Peter Dutton slams union RBA plan

Peter Dutton says the government has ‘gone off the rails’ in backing a CFMEU proposal to consider appointing unionists to the board of the Reserve Bank.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Peter Dutton says the government has “gone off the rails” in backing a CFMEU proposal to consider appointing unionists to the board of the Reserve Bank of Australia, warning such a move would threaten the central bank’s independence.

A motion agreed to at national conference last week stated Labor would consider appointing a more diverse range of RBA board members, including “worker representatives” that could bring to bear their experiences to the body that oversees the country’s interest rates.

Mr Dutton accused the CFMEU of being “the most radical of the unions” and raised alarm over the possibility of their leadership being appointed to the RBA board.

“There’s a place for unions in Australian society – of course there is – but less than 10 per cent of the Australian working population outside the public service are members of the unions,” he told 2GB.

“The disproportionate influence of the unions within the Albanese government is quite remarkable.”

CFMEU national secretary Zach Smith said the Opposition Leader’s comments were “out of touch”.

“Having people with experience representing workers’ interests on the Reserve Bank board is a no-brainer. Peter Dutton is woefully out of touch with everyday Australians who have been smashed by relentless interest rate rises,” he said.

“Australians are wising up to neoliberal lies that insist working people have to be the sacrificial lambs for corporate profits. More diversity on the RBA board is exactly what Australia needs to ensure we have an economy that works for society – not the other way around.”

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the idea was not “especially controversial”.

“When I make appointments to the Reserve Bank Board, It'll weigh up a range of perspectives. I have in the past and I will in the future,” he said.

The looming shake-up of appointments to the RBA raises questions over whether the definition of “full employment” – which currently includes a 4.5 per cent unemployment target – will be revised, given unions’ criticisms that the government should be aiming for 0 per cent unemployment rate.

Then-RBA reserve governor Michele Bullock said in June unemployment “will have to rise” to the 4.5 per cent target to bring inflation under control, sparking outrage from union officials who accused her of being in favour of Australians losing their jobs.

Dr Chalmers attempted to distance himself from the 4.5 per cent target, which he said was only a “technical” figure.

“I’ve made … a very clear distinction between a narrow technical assumption which feeds the forecasts in the budget and our objective for the Australian economy to create a good, secure, well-paid job for everyone who wants one,” he said.

On the prospect of board members from the union movement seeking to change the 4.5 per cent unemployment target, Dr Chalmers said the definition of full employment would be addressed in his Employment White Paper to be released later in the year.