Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
9am with David and Kim -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) The resources sector continues to

boom, so does the Government's take.

Petrol prices continue to skyrocket.

So does the Government's take. The

previous government socked it away,

a massive surplus built. The

Treasurer is awash with coin. What

did we get last night in the first

Budget of the Rudd Government? Are

we about to feel the pain they

warned us to expect? Could this be

the end of their honeymoon? Who were the winners and were the winners and losers?

Joining us to break down the Budget

is new mother for the second time Senator Natasha Stott Despoja. Good

morning. Good morning, guys. Thanks

and congratulations. I know you've

got a nine week old so it's hard

work at the moment. It is a lot of

work at home and at work. This work at home and at work. This is

the thing. You're straight back

into it. Where's the creche at

Parliament House? Unfortunately, we

don't have a creche in Parliament

House and it's not in my office at

the moment. But I think Parliament

should be, you know, leading by

example, showing that we do believe

about working families, we do

support them and childcare in this

place is notoriously difficult, no

creche here, waiting lists of a

year or more outside the building

so we each to supply our own

childcare. You're leaving the

Parliament in eight weeks time Parliament in eight weeks time and

you can go home with paid maternity

leave. If only we had paid

maternity leave. In this budget

there were changes made to the baby

bonus, it's paid incrementability.

But no paid maternity leave. It

increased? It goes town $5,000 as

of July 1 this year but now it's

means tested and I'm sure means tested and I'm sure many

viewers will have strong views

about that. Means testing the baby

bonus doesn't solve the issue of

paid maternity leave. It gets some

savings, not many, about $300

million worth of savings for the

Government each year but it's not

enough. Is it perhaps the first

step towards paid maternity leave?

I know they're talking about plasma

protecting the baby bonus so you

can't go out with your lump sum.

They're paying it incrementably, is

that the first step? Perhaps to

prepare us maybe psychologically

and also economically as a nation

for the concept of the paid

maternity leave. As you know, we're

one of only two OECD countries that

don't have some form of paid

maternity leave. We need to

that is t is proper maternity leave

sow get taxed on your payments, you

get your superannuation payments

continuing and it ensures the

workplace attachment that's so

important for mums, especially

those in the workforce. We're not

there yet and paid maternity leave

would be cheaper if you take into

account taxation than the baby

bonus. It's still more than $1

billion a year in baby bonus

payments and it's not what women

really want and not what men want.

They're different things. Indeed.

You mentioned it would be means

tested. Where's the cut-off point

and does that signal where and does that signal where working families, whoever they are, stops

and the rich start? It's

interesting you say that because

there's a lot of debate today as

what constitutes a working family.

What makes you wealthier? What

makes you richer? Obviously some of

the means testing arrangements seem

to cut in at around $150,000

peranium for families, so the

family tax payment payment B and

the baby bonus, it's going to be

interestingly means tested for six

months on your income the six

months before you have the baby.

And there therein lies the problem.

That's $75,000. There'll still That's $75,000. There'll still be

people saying, "A couple working

who are each earning - I know

$150,000 sounds like a lot for $150,000 sounds like a lot for one

family but there are families who

are still struggling, especially

when they're losing a wage.

Exactly. I've been listening to

stories all morning who say they're

in a family with two parents, two

people in the workforce, teaching

salaries, you know, sends them

right over $100,000, and they've

got maybe three or four children,

yes there's been money into

education, health hasn't been cut,

there are some benefits for there are some benefits for seniors,

but offset by changes. There are

tax cuts as well for middle income

families but what about those big

expenses that we all face?

Education costs which are

increasing, health costs, which are

inevitably increasing and the big

one of course is mortgages, rental

costs, housing generally. So a lot

of the changes in this Budget don't

offset those big costs that

families are coping with and tends families are coping with and

to send people into the income

bracket of being considered

wealthier but doesn't necessarily

mean that they are. That's right.

Just on housing affordability,

there was some - 1.2 billion put

aside for a fund it help new home aside for a fund it help new

buyers into the market. That's got

to be a positive sign. Certainly. I

think some of the measures that the

Government announced before the

Budget and they've delivered on are

very important. Anything to assist

with aleaviation of rental costs,

anything that ensures that first

home buyers are able to get into

the market and have their little

piece of property. All of these

things are important in the same

way that the Government has

invested in infrastructure and

education fund. $10 billion in the education fund. $10 billion

health fund. Indeed. How will that

work? Where's it going it go and

when will it go? I mean there's no

commitment to spending it in any

period of time, is there? No. In

fact I'm a bit confused and I

think the Opposition is wondering

what this means. Are these blank cheques for infrastructure and is

that a good thing? Obviously the

money for education, which is

targeted at universities and

infrastructure and research and

teaching, that will be delivered,

most of it, through what's already

available. The higher education

endowment fund, but in terms of the infrastructure fund generally,

we're not exactly sure how that

will be spent. I think the aim is

to be anti-inflationary. It's not to be anti-inflationary. It's

going to be spent immediately. Not

all this money is being sent into

the economy but is actually going

to be looked at and used for the

purposes of, you know, carefully

scrutinised - we hope - planned infrastructur - and scrutinised - we hope - and

planned infrastructure projects.

But we'll wait and see on that one.

You said it was - it's planned to

be anti-inflationary and I guess

any Budget wants to - they talked

about trying to curb inflation with

this Budget. Do you believe that this Budget. Do you believe that it

will do that? Will, it's hard to

assess but most economists seem to

be telling us that this is light on

when it comes to anti-inflationary

sentiment in this Budget. If you're releasing money through tax cuts

into the economy - and admittedly it

was an election promise solings

hard to back down on - if you're

doing that, that has a potential

inflationary impact. Even smaller

measures like the childcare rebate,

lifting that and ensuring that is

there's more money going there's more money going into

childcare for families - Up from

30% to 50%. Into that will mean

real assistance for some families

but who's to say childcare centres

won't just put fees or charges won't just put fees or charges up.

That potentially has inflationary

impacts as well. Some measures will

undoubtedly have an inflationary

impact but oval this Government has

seemingly kept its promises, has obviously targeted so-called

working families however we may

define that but there are a few

things missing - paid maternity

leave, assistance for young people.

I think children could have done

better out of this Budget. That's right. For instance on right. For instance on childcare,

you've got to get your kid into the

childcare centre first. That's one

of the issues. Those positions

aren't always available. The debate

about affordable, quality and

accessible childcare will continue

and people will expect the

Government to deliver on those

substantive issues as they, you

know, have an opportunity to

develop policy while they're in

office. I think that paid maternity

leave will come next year but it's

a long time coming and certainly

education. Many students on

campuses around Australia in higher

education institutions and vice

chancellors were hoping for some

form of trapsition or other

assistance when it came to so-called voluntary student

unionism so services and clubs and

representation on campus. There's a

few things missing we would have

liked to have seen and pensioners.

They always seem to not get enough.

Exactly. The big reaction from the

Opposition last night, whilst Mr

Swan was bringing down the Budget,

was seniors and carers. There

wasn't enough there for them, was

there? I think there's always more

than we can do as a community for

seniors and certainly there's not

any huge increase in pension

entitlements. Obviously there are

one-off payments including some

travel concessions, changes to the

seniors' health care card but some

seniors out there will lose their

health cards as a consequence of

increaseed scrutiny and some

compliance changes that will affect

them negatively. Utilities

allowance, that's a positive thing.

That's been increased as has the

telephone allowance but fleas more

we could be doing for real low

income earners. This Budget seems

to be targeting middle Australia.

It's something you've pushed for

and that is for adoptive parents to

be included in the baby bonus and

I'm pleased that's going to happen.

This is a real win, Kim, for my

party. We've lobbied for years

get the baby bonus not get the baby bonus not only

initially available to adoptive

parents and then children up to parents and then children up to the

age of two. Now we've age of two. Now we've been

campaigning to get it for those

parents who adopt children over parents who adopt children over the

age of two and last night the Government delivered and that means

up to the age of 16, if you're

adopting, if you adopt a child up

to the age of 16 you can get the

baby bonus and I'm thrilled so to

all those adoptive parents out

there we're trying to tell you are

as important as people who have

biological children. Well said.

Enjoy your retirement from

Parliament. She's not retired yet.

She has eight weeks of very hard

work left. And who knows what will happen then. It's a pleasure