Senator the Hon Katy Gallagher

SENATOR THE HON KATY GALLAGHER, MINISTER FOR FINANCE: I just wanted to give a response to the monthly CPI numbers that were released earlier this morning. I think they really demonstrate the very significant and substantial progress that’s been made on dealing with the inflation challenge in the economy. We’ve seen both headline and underlying inflation in the target band for the second month in a row, and I think this is the first time in four years that we’ve seen headline inflation in the target range for six months. So that, again, shows very substantial progress we’ve seen, that’s welcome. We’ve seen inflation coming down, we’ve seen wages going up, we’ve got low unemployment, and we’re seeing a reduction in interest rates which will help people with those urgent cost-of-living pressures. So, overall, these numbers – and I accept, and the Treasurer also has acknowledged, that these figures jump around from month to month – but I think they again demonstrate the very substantial and welcome progress that’s been made on inflation. Happy to take any other questions you might have.

JOURNALIST: Minister, we learned in Defence Estimates earlier today that there was about a 40-minute window between when the live fire exercise window opened up, which the Chinese forces conducted, and Defence actually were notified. Given we were supposedly monitoring the water for several days, are you concerned there’s a capability gap there given that gap?

GALLAGHER: Australia’s national interest is very well served by the ADF and the protection they provide to Australian citizens. We have said already and registered formally with the Chinese authorities that best practice was not followed in terms of the exercises they’ve been undertaking and have registered that both formally through our relevant processes and directly by the Foreign Minister.

JOURNALIST: Minister, have Australian officials sought a meeting with Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro? Do you think he’s a roadblock to a tariff deal, given criticisms of Australia’s aluminium exports and social media levy?

GALLAGHER: Well, as you’d expect, all of the Australian ministers have been engaging with their counterparts. We’ve had some very substantial progress, considering the administration has only been in place for about a month, where we’ve had the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister, the Foreign Minister and the Treasurer – who is making his way back from Washington right now – engaging in Australia’s national interest with the new administration. And you would expect to see that continue through the efforts of Minister Farrell.

JOURNALIST: Going back to Defence, in terms of our CDF saying we don’t know if a submarine is there. Is that acceptable that we could or could not have a submarine a couple hundred kilometres off Australian shores and we have no idea? Essentially, it’s a your guess is as good as mine from the CDF?

GALLAGHER: Well, I haven’t followed closely what’s happened in Defence Estimates. I’ve been in my own Estimates, enjoying that. But what I can say is Defence are monitoring this group of Chinese ships; they have been monitoring them for some time. I can’t speak highly enough of the CDF and all the effort that goes into that. And the Chinese are conducting these exercises, as we do in places like the South China Sea, in accordance with international rules. We’ve made it clear that we are not happy with the lack of notice that was provided to the Australian authorities. We have formally registered that, as you would expect, and that is being taken up with the Chinese authorities, both through our administrative structures but also directly through ministers.

JOURNALIST: From your Estimates, was there any evidence that Peter Dutton had contact with Godwin Grech or any other Treasury official before making his purchases of bank shares in 2009?

GALLAGHER: Well, there were certainly some questions asked. In a very unusual way, the committee was shut down, papers were refused to be allowed to be tabled. So, I think there are genuinely questions that remain unanswered. We had very defensive Coalition senators trying to obstruct questions from being asked, and I think Peter Dutton still has some questions to answer. I mean, he’s said at the moment to just take his word for it. I think he needs to be a bit more, you know, provide a bit more significant advice around that, rather than just taking his word for it.

JOURNALIST: What are those questions, though?

GALLAGHER: Well, it would seem to me that the day before a bank bailout, a substantial bank bailout, there was a significant purchasing of shares. They’re facts. They’re on the record. But I think certainly the questions we would ask Mr Dutton is, what was the value of those shares? Why were those shares purchased the day before a very substantial bank bailout when we know there were other things, through the Godwin Grech inquiry, questions being asked. And you know, I think these are entirely reasonable questions to ask of someone who wants to be an alternate Prime Minister of this country.

JOURNALIST: Minister, do you consider Mr Grech a reliable witness?

GALLAGHER: Look, I wasn’t around in the time that that episode happened, so I don’t have close knowledge of it, but I think the questions that were being asked in the committee today are reasonable ones to ask. There is a history here and now we know that on the eve of a very significant announcement, a market-sensitive announcement, there was the purchase of a substantial number of shares in the major banks in this country by Mr Dutton. And I would say, you know, he should answer questions about that. If he wants to be Prime Minister, he needs to be upfront, answer those questions and not just say take my word for it, there is nothing to see here.

[CROSSTALK]

GALLAGHER: One at a time, please, one at a time. James has been trying to get a question. I will come back to you.

JOURNALIST: Mr Dutton said today that the RHT Family Trust which has been used to buy a shopping centre in Townsville, a couple of childcare centres, it no longer has any assets in it, it’s essentially a dormant trust. Do you believe that statement from Mr Dutton and if not, what changes could be made to Parliament’s Register to improve transparency for all MPs?

GALLAGHER: Again, I haven’t seen everything that’s happened this morning, but I would say, we would need to substantiate that around his personal financial relationships and structures that he has in place.

JOURNALIST: But is it good enough? I mean, and this is a question for all politicians, like anyone else, like any other Australian, they can have a family trust or a discretionary trust, they can hide assets in it. Do you think that’s good enough for Australia’s politicians? Would Labor consider raising the bar in terms of the transparency that the Register of Members’ Interests requires?

GALLAGHER: Well, I mean, I can only speak for myself. I don't have a trust. Everything I own and don't own, all my debts, are on the Register. I think that's the intent of the Register is to make sure that there is good line of sight on politicians’ assets, debts, and for good reasons, to instil trust in the political system. And so, it's very clear where you owe money, who you owe money to, and what you own. That's the whole point of having a Register.

JOURNALIST: Just one more, if I may, in terms of his declarations. So, Mr Dutton failed to declare the sale of two properties- sorry, he declared late the purchase of five properties, and he declared late the sale of eight properties, two of them by more than two years. Is that appropriate? You know, what sanctions could be taken, or measures could be taken, steps could be taken, to sanction Mr Dutton, if indeed any?

GALLAGHER: Well, I'm not I'm not sure about the sanctions. That would be a matter for the Parliament, I would imagine, and the chamber that he's represented in. But I think politicians have a responsibility, particularly those who are going to the highest office in the land, to make sure that they are adhering to the rules about declarations on the Register. And I guess, when you own as many homes and a shopping mall and childcare centres, and you're turning that over pretty regularly, it seems, you know, chances are you're a bit tardy with your paperwork. But I would say it's a serious matter, that politicians need to be very clear about the shares they're trading, the properties they own, the properties they're selling, the business interests they have, that's part of making sure there’s trust in the political process.

JOURNALIST: Minister Gallagher, on a separate matter, the Government's announced several new spending commitments, but so far we haven't heard any new revenue raising measures or savings measures ahead of the election. Does that mean that Australian taxpayers can't expect another round of income tax cuts in the next term of government?

GALLAGHER: Well, there's a lot in that. Look, we're finalising a Budget as we speak and we're pushing up against those deadlines now. And through that budget process, we look at everything that's possible. You know, looking at what the pressures are on the Budget, how we identify new areas for investment, how we look at finding savings and returning those savings to budget. We've had a significant turnaround in the Budget, $200 billion. We’ve got $170 billion less debt, we’re paying less interest on that debt, we've delivered two surpluses. So, I think we've demonstrated over our budgets how much we're trying to get the Budget back in shape. Part of that's about making sure we've got room to meet new priorities, but make sure the Budget is able to absorb, you know, some of the pressures that it's facing over the next coming years.

JOURNALIST:To the point about the Register. You're saying Peter Dutton should have, or should now say, how many shares he bought, what value they were, things like that. Those actually aren't requirements of the Register. You are in government. You've been in government for a couple of years. Now, the Government can change these rules at any point to require politicians to disclose more information about their personal interests, about what property they own, what shares they own, how much they are making or losing and so forth. Why haven't you made those changes? And will you make those changes?

GALLAGHER: Well, I think the share portfolio, or the purchasing of shares, is slightly different to the issue of what's on your Register. I mean, so the issue that's on the Register and that’s been raised around the Register is the turnover of properties and the failure to declare. So, I'm making that point that you should adhere to the responsibilities of the Register, and that is, declare in a timely way so that everyone can see what's happening. The issue on the shares is slightly different in that it seems that on the eve of a massive bank bailout in 2009, Mr Dutton happened to, for the first time it seems, before that bailout and since, purchase shares in the major banks on the eve of that. And that is the question that I guess we're raising and saying that he should stand and explain all of that, including the value of the shares, why they were purchased then, and perhaps what they were offloaded for shortly after.

[CROSSTALK]

JOURNALIST: But requiring a broader level of disclosure generally would help address this question in future though, wouldn’t it?

GALLAGHER: That's a matter for the Parliament. I mean, people need to disclose their shares. You know, that's a matter for the Parliament to determine, whether the Register is adequate or not. As I said, people should adhere to the current rules of the Register, and they should also, in the instance of Mr Dutton and the shares purchase, explain really the circumstances that those purchases were made in. It seems, you know, that it was on the eve – on the facts given to me – the day before a big bank bailout was announced by the government, there was a purchase of a number of shares in the banks. I think that raises some questions.

JOURNALIST: Women's portfolio question for you. There were some pretty gross comments made earlier this week by a commercial radio host about the Matildas and about women's sport more generally. Do you think female athletes get the respect they deserve, particularly the Matildas, who have the public sort of attention and focus on them?

GALLAGHER: Look, I think it's improving, but there are obvious examples where women get let down by social commentary, for sure. And it's not just in sport. It's in a whole range of areas. I think a lot has changed in my time in public office to raise the professionalism and, you know, I guess commentary around women's sport. And that's been on the basis of the excellence and skill and professionalism of those women involved. They deserve respect. I think that for the large part the Australian community does respect them. And I think, you know, negative commentary or derisory commentary should be responded to in the harshest possible way. Thanks.