E&OE TRANSCRIPT

SUBJECTS:  US election; Social media age limit; cutting student HECS debt

PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: Two days on from what was billed as the most significant election in US History. What are the implications of a second Trump term for us here in Australia? Already many are suggesting it carries warning signs for the Albanese government on issues of inflation and immigration as they head into our own election. Of course, by May next year. The NDIS Minister Bill Shorten was Labor leader last time Trump was the president and he joins me now. Bill Shorten, welcome.

BILL SHORTEN, MINISTER FOR THE NDIS, AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES: Good morning, Patricia.

KARVELAS: You were Opposition Leader last time Trump was elected US President. What's different about his re election this time?

SHORTEN: Well, he lost the 2020 election and he's come back. It's only, it's a very unusual thing in American politics and congratulations to him. I think the last person to do it was Grover Cleveland in the, towards the end of the 19th century. So, there's no doubt that the new president has staying power.

KARVELAS: Yeah, nothing, nothing like a comeback like this. I haven't seen anything like this. Do you think the Albanese government will be able to find common ground with Donald Trump given such different agendas?

SHORTEN: Yeah, I do. Listen, Australia and America have had governments of different political persuasions but the alliance with America runs deep. And you know, I'm a student of history, it's a little known fact but when the Japanese bombed continental Australia for the first time, they bombed Darwin in February of 1942. They had hundreds of planes and only 10 planes were available to go up and nine of them got shot down but all 10 planes were American, so defending Australia. And some of their pilots died as did their troops during the second World. The relationship's strong and it's about our national interest and for the American government it's about their national interest. America has a trade surplus with Australia. So, yeah, I'm positive about the context.

KARVELAS: You won't be surprised that I've looked through the archives, Bill Shorten. And when you were Opposition Leader you were pretty critical of Malcolm Turnbull for not speaking out against different things that Donald Trump had talked about, including the executive order on immigration. Would you like to see Anthony Albanese be outspoken about things that he thinks are wrong?

SHORTEN: I've got no doubt that our Prime Minister will speak up in the national interest first and foremost. But you know, you won't be surprised that I too have looked through the archives because I'm not surprised by your question. And did you know that J.D. Vance, who's now the Vice President of America after in 2016, around the same time you were talking about me, said that the current president was an idiot and reprehensible but now he's the Vice president to him. So, you know, I think we'd better focus on the future. And I've seen the same with some of Mr. Dutton's Coalition frontbenchers who were less than flattering. So, I think the trick is the American people have spoken. That's unequivocal. Mr. Trump got just 72.7 million votes. Vice President Harris got 68.125 million votes. He won. He's the guy we've got to deal with. They're a democratic country, they've had their elections. We respect the outcome.

KARVELAS: I'm glad you've looked through the archives too. Of course you have. I'm going to miss our sparring. Bill Shorten, I want to talk about some of the themes of that election that I just heard you with Peter Dutton on television. He says immigration is similar and he will pursue it here as an election issue. The other overwhelming one is of course, cost of living and inflation. What are the lessons for incumbents with an inflation crisis? I mean, if you look around the world, it's not good for incumbents, is it?

SHORTEN: Well, before we get to incumbents, let's think about the people, your listeners. It's tough with 13 rate rises, the mortgage holders doing it tough. They're hanging on by their fingernails. But the reality is that this government's delivered surpluses, two surpluses. Our predecessors in nine years just delivered deficits. So, you know, I love getting lectures from these self-appointed economic supermen of Australia, the coalition, their record. It's the actions that speak, not the words. They just delivered surplus after surplus. Jim Chalmers and the financial team have delivered surpluses, so that helps put downward pressure on inflation. The other thing is we are not out of the woods. But when we came into power, the economic supermen of the liberals left us 6.2% inflation. And now the last most recent figure we got was 2.8. So, we're doing something which I think is helping, but a lot more work to be done with immigration. America has a land border. I mean, one of the gifts which makes Australia one of the luckiest countries in the world is we're the only nation who occupies a continent entirely to ourselves as a nation. So, whilst we want to make sure that crooks and bad people are sent, you know, sent out of the country, we don't have the same land border challenges as the U.S. So, I'm not quite sure it's an important issue here, but the heat on, you know, those border states in America is just red hot.

KARVELAS: Yeah, I do think it's playing out differently. But it is interesting, isn't it, that the Opposition Leader has two of the key same issues to be able to campaign on here. Is that something that-

SHORTEN: I think there are issues all around the Western world. People from poorer countries want to go to richer countries, don't blame them. But the whole of Europe's struggling with this issue. North America, to some extent, we are far luckier than most because we are far further away than most. But in the recent High Court case, it's not the decision we wanted. But Tony Burke the next day is down at Yarralumla with a new regulation. So, it's not the decision we wanted, but we're prepared for it. That's our legal system. They make decisions. You've got to respect it and you've got to work or you've got to deal with the facts you got. And we are moving quickly.

KARVELAS: I want to talk about today's plan for a social media ban and the meeting around that. The Prime Minister will take that plan for under 16s to be banned from social media to national cabinet. It's. Yeah, it might be a sort of very popular idea at face value, but how do you do it? How will users verify their age without handing over sensitive personal documents to large tech companies?

SHORTEN: Well, the large tech companies have got the ability to do this. We're not saying that the burden should fall on parents and kids. Social media can perform some really great functions. It's connecting people up. If you're isolated, social media's not all bad. Absolutely not. But there is a dark underbelly of social media which the profit makers, the large social media companies just ignore. And so, yeah, if we've got to push to protect our kids, we should. Parents are overwhelmed, there are negative consequences. Social media, this idea, everyone's got to look perfect. It's putting tremendous pressure on body image. The algorithms are addictive. I mean, this is not a new argument, though I think perhaps I boringly said at the start, I'm a student of history, we had to argue to protect our kids from working in coal mines and factories. And those factory owners said that would be the end of them. When we first proposed to having mandatory seat belts to protect people, our car companies said that would just be the end of it. And well, you know what? It's not. And we don't ask civilians and car users to bring their own seat belt to a car. So, why should social media companies buck past their own duty of care? You're not allowed to produce products and monetise and privatise kids’ experiences when they're kids and trade in their data and just say nothing to do with us.

KARVELAS: How did you land on 16?

SHORTEN: Well, there'd been a lot of consultation. Michelle Rowland has been doing her power work and, you know, really the choices are 14, 15 or 16. I think 16 gets the balance right.

KARVELAS: It's pretty old. You've been able to work for a couple of years even in some cases.

SHORTEN: Oh, yeah, but you can't vote, you can't drive, you can't own a gun. So, no, I think 16's it's not that old. It seems a little while ago in the revision mirror of my life.

KARVELAS: A while ago for me too. But you know, you've got kids 16-

SHORTEN: Yeah, I do.

KARVELAS: -they're kind of pretty highly engaged by then, aren't they?

SHORTEN: Oh, yeah. So, are the 14 year olds.

KARVELAS: That's another story, as we know we do. Won't a ban just drive use underground? Surely education is a better approach.

SHORTEN: The age limit is a tool to help families, it's a direction, it's a statement of national intent across jurisdictions. It's not the only thing that we do in and of itself, it's just one thing. But what we're saying to the social media companies is time to join the club of accountability. It gives these companies the right to sell and do whatever they want. I don't remember voting for them, I don't remember getting. These companies have a social licence and their product is not a neutral product. They use algorithms that can addict. They use the data. Who gave these companies the right to be data traffickers of our kids?

KARVELAS: Look, I don't know many people who would disagree with your assessment. Some would, but many would sort of go, yeah, on balance, he makes a good point. It's about the way you do it though. And many experts are saying the way that the government is trying to push on won't work. Isn't it better to put a sort of duty of care on the companies rather than.

SHORTEN: That will be part of the discussion.

KARVELAS: Ok, so you do think that they should be transparent with algorithms and putting a duty of care on them, actually forcing them to change the way they do business?

SHORTEN: Yeah, I do. This 16-year-old age limit is a start, but as I think I said earlier, it's not the only tool. I recognise its limitations and I recognise that people will try and do workarounds and I recognise social media companies will scream like, you know, scalded cats that, you know, anything which might affect Their, you know, gazillion dollar profit is just a pain in the butt for them. But you know what, it's not just them. In this world, we don't just exist to serve big social media companies and the duty of care is a legitimate proposition. It was one of the recommendations of government inquiries and I think we'll be hearing more about that.

KARVELAS: I just want to ask you a couple of questions about something that's going to be very close to your heart, very close, you know, By February next year, the Albanese government is cutting close to $20 billion in student loan debt for more than 3 million Australians. The opposition looks set to oppose it. Can we afford this right now?

SHORTEN: Well, can we afford not to? We've got to stop loading our kids up with debt. We've got a challenge in this country with intergenerational inequity. I just don't mean between older people and younger people, but I mean more and more. Having rich parents is the only way you're ever going to get a house. I think what the Albanese government's done by proposing reducing 20% of student debt, and remember, this goes for TAFE and for universities, is just taking a $5,000 rock out of the knapsack of people's futures. So, I think it's really good. To be honest, I am stunned to the point of disbelief that the opposition are like lemmings running for the cliff if they think that it's a good idea to go to the next election telling 3 million people, we want you to pay $5,000. More like, the thing is we want a smart country, so why are we pricing people out of being able to get smarter?

KARVELAS: Well, the argument is, well, one of them being obviously the big cost to the budget, but then the other argument slowly phased in.

SHORTEN: It's not a big hit in one year.

KARVELAS: Well, but then the other argument that's being framed, not my point, but the argument that's being framed is that people who can then go on and earn more are being given a discount. I mean, this goes to the.

SHORTEN: Yeah, but it's called productivity. You know, these liberals don't mind giving a diesel fuel excise to mining companies worth $5 billion. And fine, but that allows mining companies to earn more. Really what this country needs, and we see it all around the world, we need to encourage a spirit of critical inquiry in the minds of Australians. Education is still the best proven path from disadvantage to advantage. This country doesn't suffer if we have more nurses and teachers and plumbers. It's not a bad thing. The argument that somehow funding education means that some people will earn money has got to be one of the most bog ignorant arguments I've heard in a very long time.

KARVELAS: Thank you, sir.

SHORTEN: We are not going to dumb ourselves to greatness.

KARVELAS: Thank you so much for joining us. Bill Shorten.

SHORTEN: Super.