Subjects: The Coalition’s plan to protect children from online harm; 36 months campaign; John Setka’s extraordinary CFMMEU rant about Stephen McBurney and the AFL – and the Prime Minister’s failure to condemn; charter flights; Labor’s Big Australia policy; Labor’s cost of living crisis; Labor’s energy policy shambles; nuclear energy; the Prime Minister’s car and ute tax; unemployment figures.
E&OE.
PETER DUTTON:
Thank you for being here this morning. A really important announcement, I think, and I want to speak as a parent today, particularly of teenage children. The social media world, it’s a difficult one, and it’s always a difficult conversation to have with your kids because they want to be connected, they want information, they’re part of chat groups and the rest of it. But what we do know is that for younger children, in particular, there’s a higher prevalence of many mental health conditions and issues around body image, bullying online. We’ve seen some tragic consequences as a result of that online environment having a negative impact on the minds of young, impressionable Australians, and it’s true around the world as well.
The question is, what do we do about it? The one option that you can take is just to do nothing and allow a lawless environment to prosper and allow these companies to continue to profit at the expense of Australian children and their future, or you can take the path that we’re proposing now, and that is that there is age verification in place, that we don’t allow young, impressionable minds onto social media without any guardrails.
As David rightly has said in relation to this issue before, it’s inconceivable that you would just allow your 13 year old to go down to a local park and just start mingling with any random person who comes by, or that you would have a magazine on the table with all sorts of explicit content in it, and that you would allow your kid to flick through that content. I mean, it’s inconceivable.
So there’s a lot that we can do, and the technology is trending in our favour to make sure that we can deal with the scale of the problem. Nothing’s ideal, but we want to make sure that we can help parents in that conversation, help keep Australian children safer than they otherwise would be, and I’m really pleased to say that David’s done some amazing work and obviously has a level of expertise and experience here that very few people do. As the Shadow Minister for Communications, he’s really worked up a very significant policy.
I also want to acknowledge the work of News Corp, who I think has really pushed very hard for an outcome that is right for our country, and also Wippa and Fitzy yesterday. They’ve almost got 100,000 signatures on their online petition. I signed it yesterday, and I really encourage Australians to visit the Nova website to sign up to the 36 month campaign because we can make a really positive difference here.
It’d be great to work with the Prime Minister. I don’t understand what the Government’s hesitation is at the moment, but this is one of those issues where we can try and help protect kids online, try and help families and parents have the tools that they need to help protect their children. But it’s one of those issues that really should be approached on a bipartisan basis, and we’d be really happy to work with the Prime Minister and the Government to see the outcome here, and send a very clear message that both sides of Parliament stand united against the scourge of social media and its influences on young minds. Consume it in a responsible way, and that’s our offer of friendship to the Government today to make sure that we can join up together on this really important issue.
I’ll hand over to David and then I’ll have a few more statements, and then I’ll take some questions.
DAVID COLEMAN:
Thanks Peter. Good morning everyone.
Well, we know we can’t rely on social media companies to enforce age limits to protect kids, so we’re going to force them to.
This issue is one of the defining issues of our era. If we went back 20 years ago and we said, ‘here’s what we’re going to do, we’re going to create a situation where any child can communicate with any random adult, anywhere on Earth, who can provide pretty much whatever material they want to them’, we would have said, ‘well, we can’t do that. That would be a disaster’. And yet that’s what’s happened.
The social media companies have let Australian families down, because they don’t enforce age limits. The age limit of 13 is clearly too young in the first place, and secondly, they don’t enforce it. This is a totemic issue in the Australian community.
The data that we’re seeing in relation to the mental health of Australian kids is really disturbing, especially relating to girls. If you look at things like the rates of self-harm and hospitalisations of girls over the last decade, we’ve seen dramatic increases in that, and there’s no question in my mind that social media is playing a significant part in that.
So, the option of leaving things as they are is completely untenable. There is no scenario where the social media companies will do the right thing, and so we’re going to force them to. It’s the right thing to do, and we hope that the Government will get behind this. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. I think every parent worries about this, and so it doesn’t matter what your political views are, I think, on this issue, this is something that we should all be able to come together, get behind this, and force the social media companies to do the right thing.
PETER DUTTON:
Thanks David.
There’s another really important issue for our country today, and that is the thuggish behaviour of the militant unions like the CFMEU.
Don’t forget that the CFMEU has been before the courts on literally hundreds of occasions, with charges and allegations of bullying and all sorts of cases, frankly, that have been proved imposition of penalties and very dramatic ones, has been common place for the CFMEU because they conduct themselves outside of the law.
I think that the Prime Minister really needs to stand up to John Setka. We know the CFMEU donates $4.5 million a year to the Labor Party, but the Prime Minister needs to stand up for Australians and to stand up against this bullying. The Prime Minister would be the first out of the blocks, as any of us would, to condemn bullying in the workplace. Well, we’ve now got a union leader and a very powerful union leader within the labour movement, who’s out there trying to intimidate the Australian Football League.
So, the AFL shouldn’t be subject to these sorts of scandalous threats, and good on them for standing up and pushing back against John Setka and the other militant unions, including the ETU, who have joined this outrageous call.
I think it’s unbelievable that we haven’t heard from Tony Burke, or Anika Wells, the Sports Minister. Do they condone this sort of conduct and behaviour that we’re seeing at the moment? It doesn’t have any place in our country. The unions serve a useful role, but not when they’re a stand over merchant tactics and bullying tactics to try and get outcomes that they seek.
So, I think the Prime Minister, when he stands up later today – he failed to do it yesterday – he should stand up and condemn these actions, because as we know, at least in some part, the building crisis in our country is attributable to the actions of the CFMEU. From some reports, productivity on building sites controlled by the CFMEU is down to about 2.8 days per week, and it’s no wonder that we’re paying exorbitant prices for home units, for aged care facilities, we’re not getting as much bang for our taxpayer dollar in terms of road funding and infrastructure funding, and the Prime Minister allows the CFMEU just to run riot through the Australian economy. It’s completely unacceptable.
I’m happy to take any questions.
QUESTION:
What technology would you use to enforce the restrictions on under 16s? We’re all aware that there are many workarounds that exist on the internet. And would there be penalties for companies that don’t comply?
DAVID COLEMAN:
One of the really important points to know is that Facebook and Instagram already, in very limited circumstances, use age verification.
So they do it for Facebook dating in the US, they do it for Instagram if you change your age from say 15 and say you’re 18 – because in that case it’s so obvious the person is probably a child, they have to look into it – but they’ve been doing that for some time. So, the idea that the technology doesn’t exist, or it’s not possible, is just wrong. It does exist. It’s happening now, and the technology is improving all the time.
We’ll release further details in due course, but plainly, the companies will be required to comply with the new law, and that will include penalties if they don’t.
QUESTION:
Can I just ask, why did you reportedly spend $23,000 on a taxpayer funded flight – private jet – to Tamworth last year, where you criticised the Government about their cost of living measures?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, as you know, the Prime Minister flew into that event as well. I didn’t go in on a 737, but we went in on a charter when a commercial option wasn’t available.
Look, the reality is that – particularly in these roles – I don’t know, we’d do 200 plus flights a year. We can do three states in a day because there are functions and requirements for us to be at media events, or at meetings otherwise, and that’s the only available option in that circumstance. Ninety nine per cent of the flights we take would be commercial flights, but that was what was available on the day.
QUESTION:
Do you concede it undermines your message your Party, and you yourself, have criticised the Government on a similar topic around cost of living and taking these flights?
PETER DUTTON:
No, I don’t. No.
QUESTION:
Can I also ask, the Government’s going to block people on visitor, or temporary graduate visas from applying for student visas. Do you think that this is a measured response? And would the Coalition Government have a different approach? We’ve obviously heard there are warnings that the broader capping of international students could threaten to unravel the sector.
PETER DUTTON:
Well look, the obvious point to make is that I just wouldn’t trust anything that the Albanese Government does in relation to the migration programme and the management of it. I mean, Minister Giles is a walking disaster. Nobody with credibility in this country, as a commentator or political observer, believes that Andrew Giles should still be in his job.
So, let’s understand the detail of what the Government’s proposing, but it’s obvious that when you bring in 920,000 people over a two year period and you’ve only got 265,000 homes being built, that’s why we’ve got a housing crisis in our country.
So, there needs to be a measured response, and what we announced in the Budget In Reply speech was a measured and proportionate response to how we can help get Australians into housing.
We need to have a well-managed migration programme. At the moment the Government doesn’t have that, and let’s see what it is that they’re proposing, but I just wouldn’t trust anything that Minister Giles does because his judgement is obviously fatally flawed, and it’s hard to take somebody serious who actually should have been sacked by now as well.
QUESTION:
So new figures released today show migration is down. How much further should it fall to ease housing pressures?
PETER DUTTON:
What’s it down by?
Yeah, I mean, this is a really important question because it’s off a very high base, and it’s gone up dramatically. So, when you bring in 1.67 million people over five years, and we’ve got building approvals at an 11 year low, that’s why Labor’s created this housing crisis. When you see the footage – and you know it with your own friends and friendship groups – when people are applying for a rental property and they’re competing with 30 or 40 other applicants, I mean why is that happening? This is why I think a lot of Australians are saying that they’re not better off today than they were two years ago when Mr Albanese was elected Prime Minister. These problems weren’t the case five years ago. You can’t buy a house for love nor money as a young first time buyer, because the Government has really surged the numbers, and will do so over the next couple of years as well. So they’ve come down slightly, but nowhere near what’s required to answer the question to what do we do about housing?
We’ve got to take care of Australians and help get them into housing. We’ve got people living in tents and living in homeless shelters and living rough at the moment. I want to make sure that we can get Australians into housing, and that’s why we need a managed migration programme.
QUESTION:
Mr Dutton, on climate, is there a risk that the European Union would put carbon tariffs on Australia that could harm Australian farmers if the Coalition doesn’t have a 2030 emissions reduction target?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, the Coalition strongly believes in the net zero 2050 target. We’ve signed up to it, absolutely committed to it. There’s no question in my mind that with renewables in the system, with gas in the system, particularly, over the interim period – once the 90 per cent of renewables firming goes out of the system by 2034, and once we bring in nuclear, which is a zero emissions technology, we can achieve and we must achieve the net zero by 2050. But I’m not going to sign up to a policy that the Prime Minister is proposing at the moment that during a cost of living crisis, which Labor’s created, families can’t afford to pay their electricity bills now, and he’s talking about a 65 to 75 per cent target in 2035, which is going to drive your electricity prices up even higher.
I just say this to people who are going to Coles or Woolies today and knowing that you’re just getting smashed when you get to the checkout: why is it that grocery prices have gone up so dramatically under Labor? Well, it’s not just your household power bill that’s gone up, it’s also the farmer, and it’s the IGA, and it’s the Coles, and it’s the butcher, and the baker, and it’s the farmer with a cold room. All of their electricity bills have gone up as well, and that’s fed into higher grocery prices when you turn up at the checkout. That’s why families are under the pump at the moment.
I just don’t think families can afford another 20 or 30 per cent electricity price increase under Mr Albanese, when he signs up to a 65 to 75 per cent target without any economic modelling. I mean, let’s release the economic modelling to understand what it means.
The Prime Minister said nothing before the last election about adding $10,000 to a Toyota Hybrid RAV4, or to a Toyota HiLux or Ford Ranger, but that’s what he’s imposing to try and achieve the 43 per cent target, which is not going to be achieved anyway.
So, I believe in strong action on addressing our emissions and on climate change. Absolutely. But I’m not going to send Australian families to the wall and really hammer them even more than what they’re experiencing at the moment under this Government. Why would we sign up to an arrangement that Australians don’t understand?
It’s okay for Mr Albanese to want to feel popular and get all the back slaps from Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron at the Paris conferences; the Prime Minister’s responsibility is actually to the Australian public. As Prime Minister, I would make decisions which help us meet our international obligations, but which don’t destroy small businesses and impose huge cost increases in electricity bills on Australian families.
QUESTION:
And that would be worth the risk of other countries putting carbon tariffs on Australia?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, if you look at the United States, the United Kingdom, they’re not meeting their targets. So what’s happening in that scenario? The Government here is not going to meet its target. What tariffs will be applied to them? I think they’re reasonable questions to ask.
We’ve got a responsible pathway to meet our net zero by 2050 obligation, but we can’t destroy the economy in the process. There are a lot of economists talking about our economy going into a recession by the end of this calendar year. We had anaemic growth in the last quarter. When you speak to restaurateurs, when you speak to retailers, people are keeping their hands in their pockets. We were out in Eastwood yesterday talking to some of the restaurateurs there. They’re very open about it – people are not going out to restaurants, people are spending less when they do go out – and that is as a result of inflation, which is high, it’s sticky, and in part it’s because of the Prime Minister’s renewables only energy policy, which is driving up electricity prices, driving up gas prices.
We’ve had a threefold increase in the number of manufacturing insolvencies in the last two years, and a record number of small businesses are closing their doors. There’s no sense in just dealing with the headline figures. Every one of those small businesses, their lives are destroyed because in many cases, their house is used as security with the bank to set up the restaurant, or to set up the shop in the mall, and they’ve lost their livelihoods. Those families are under pressure at the moment because of the decisions Mr Albanese’s made.
He’s now talking about signing up to a 65 to 75 per cent target that’s just going to see electricity prices go up by another 20 or 30 per cent. He can’t tell you how much it will go up because he hasn’t done the economic modelling. How can he sign up to that in the middle of a cost of living crisis?
I think the Prime Minister’s so far out of touch with where families are. He promised before the last election that he’d reduce your power bill by $275, it’s now gone up by $1,000. It’ll go up by at least another $1,000. We don’t know the real figure because he won’t do the economic modelling, and yet he’s prepared to sign up to this agreement without understanding how negative the impact will be on families. We know it’s going to be very negative, but ultimately, we don’t know the true cost and Australian families are going to be asked to bear that.
QUESTION:
The Prime Minister says the Government thinks that universal early childhood education is desirable and possible. Why doesn’t the Coalition have a position on universal childcare?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, we’re happy to see what the Government’s proposing. The Prime Minister’s had a few thought bubbles in relation to this, but really hasn’t followed through with a policy. We need to understand how it would impact on the supply and demand situation in relation to childcare, we need to understand what happens with wages, we need to understand what happens in situations where in regional communities, for example, they just don’t have access to long day care. What would be the solution in those communities? And what would the cost be?
In Queensland at the moment, we’ve got a State Government who’s in a going out of business sale, giving away 50 cent fares on buses and trains, etc.. It’s only for a few months until just after the election, but that’s how Labor runs the economy. They don’t have any consideration for what it means to continue to pump money into the economy and drive up interest rates.
The reason people are paying more for their interest rates under Anthony Albanese, and the reasons that they’ve gone up on 12 occasions, is because Labor continues to fuel inflation. If we’re going into a recession, as the Government predicts, unemployment will go up. That’s what they say in their budget papers, and that’s a disastrous outcome for families. I really worry about the state of the Australian economy at the moment under Labor.
I think childcare is incredibly important and we’ll look very carefully at anything the Government proposes, but what detail do we have? I mean, have they told you what the cost of this childcare policy would be each year? In the budget, they’ve announced 36,000 public servants – new public servants – 36,000. There’s only 58,000 people in the Defence Force, and the 36,000 public servants in Canberra come at a cost of $6 billion per year – $24 billion. You could do a lot with that. You could do a lot in childcare, you could do a lot to provide support to families. But we don’t have any of that detail from Labor yet.
I know the Prime Minister talks a lot, but you’ve got to look at what he does, and this Prime Minister has been a lot of talk and where he has acted, it’s been against the interests of the Australian public.
QUESTION:
Can I ask one more on unemployment? Sorry, please.
PETER DUTTON:
Sure. Yeah.
QUESTION:
The unemployment figures are out today. Do you think Jim Chalmers’ plan is working?
PETER DUTTON:
Look, I think you’ve got this smoke and mirrors exercise going on by the Treasurer at the moment. When you look at the economic analysis of the state of the Australian economy, it is in a weak state. Inflation is sticky, and the Reserve Bank is not talking about interest rates coming down anytime soon. I think a lot of Australian families thought that maybe interest rates would come down by now, and that that would help them get through Labor’s cost of living crisis, but for those families who are facing massive increases in their power prices, and in their gas prices under Mr Albanese’s wrecking ball of a renewables only energy policy, which is really destroying the economy, you are going to see inflation stay higher, and the Government does predict that unemployment will go up.
When you hear a lot of the stories from the cafe owners and the rest, they’re cutting hours. So, it may be that unemployment numbers are masked by underemployment and that to try and make their business stay open, they’re cutting back hours of workers.
I know the union movement’s talking about a 42 per cent increase for junior wages as well. That would destroy many of these small businesses, and frankly, those 18 year olds would never get a job because they don’t have the same productivity of somebody with experience being paid the same wage who’s 25 or 35 years of age.
So, Labor can’t manage the economy. We see it at a state level, they rack up enormous debt, and it’s always the job of the Liberal Government to come in and restore order, put balance back into the budget to help families again, and that’s exactly what we’ll do after the next election.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
[ends]