E&OE TRANSCRIPT
DOORSTOP
ADELAIDE
TUESDAY, 16 APRIL 2019

SUBJECTS: Labor’s $200 million pathology investment; Sharrouf children; negative gearing policy; strong economy, wages and cost of living; Notre Dame; Gladys Liu; Repat General Hospital; Murray-Darling; tax subsidies

NADIA CLANCY: I’m Nadia Clancy, I’m Labor’s candidate for the federal seat of Boothby and I’m really happy to have Bill Shorten, Catherine King and our Labor senate candidate Emily Gore here today in my electorate – well my hopeful future electorate. I’m really proud of Labor’s positive policies for our future, and particularly our health announcements over the last couple of weeks have been incredible. And we have some more today. And it’s so easy to go doorknocking and meet with people in our community because we have such an exciting message to give people, and even just on Saturday I doorknocked a young woman who has blood cancer and is on the disability support pension. And she’s really, really struggling; she’s not just worried about her health, she’s worried about how she can afford to get the tests she needs to get throughout this process as she’s desperately trying to fight this cancer. And she should be focusing on fighting for her life, not worrying about how much cash she has in her wallet. And so I’m really, really excited that we have more really great announcements today in the health space, even one specifically for Flinders University.
 
BILL SHORTEN: Thanks Nadia. Good afternoon everybody, it’s great to be here in South Australia in the seat of Boothby with our very capable candidate Nadia Clancy. Today Catherine and I are pleased to announce a significant new investment in pathology testing in Australia. We accept the argument that Australian pathologists have put to us that the system is near breaking in terms of bulk billing. That without a significant injection of new funds, that we could be jeopardising the wide take up of bulk billing for pathology tests. Now one of the great things about our healthcare system in Australia, is that when a doctor prescribes a blood test they can do so knowing that they’re not putting financial pressure on our patients, that the system can afford the tests which patients need to help with the treatment that they require. But at the moment in Australia, it's estimated by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, that in fact 140,000 of our fellow Australians is currently not taking pathology tests because of the cost. Our system of bulk billing should not be jeopardised because of under-investment in pathology. We need these tests when people are in the fight of their lives. So Labor will invest $200 million so that we can keep the high rates of bulk billing and pathology where they are. I’d now like to invite Catherine to talk a bit further and then we'll be happy to take questions.
 
CATHERINE KING: Thanks Bill, and it's terrific to be here with Nadia Clancy, our candidate for Boothby and also Emily Gore, our Senate candidate here in South Australia. Well Bill and I are announcing a further part of Labor's $2.3 billion cancer plan today. And we know that pathology is vitally important for cancer diagnosis and cancer treatment. 100 per cent of all cancers being diagnosed rely on pathology. It is a vital part of our healthcare system. Since Labor was last in office, we introduced bulk billing incentives to make sure we could keep the weight of bulk billing for pathology and keep free pathology for people across the country as high as it possibly could be. But since the Morrison Government has been in place, six long years of a freeze on the Medicare rebate, pathology is under pressure. We had to fight them over the course of the last few years because they wanted to get rid of the bulk billing incentives and we were successful in doing so. And today we’ve responded to Australian Pathology telling us that because of the long freeze in the indexation of rebates for pathology, that pathology bulk billing is under pressure. This $200 million today will help support 3.2 million patients every year accessing pathology tests across the country. Cancer patients and older Australians who predominantly are highly represented in our cancer statistics. This will mean that pathology stays free for many, many Australians and that we support bulk billing. We're also going to be announcing today $2.5 million here at Flinders University Medical Centre, a really important facility that works so closely with the hospital here as part of our education precinct in South Australia, for a $2.5 million clinical simulation lab. Simulation labs allow our doctors in training, our nurses in training, our other clinicians in training to actually have almost live experiences of significant crisis that can occur in our hospital system. And it means that the quality of care that they provide while they're doing that training constantly will be significantly improved. We're very proud of that $2.5 million investment and I want to thank Nadia for her advocacy here. I’m going to hand over to Eric, who is from Australian Pathology, to talk a little bit about the importance of Labor's $200 million commitment for pathology bulk billing today.
 
ERIC SWAYN: Good afternoon. My name’s Eric Swayn, I'm representing Australian Pathology. I’ve worked in this industry now for just over 20 years, and to hear the news today from ALP about their significant investment in pathology tests is something that is greatly welcomed by our industry. Australians may not know this, but every blood test, swab, or biopsy that is done is actually touched by a pathologist. It’s also worth noting that 100 per cent of cancers are diagnosed by pathologists in our laboratories. So this announcement for cancer sufferers and older Australians is welcome to protect those that are most vulnerable. This investment of $200 million into bulk billing will protect the older Australians and those suffering from various cancers. It will enable no out of pocket costs for the diagnosis and testing required for cancer treatment. Thank you, Mr Shorten.
 
SHORTEN: Thank you very much. Welcome words from the peak association representing pathology in Australia. Are there questions?
 
JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten, this morning you were with asked about the Sharrouf children being brought back. What possible reason is there for not bringing them back to their family in Australia?
 
SHORTEN: None that I can think of. Just on the Sharrouf children, they shouldn't be a political football. They have already suffered. Incredibly irresponsibly, their parents took them to a war zone. Their parents took them into a regime of terrorism. But these children shouldn't be held responsible for what their parents did.
 
JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten, significant parts of your negative gearing policy have been taken down from Labor’s website, charts and graphics explaining how the policies will work. Can you explain why that’s happened?

SHORTEN: Yes. We're updating the documents. I mean let's face it, if you want to talk about putting policies upfront, we're doing that. We put our negative gearing policy out from the Sydney Town Hall in about February, March, of 2016. As new numbers come to light, we update them. So, I think if you want to look at the gold standard in terms of putting policies out there, I don't think any of you can really look past Labor. But if you want to look at what is not the gold standard, have a look at this very important report the Grattan Institute has written today. I would encourage you all to read it. It has some real information there. What it shows is the Liberals' economic model on display yet again. It shows that for tax cuts on the never-never, they are planning though to cut up to $40 billion a year in secret cuts. The Government will have to answer during the course of this campaign. What are the secret cuts you're planning to promise an illusory tax increase in half a decade’s time?

JOURNALIST: Do you, and if you do, why do you believe that Australian taxpayer money should go towards helping restore Notre Dame?
SHORTEN: Restore?

JOURNALIST: Notre Dame, in Paris.

SHROTEN: Oh listen, I think all of us were shocked to see that image. Notre Dame is a global icon. I don't know how many people here, but certainly I and millions of Australians over the years have backpacked or travelled to Paris, and one of those postcard moments of any young Australian's trip overseas is to go to Notre Dame. Notre Dame’s an 800-year-old cathedral. It has survived civil war and religious strife, German occupation. So I think a lot of us were really sad and shocked to see what has happened today. I mean for Australians, imagine if we saw the Opera House on fire. And that is essentially what we have seen in France. And Notre Dame therefore doesn’t just belong to Paris or France, it belongs to the world. I like Mr Turnbull's idea that there should be some modest commitment to help rebuild, if that is the case, and that’s what friends are for. And I would encourage Mr Morrison to take up mine and Mr Turnbull's idea.

JOURNALIST: Should Australian special forces be used to get the Sharrouf children and other Australian children out of Syria?

SHORTEN: I’m not going to start giving security advice, I’ll leave that to the security agencies.

JOURNALIST: In regards to your living wage policy, can you clarify who the 1.2 million workers you promised a pay rise are? Where did you get this figure from and can you explain who exactly it is, given that 180,000 workers are on the adult minimum wage?

SHORTEN: Well first of all, you’ll find that about well over a million people are award-dependent. And so they're the people I'm talking about. If you improve the living wage, if you improve the minimum wage to a living wage, then we want to eventually see that flow through to the people who are still reliant on the award system. That number’s bigger than 100,000 people. But let’s, you know I get where the question’s coming from, and it's really about this ongoing boast that Mr Morrison keeps saying about a strong economy. Let's unpack what a Liberal strong economy is based upon. It's based upon two principles. The first is keep wages as low as possible, and they're proud of that, and keep making sure that the profits go up and up. This Government has an almost religious conviction that if you can make the richest people in Australia richer, the richest companies in Australia richer, then eventually some of the crumbs will fall off the table. So that's the first leg of the principles of Mr Morrison's strong economy, keep wages down. The second leg though, and the Grattan Institute’s blown the whistle on this again today, is that the number two method that this Government believes keeps a strong economy, is by reducing real spending on essential services that working Australians require. TAFE, universities, child care, health care. These are the services which working Australians and Australians depend upon. If that’s what Mr Morrison calls a strong economy – low wages and reduction in real services – then that's not the strong economy Australia needs. Labor, by contrast, believes in a strong economy built upon fairness and decency. And we are not going to stand by and watch Mr Morrison boast about a strategy which sees the rich get richer, and everyone else just miss out. Where the cost of living is squeezing millions of wage earners.

JOURNALIST: Have you or any of our colleagues spoken to Sam Dastyari about today's pathology announcement?

SHORTEN: I haven't. And indeed, this pathology announcement stands on its own two feet, doesn’t it? When you think about it, and I will get Catherine to supplement the answer, pathology makes sick people well. It has that potential. When you're in the fight of your life, you know, 100 per cent of cancer needs pathology. So I understand if perhaps the Government doesn't like the fact that we're leading on health care as we do, but the experts tell us there is a problem, that that bulk billing levels of pathology are under pressure. As I said earlier, but I think it's a pretty fair point, one of the great strengths of our medical system, is that doctors can recommend tests and they’re very confident that it’s not going to put added financial pressure on patients. I want to preserve that system but the problem is, and Catherine can talk at more length, 140,000 Australians now annually are recorded as not being, taking their pathology tests because they can't afford to. But I might hand over to Catherine for a moment.

JOURNALIST: But can I bring you back to the question?

SHORTEN: Yeah, but I’ll let Catherine talk more about her announcement first.

JOURNALIST: You haven’t answered whether your colleagues have spoken to him.

KING: Thanks very much. The answer to that is no from me. But certainly, in terms of pathology – what we know has been happening since Labor was last in office, we introduced bulk billing incentives because we know how critical it is for people to get those tests if they’re going to actually find out what is going on with their health. Whether it be from cancer diagnosis, diabetes, other really important chronic diseases that we have in our community – pathology is absolutely vital to that. What the Liberals tried to do, what they tried to do in their Mid-Year Economic Financial Statement in 2015, was actually get rid of those bulk billing incentives, cut $600 million out of diagnostic imaging and pathology, and they faced a complete pushback because what that would have meant, is that Australians across the country, would have seen, starting to have to pay co-payments for pathology. What we're doing today is making sure that bulk billing for pathology stays high, and that’ll benefit over 3.2 million Australians across the country every single year, as they get tests for cancer, and older Australians for tests for a whole range of other diseases.

(JOURNALISTS ASKING QUESTIONS)

SHORTEN: Sorry, I will come to you, Jade.

JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten there's been allegations that that Liberal Party's candidate in Chisholm made homophobic comments. Does she need to apologise and does the Prime Minister need to intervene?

SHORTEN: Well I think it will be very interesting to see how Mr Morrison handles this rogue candidate in Chisholm. It’ll be very interesting indeed to see how he handles it because he needs to make up his mind on a couple of questions. One, whether he wants as a candidate for the Liberal Party someone who’s said such hurtful things about her fellow Australians, and two, whether he wants as a candidate for the Liberal Party someone who stood in front of the media and said it didn't happen when clearly it did. This will be a test for him to see how he handles it in coming days.

JOURNALIST: Can you rule out no new or increased taxes on superannuation?
 
SHORTEN: We have no plans to increase taxes on superannuation.
 
JOURNALIST: That’s different from ruling it out though.
 
SHORTEN: We have no plans to introduce any new taxes on superannuation.
 
JOURNALIST: So will you rule it out?
 
SHORTEN: Sure.
 
JOURNALIST: You have spoken almost exclusively since your budget in reply speech and focused on health. When can voters learn more about Labor's emission reduction target, how you will get there and the cost to the economy?
 
SHORTEN: First of all I haven’t spoken exclusively about health.
 
JOURNALIST: Some of your staffers have said the same in private conversations.
 
SHORTEN: I don't know what private conversations you have with people or what you want to reveal. But let me go to the record – I just said four minutes ago Mr Morrison loves to boast about his strong economy. I'm pretty sure we were all here when I said that. But let me say it again, because it's a good point to make. Mr Morrison loves to boast about his strong economy. But his strong economy is your classic Liberal strong economy, it's built upon two propositions, one, low wages, they're proud of it. They almost have a religious fervour, don't they, about being happy when the wages are low and corporate profits are up. Did you know that since the last election, corporate profits have gone up 39 per cent? But in fact wages have moved on average 5 per cent. And the second leg that he relies upon for this Liberal strong economy is the reduction, the reduction in real spending on services. In particular, health, but also I mentioned education, I mentioned TAFE. I mentioned childcare. The problem for Australia is that a Liberal strong economy relies on the mythical belief that if the biggest corporations in Australia make a lot of money, if the richest people in Australia can pay less tax through the loopholes, that miraculously everyone else benefits. That hasn't been the lived experience. Labor has a different view about what creates a strong economy. What creates a strong economy is fairness and decency.
 
JOURNALIST: You didn't answer the question. Answer the question, when can people know, Mr Shorten, the cost to the economy. You didn't answer the question. You should answer the question. That's why we're here to ask questions, why can't you answer the question?
 
SHORTEN: I'm going to give your colleagues half a go.
 
JOURNALIST: Why won't you answer the question, Mr Shorten?
 
SHORTEN: Dan, I'm going to go to you.
 
JOURNALIST: On pathology, nine out of 10 pathology blood tests are done out of hospitals. 99 per cent of those are bulk billed. How can you say the system’s at breaking point when the rate is at 99 per cent? And can you guarantee this $200 million will not just fill the bottom lines of pathology companies?
 
SHORTEN: Well, I’ll just refer to you the Institute of Health and Welfare saying that 140,000 of our fellow Australians already are delaying or not having pathology tests because of the costs. But I might get Catherine to talk about how this is an important addition to protecting and preserving our existing system.
 
KING: We know that it will because pathologists are telling us that, they're telling us because of the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government freeze on Medicare rebates, that has had an impact on pathology, that they are at breaking point. We knew, when we're in government, that we wanted to keep bulk billing, it's why we introduced bulk billing incentives, and then this government tried to get rid of them. We know, that this, this will be a new Medicare item that we work with pathologists on, again, that they only get if it is bulk billed, that that will preserve the rates of bulk billing for pathology. It's too important for us not to. We know that 100 percent of cancers rely on pathology for diagnosis, as are many, many other diseases, and this ensures that we are absolutely keeping the bulk billing rate high for pathology, which is too important for us not to do.
 
JOURNALIST: Surely pathology companies come to you and say we want more money, do you just roll over and accept that argument without scrutiny, and is that  the process that applies to other industries as well?
 
KING: Not at all. We work very closely obviously, we listen to industry, we listen to patient groups across the country, we listen to cancer groups across the country, and I've been the shadow minister for some six years now, I'm pretty experienced in what's actually happening across the health care sector. I know that bulk billing for pathology will come under pressure, and is under pressure, 140,000 Australians already not actually getting access to pathology tests because they can't afford it. It is always, always difficult in this area, but it is going to be even more difficult, if we don't actually undo the damage this Government has done because of its long freeze on Medicare rebates.
 
JOURNALIST: But hasn't the government done a better job? It was 97 per cent in 2013, when you guys left office, and it's above 99 per cent now?
 
KING: Again, the bulk billing incentives that Labor introduced are working. And this is a Government that tried to get rid of them, tried to cut them. If you remember the 2016 election campaign, 600,000 people signed a petition against Turnbull's cuts to pathology. We stopped them, we stopped them doing that, and that's why it remains high today, and why only Labor can make sure it will stay high.
 
JOURNALIST: If it remains high today, how can you say it's at breaking point?
 
KING: Again, listen to the pathologists.
 
JOURNALIST: Could I ask on those 90 excluded pages re your capital gains and negative gearing changes, you say there are new assumptions, so they need updating, which is a very fine thing. How do the assumptions change the costings on those two programs, and assuming that they're not affected, would you release the 90 pages so we can have a look?
 
SHORTEN: Listen, I think the original question comes from a story I read in the Fin by Nicholas Lenaghan, and then it was followed up by a question here. We've said, and I went and checked when I saw the story, said how come this page is down, they said they're updating it. I can't add any more at this point. 

JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten in Boothby do you support the South Australian government's plans for the Repat general hospital, and if so will you match the $35 million in Coalition funding pledged?
 
SHORTEN: Yes, we will. Do you want a little more detail than yes?
 
JOURNALIST: Yes please.
 
KING: I'm going to say yes too. In fact overnight I have actually been emailed by someone who, in the community, who operates out of there, saying the Repat will be really important, particularly for elective surgery. We'll match that commitment and we'll have more to say about our capital plans across South Australia to improve public hospitals across this community.
 
JOURNALIST: The health minister here says they haven't heard from Labor at all on this issue.
 
KING: We actually wrote, I can tell you now, I actually wrote to the health minister and he replied to me, and did not even mention Repat as one of the things he wanted Labor to put capital into. So I wrote to that health minister over two months ago now, and the Repat wasn't even mentioned. We know it's important to this community, we know it's important to Boothby. Nadia has made sure I know it is important to Boothby and we will fund it.
 
SHORTEN: I will just keep moving around. Jade, did you want to ask a question?
 
JOURNALIST: In terms of the Sharrouf children, is there anything more the Government should be doing there, and if they do come home are there particular measures that you would like to see in place to make sure they're not some kind of threat?
 
SHORTEN: Listen, I don’t want to second guess the Government on this. These kids should not be a political football. Obviously the grandmother has worked very hard to try and see these children's welfare is put back up the top of the charts. But I'm not going to engage in criticism of the Government when I'm unaware of exactly what they have done. In terms of what happens when they come back, the experts will be looking at it, but I have got no doubt there's a fair bit of trauma there. I don't know any of us could imagine if our kids were dragged to those war zones and terror zones and we've all seen some of the images of what Sharrouf exposed his kids too. These kids need to be given a little bit of room and a lot of love. Probably if they can get a lot of love then I suspect that will be the best way to help reabsorb them into Australian life.
 
JOURNALIST: South Australian irrigators have been told over the last 24 hours they will only get 14 per cent of the allocation which they were hoping they would get. They feared they might get 50 per cent, they were hoping to get 100 per cent. What is Labor's plan to fix the Murray and does it include or could it include resparking up this $2.2 billion desalination plant that we have here?
 
SHORTEN: Well first of all there are no jobs on a dead river. And South Australia has been handed the rough edge of the pineapple when it comes to the current Federal Government. Labor put in place the plan for the basin, getting the balance right between river survival and therefore job survival and fish survival, and ecological survival, and agricultural needs. There’s no doubt to my mind that for anyone who cares about the future of the Murray-Darling Basin, anyone who lives in South Australia, anyone who is concerned about the fish kills that we saw this January and over the Christmas holidays, this Government has failed. So we want to put the Basin Plan back on top. Obviously we want to bring all the stakeholders together, including South Australia, southern irrigators and northern irrigators, because at the moment, this is an ecological disaster and the story in The Advertiser really spelt that out pretty clearly I think.
 
JOURNALIST: Will you sack the CFMEU's Michael Ravbar from the Labor national executive now he's been fined by the Federal Court?
 
SHORTEN: Listen, that will be a matter for the national executive. No-one is above the law. Unionist, banker, Clive Palmer. No-one is above the law. But in terms of the national executive matters, I will leave that to the Labor Party.
 
JOURNALIST: Do you think it's appropriate that Sam Dastyari's employer will make a motza out of today's announcement?
 
SHORTEN: Well first of all, Mr Dastyari is no longer a senator. He paid a pretty big price, I think, for mistakes he made. I'm not about to get – he's got a right to a life after politics, as I think all political people do. But I’ve just got to go to this issue of pathology. Is the Government really arguing that we shouldn't be investing more in pathology? Is the Government really arguing that we shouldn't put downward pressure on the cost of pathology so that we can make sure that we maintain our bulk billing system? If they are arguing that then they are more out of touch than I originally thought. Thanks, everyone.
 
JOURNALIST: On the weekend you made some very strong comments about people spending more than $3,000 managing tax affairs, you said it was a loophole and a rort. Are you surprised organisations like the CPA and the Institute of Public accountants are making such partisan opposition to that during the election campaign? Usually they would be a bit less in the thick of the political campaign.
 
SHORTEN: I think our CPAs are excellent. Love accountants. I notice there was the usual propaganda from News Limited which said that we are against the professions. We’re not. But really, in this country, can we afford to be giving away millions of dollars of tax subsidy to people for the cost of minimising their tax already? I mean we are talking about the taxes which nurses and tradies pay to Canberra. I would rather use that taxpayer money for the best schools in the world, for the best TAFE, for the best aged care, for the best health care system. It is a matter of priorities. Am I surprised that a vested interest whose business model relies upon tax subsidies isn't happy if we are going to reform it? No. I get why they might not like it. But we’ve got to ask ourselves in this country, are we just a country who wants to maintain tax subsidies and loopholes for the big end of town, or are we a country who wants to invest in our people? At the end of the day, we are not changing the ability of accountants to do work for their customers. We are just saying that perhaps once you are paying over $3,000 a year to an accountant you shouldn't be able to deduct that off your tax. It is not, it is not how it has been characterised in News Limited and I expect to see more of these dishonest scare campaigns about Labor. But at some point the political process in this country has got to put ordinary people back at the top of the pile. We’ve got to start saying, “Do you want your kids not to be able to get all the classes they need, be they kids who need special needs, or be they kids who need extensions and advancements in their class?” Do we want to be a country who can't afford to be alongside you when you are in the fight of your life on cancer? Do we want to be a country who does nothing on climate change? Do we want to be a country who just says, well, we'd rather give a tax subsidy to someone claiming $1 million and let them write that off their tax when they have already minimised their tax beyond that? It’s all about choices and values. We want to run an economy which is fair and decent, not one which supports lower wages and cuts to real services.
 
Thanks, everybody.