Federal Budget 2015: ABC Lateline host Emma Alberici fires up in interview with Finance Mathias Cormann

IT WAS undoubtedly the interview of the evening. Lateline host Emma Alberici fired up in a heated discussion that had the Finance Minister nervous.

IT WAS undoubtedly the interview of the evening.

Lateline host Emma Alberici fired up against Mathias Cormann in a heated discussion that had the Finance Minister cracking under the pressure, according to viewers.

Aired after Joe Hockey’s 2015 Budget speech, Alberici took no prisoners, taking aim at the government’s hypocrisy over “broken promises”, “double dipping” and demanded answers regarding Australia’s debt and deficit disaster.

She accused the government of making up “nonsense” figures that “you continue to trot out”.

But we won’t ruin all the fun, below is a full transcript of the interview.

Happy reading.

WATCH THE LATELINE INTERVIEW IN FULL HERE

Budget emergency or not? @albericie does the jobs on @MathiasCormann on #lateline pic.twitter.com/w27ZL0qQoW

— Daniel Pastorelli (@dan_pastorelli) May 12, 2015

Before the election the Prime Minister said the budget position under the coalition would always be better than with Labor. Was that just another broken promise?

Not at all, it is, we are as a result of the decisions that we’ve made in a stronger position than we would have been if Labor had stayed in government and we had stayed in the same trajectory. The truth is, since last year’s budget, a lot has changed in the world economy, a lot has changed in terms of economic conditions.

But with respect, every time (former Labor Treasurer) Wayne Swan made that excuse that’s exactly what you called it, an excuse.

Well we're not making any excuses. We have an economic plan, a responsible long term economic plan to strengthen growth to create more jobs to get the Budget back into surplus as soon as possible. What matters is the decisions that you make when you’re faced and confronted with certain challenges. Labor decided to boost spending unsustainably in the period beyond the forward estimates, we’re working to get spending under control to put us on a stronger foundation for the future.

I’m wondering about that, because you do talk about getting spending under control, you do talk about living within your means but amid your so called debt and deficit disaster you’re spending more than you’re saving.

That is not true, all of the additional spending decisions are more than fully offset by spending reductions ...

Well let me explain the question because out to the forward, so for the next four years, you’ve got $14.6 billion worth of new spending, $1.4 billion in tax cuts and savings of just $10.9 billion.

I think you omit there the $10.1 billion in savings we have made from not proceeding with the paid parental leave scheme, my assertion absolutely stands, all of our new decisions to increase spending are more than fully offset by reductions in expenditure. In fact if you look at the projected expenditure at MYEFO over 2014-15 forward estimates we are now spending $7.3 billion less than we predicated at that time. The really important point here is despite having lost $90 billion in expected tax revenue, our timetable for a return to surplus remains the same as last year’s Budget and that is because we’ve kept spending under control. That is because spending as a share of the economy continues to reduce over the forward estimates down to 25.3 per cent as a share of the economy.

When Labor announced a deficit of $18 billion you called it a Budget emergency so what do you call a deficit that’s about double that at $35 billion?

Labor promising a deficit of $18 billion in May 2013 was a lie ...

Can I draw you back to my question? If $18 billion is a Budget emergency Mathias Cormann what’s $35 billion?

Well $18 billion wasn’t the truth ...

When you thought it was the truth it was a Budget emergency.

Because we knew that the position was rapidly deteriorating because we knew that Labor had locked in expenditure that was unaffordable in the period beyond their last forward estimates. In years five, six and beyond they had hidden expenditure that we knew wasn’t affordable and that Labor was taking Australia to a debt of $667 billion within the decade.

They were your figures. With respect that is a nonsense figure that you continue to trot out that you made up yourselves. In the PEFO (Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook) figure, which is the one you really should be referring to, it was about $370 billion.

It was not a nonsense figure, we absolutely stand by it, you’re entitled to run the Labor argument.

No, it is not a Labor argument Mathias Cormann, the $667 billion was a figure that you created.

No we didn’t, we absolutely didn’t.

So tell us, how much money will you get back from the 30 companies identified by the Treasurer that he says don't pay tax in Australia?

As the Treasurer indicated yesterday we’ve been very cautious in not putting a revenue figure on it, we’re committed to ensuring these 30 companies have paid their fair tax in Australia, that they pay the tax that is owed to Australia. Now the Labor Party, when they come up with a new tax or tax measure not only do they exaggerate the revenue they think it will raise, they spend all the money they think it will raise before they actually collect it.

Let’s talk about your government rather than the previous ones.

I’m just comparing and contrasting.

After all the discussion about reigning in this money that wasn’t being paid you can’t give us a figure of how much tax you will make these multinationals pay in Australia?

We will get as much as we need to get in order to ensure these companies pay their fair share of tax. There’s a body of work to be done, we are committed to doing it, and we will not put a figure on it at this point in time, that is a deliberate decision that we’ve made because unlike Labor we’re being very cautious and very considered in the way we approach these things.

Last year at Budget time you told me a generous paid parental leave scheme was a very important productivity measure, so you were offering up to $75,000 per family. You said it was “very important reform to build a strong economy”. Every woman was supposed to get enough money to allow her to replace her wage for six months. Now you’re saying 79,000 women who get even a few weeks paid leave from their employers get nothing from you.

A couple of things. Firstly, I did say all of that in relation to our paid parental leave policy that we took to the last election, but the truth is we weren’t able to obtain the support across the parliament to get that particular paid parental leave scheme through parliament.

We weren’t able to get the support arguably across the community so we made a decision early this year not to proceed with it and repriotise the savings into other areas of the Budget.

Now, in relation to the decision not to allow double dipping that is something that we did raise in the lead up to the election, we did say that we didn’t think it was fair that most women can access one paid parental leave scheme ...

But with respect you thought it was fair to give six months, you clearly don’t think that’s fair and you’re using language about double dipping.

With respect and I was about to answer your question, we actually made this point when we were promoting our paid parental leave policy too, that as part of that approach we were also going to abolish so-called double dipping. Most women across Australia can access one paid parental leave scheme, only some women can access two paid parental leave schemes across the public sector.

The scheme they can access you previously called grossly inadequate.

Of course and that is why those women who can access a more generous scheme through their employer, private sector or public sector employer will opt for that scheme but what we’re saying is having opted for a more generous scheme through their private or public sector employer we don’t believe that the tax payer should fund an additional scheme on top of that.

Why should parents trust you to deliver on the $3.5 billion on childcare you’ve promised when you haven’t been able to deliver this generous paid parental leave scheme?

Well we’re committed to helping families access more affordable, simpler, more flexible childcare. We do believe this is an important measure, not just for families but also for the economy because it will help families get into work, stay in work and be in work. It is a jobs for families measure. Now what we’ve said is we want to invest $3.5 billion in additional money. But of course we need to pay for it so that is why we also need to pass savings in order to ensure the package is fully funded.

@albericie tearing Cormann apart with truth bombs on the budget. Brilliant to watch! He's rattled. #lateline

— Antfarmer (@antfarmer) May 12, 2015

.@MathiasCormann is getting very shouting on @Lateline, especially when reminded about being higher taxing & spending than ALP #budget2015

— Shobaz Kandola (@ShobazKandola) May 12, 2015

Great interviewing of @MathiasCormann from @albericie tonight on #lateline must have drunk from Sarah Ferguson's coffee cup #truthbombs

— Darragh Kennedy (@darraghke) May 12, 2015

#lateline @albericie not letting Mathius Cormann churn out his usual BS this evening. Many thanks!

— Sir Hojpojj (@Hojpojj) May 12, 2015

Originally published as Federal Budget 2015: ABC Lateline host Emma Alberici fires up in interview with Finance Mathias Cormann