they need and deserve.

I was very proud to work very closely with Anne Aly and Jason Clare, and the Prime Minister and others in the course of the last term to make room for the Commonwealth contribution to these pay rises.

This is an area with a lot of young families, so is the area that Emma represents, the area that I represent, and we know how important early childhood educators are. We want to make sure that they’re paid properly, we’ve made room in the Budget for billions of dollars to make sure that that’s a reality.

Journalist:

Treasurer, can you explain how defined benefits pensions will be taxed? How’s it calculated, what’s in [indistinct].

Chalmers:

The actuarial calculation is similar to the calculation that currently applies to the changes that the Coalition made when they were in office. There’s a formula which is calculated by actuaries and applied by the Tax Office in a way that is not inconsistent with the way it’s currently calculated to some of the changes that my predecessors made.

Journalist:

Treasurer, what is your reaction to Gerry Harvey saying a tax on unrealised capital gains is gross stupidity of the highest order?

Chalmers:

It’s not unusual for him to criticise Labor governments. I try and listen respectfully when people make a contribution to the national public policy conversation, but I think in Gerry’s case, he’s a relatively frequent critic of Labor governments. I don’t get too carried away by it, nor do I dismiss it.

If you look at some of the commentary over the last couple of days, you know, there was one piece that was pretending that Campbell Newman, of all people, was some kind of observer of Labor government policy.

You had one Liberal politician, whose primary purpose was to raise campaign donations, you had another Liberal politician lie about there being no legislation available when he was on the Committee that scrutinised that legislation in detail.

I understand that when you’re making a change, even a modest one like this one, people have views about it, and people with very large superannuation balances will have views about it, political opponents will have views about it as well.

This is a modest change, it makes a meaningful difference to the budget, but it still provides very concessional treatment for people with more than $3 million in superannuation, and it helps make the budget more sustainable and fund our priorities.

Journalist:

The vaccination rates among children and teenagers have dropped to critical levels across the country. Will the government put more money into urgent campaigns or other awareness campaigns to encourage parents to get their kids vaccinated?

Chalmers:

I’m sure that that’s something that Mark Butler, the Health Minister, is considering, but we already put a lot of effort into educating and encouraging people to get vaccinated.

I personally found that story to be quite confronting to think that after all of the progress that’s been made in recent decades that we’re going backwards, I personally find that very troubling, very concerning and very confronting, and I’m sure the Health Minister’s in the same boat, and he’s working out what, if anything, else we could do to try and arrest that slide.

Journalist:

The $150 electricity rebate’s due to run out at the end of the year. Is the government open to considering extending that, considering the affordability crisis?

Chalmers:

Well, we’ve already extended those electricity bill rebates, that’s the $150 you refer to in your question. They were otherwise due to run out at the end of next month, and now they’ll be extended for another 6 months.

From budget to budget, we evaluate the circumstances we’re in, we look at the pressures on people and the pressures on the Budget as well, and we do what we can to help out. That’s why, and my colleagues here would know this, having spent so much time engaging with people in their own communities, the highest priority of the Labor government in the first time was to get on top of inflation and help people with the cost of living.

Electricity bill rebates are an important port of that, 3 rounds of tax cuts, cheaper medicines, cheaper early childhood education, fee‑free TAFE, all of these things are about recognising that when people are under pressure, there is a role for governments to step in and help where they can responsibly do that.

So from budget to budget, and we’ve had 4 already, and the fifth one will be in May next year, from budget to budget, we see if we can do more, if we can afford to do more to help people with the cost of living, and people can expect that next May, just like they could expect that in the first 4 budgets.

Journalist:

Treasurer, Andrew Bragg says that ‘If Mr Chalmers is so sure his unrealised gains tax will apply to Mr Albanese’s pension, he should say exactly how much tax will be paid in the first year of his pension’. Can you nominate that figure?

Chalmers:

One of the reasons why nobody takes that guy seriously is because when it comes to the Prime Minister, his pension’s not yet known. Now we don’t know his circumstances into the future.

He should know, he’s on the Committee that scrutinised the legislation that Andrew Bragg lied about and said didn’t exist. He also said that there’s no allowance in the legislation for defined benefit schemes for politicians.

Those are lies. And you need to be really careful not just to read out whatever he tweets, because he’s been caught out lying in the last day or so. I would encourage you respectfully not to take his word for it, especially this week, after he’s been caught out lying so egregiously.

There is provision for defined benefit schemes, there are calculations, those calculations are very similar to the ones that the Liberals and Nationals put in when they changed superannuation in the last term of the government, and that will apply to the Prime Minister, it will apply to any politician who’s got the equivalent of more than $3 million in super.

Journalist:

What do you make of Allan Fels’ call for an ACCC Inquiry into Bunnings?

Chalmers:

I’ve got a lot of time for Allan Fels, I respect him, I speak with him from time to time, he’s a great person with a substantial record of achievement.

We’re already acting on competition, funding the ACCC much more substantially, I provided another $30 million to empower one of Allan’s successors in that role, Gina Cass‑Gottlieb, doing a wonderful job, we’ve found more resources for her.

Our primary focus is on the supermarkets, we’ve made that really clear, price gouging and the Food and Grocery Code, but we have the ability, should we want to, to expand some of that focus, and the extra resources that I provided the ACCC will help ensure that where there’s more work to be done, it can be done.

Journalist:

Treasurer, there’s –

Chalmers:

We might just take 2 more. One more, and then another Andrew Bragg tweet, and then we’re done.

Journalist:

There’s an issue unfolding with the disability company, Cocoon SDA Care that operates partly in your electorate. Do you have any concerns about what’s going on with Cocoon and have any of your constituents raised concerns?

Chalmers:

Not that I’m aware of, but I’ll look into that, that’s the first I’ve been aware of that particular issue, but I’ll make sure I look into it, and if there’s anything I can say publicly at some future point, I’ll do that.

Journalist:

What do you say to the leading independent economists, just not Gerry Harvey or Andrew Bragg, who say that this will hurt investment, wealthy people will take their investments away from, you know, venture capital and start‑ups, and it could ruin the tech industry?

Chalmers:

First of all, there’s not a unanimous view amongst economists about that, or about the worthiness of the change that we’re proposing. I think Chris Richardson, for example, wrote something supporting it, and so always, when you’re making a change like this, there’s always a range of views, and obviously I follow closely the comments made by the peak groups and others.

It really comes back to the question I gave earlier to your colleague; we’re still providing concessional tax treatment for people with big balances in superannuation, it’s just slightly less concessional, but it’s concessional compared to the marginal rate that people would be paying.

And so I think we need a little bit of perspective here, I know that this is seen in some quarters as contentious, but again, I mean we announced this policy almost 2 and a half years ago, it’s been in the Parliament for a big chunk of that, we’ve been consulting on it, it’s a modest change, it still leaves concessional tax arrangements in there for people who have more than $3 million in super.

I expect that there’s a campaign run about it, I expect that people have got views about it, but I do think we need a bit of perspective here. It is a modest change, it does impact only a very small amount of people, and it still provides concessional tax treatment.

Journalist:

Treasurer, just on –

Chalmers:

I might just take one more here because you’ve been light on, and then we’ll go.

Journalist:

Thank you, sir. Just about the wage review again.Have you spoken to the Reserve Bank about the wage review and whether or not it’s inflationary?

Chalmers:

Thank you. I have had discussions with the Governor of the Reserve Bank and the Treasury has been engaging with the Assistant Governor as well.

We wanted to make sure that the submission that we’re putting forward, which is about a sustainable real wage increase for millions of Australians on awards, that that’s consistent with our other objectives, including getting on top of this inflation, which has impacted economies around the world over recent years.

So I consulted the Governor, I think towards the end of March, I gave her a heads‑up today that we were making our submission today, the Treasury’s been engaging with the Reserve Bank and its staff, and that’s because we have made sure that this is consistent with inflation remaining sustainably in the band; that’s our objective.

One of the things I’m really pleased about and proud of collectively in our economy, is we’ve managed to get real wages up over a sustained period of time at the same time as we’ve got inflation down, kept unemployment low, got the economy growing again, we’ve seen interest rates started to come down earlier this year, we’ve got the debt down in the Budget, so we’re paying less interest on it.

So this, I think, does reflect the very substantial progress that Australians have made together in our economy. We know that there’s more work to do because people are under pressure, the global environment is still uncertain, but the submission that we take today reflects all of our economic objectives and primarily making sure that when people work hard, they can get ahead.

I’ll take one more from you, then we’re done.

Journalist:

The ACTU want it to be 4.5 per cent, ARA says no more than 2.5 per cent. Is it somewhere in between that you kind of want it?

Chalmers:

It’s unusual, and in fact it’s welcome for different groups, including the union movement, to make submissions to the Fair Work Commission’s process. Those submissions close today, there will be hearings next week, a decision next month, it will kick in in July, and it’s a good and welcome part of the process that everyone’s got the ability to make a submission, like the government has today.

Some organisations nominate numbers, others like the government don’t nominate numbers. The Fair Work Commission in its wisdom will weigh up all of that and come to a decision.

Journalist:

Leaning more towards the union, or the business bodies?

Chalmers:

Well, that’s not how we make our submission. You know, we’ve made a detailed submission today. You know, I’ve worked really closely with Amanda Rishworth on it, before that with Murray Watt, before that with Tony Burke. We put a lot of effort, a lot of thinking, we apply a lot of consideration to the submission that we make, we don’t put a number on it like other groups do.

And I also welcome the fact that when we’ve been through this process on a number of occasions already in the life of this government, that the Fair Work Commission has provided, you know, decent pay increases for Australians who are low paid or on awards. That’s a very good thing, and we hope to see that again. More than that, we hope to see a real wage increase.

Thanks very much everyone.

MIL OSI News –