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.
PM Agenda -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) This program is live captioned by Ericsson Access Services. Bill has united us.You need a Government on your side and we will be that government.In a historic to Indigenous land.

This is Sky News live. Australia's news channel. Now Sky News coverage of election 2016 continues.

Live, this is M - PM Agenda with David Speers.It's 4:00 in Canberra, 2pm in Petr - Perth. Welcome to PM Agenda. The PM seizes on the interception of an asylum seeker boat to warn Labor's plans to scrap temporary visas will encourage people smugglers. Who's faced more abuse over their position on gay marriage? Penny Wong says she's been on the receiving end of bigotry and hatred. Scott Morrison, who opposes gay marriage, says he has too. And Tasmanian place find a body in floodwaters in Launceston. Authorities believe it is that of 63-year-old Peter Watson who went missing earlier this month. There once was a time you may recall when the Government refused to comment on so-called operational matters, on water matters when it waim to asylum seekers and whether boats were being turned back. Take a look.I'm not going to comment on operations on the water.But with only 10 days to go in a very tight election contest, and Labor trying to scare everyone about Medicare as we know, the Government has seized upon the interception late last week of an asylum seeker vessel that was making its way from Vietnam, trying to get to Australia. In fact, it's not only made this public, it was splashed on the front of the Daily Telegraph today. The boat was intercepted in the Timor Sea. About 20 people onboard. They were intercepteded by a Navy frigate and Border Force vessel. The vessel they were on were scuttled at sea. The PM was more than happy to give some details about this today.We've turned back 28 boats, this is total 734 passengers have been turned back in their people smuggling ventures. There were 21 on this vessel and they have been returned to Vietnam and we thank the Government there for their cooperation in ensuring the safe return of those people. As you know, there is also a vessel in Aceh.Now the PM says the threat posed by people smugglers right now is greater than ever. Even though Labor supports offshore processing and even though it says it will turn back boat there's is a policy difference. Labor says it will get rid of temporary protection visas for those refugees who are here in Australia already. Those who came under the Rudd and Gillard governments, around 30,000 of them, on temporary protection visas Labor has indicated most would receive permanent residency. That only applies to those who are already here. Anyone coming would presumably still be turned back or sent offshore but Malcolm Turnbull says this sends the wrong signal to people smugglers right now.The Labor Party has announced that they are going to abolish temporary protection visas and this will mean that the 30,000 asylum seekers who came by boat under the Labor Government, who are in Australia, will get permanent residence.This is proof positive that the Liberals are run out of anything positive to say about themselves. Sending out a signal to people smugglers that somehow there is some lack of national will to deter people smugglers, they should be ashamed of themselves. Giving the business model of people smugglers a shot in the arm by playing tawdry politics. This is about turning boats back, we will do what is requireded to deter the people smugglers full stop.Can Bill Shorten complain about scare campaigns at this point. He's spent the last few days scaring everyone about Coalition plans to privatise Medicare even though Malcolm Turnbull has spent the last few days ruling that out. Today the Opposition Leader has broadened or shifted his argument when he said privatisation, he's talking about patients paying more out of pocket when they visit the GP.Labor is against the increasing cost of healthcare being put on family budgets. We're against making families pay more for Medicare. The fact of the matter is that if the Liberals are re-elected on July 2, you will pay more for your healthcare.Well if paying more out of pocket is privatisation, many of us have been living with privatisation then for quite a long time. The reality is bulk-billing is actually higher now than it was under Labor. Speaking of scare campaigns, we've also seen Bill Shorten and the Labor Party in recent days warning about what might happen if the Coalition goes ahead with its promise of a plebiscite on same-sex marriage. Bill Shorten raised this in his campaign launch speech on Sunday. Penny Wong too has been well, talking a lot about this in recent days as well about the sort of hatred and bigotry that will be unleashed if we have a nationally taxpayer-funded campaign for and against gay marriage. Here she was last night.Mr Turnbull and Mr Commentators on this subject don't understand that for gay and lesbian Australians, hate speech is not abstract. It's real and words are not the only weapons wielded by some of those who harbour animosity towards LGBTI Australians. Assaults and worse are not unknown in this country, even today. Many same-sex couples don't hold hands in the street because they don't know what reaction they will get. Some hide who they are for fear of the consequences at home, at work, at school. Not one straight politician advocating a plebiscite on marriage equality knows what that is like. Well, Scott Morrison says he does know what it's like to face bigotry. The Treasurer is, of course, opposed to same-sex marriage and he was responding to some of what Penny Wong had to say there when he appeared on radio this morning.I understand the concern Penny is raising. I know it from personal experience having been exposed to that sort of hatred and bigotry for the views I've taken from others who have a different view to me but I think the best way is for us all to have a say on this, deal with it and move on.I think it's regrettable that Scott Morrison's felt the need or the relevance deprivation to include himself in Penny Wong's remarkable speech. I do accept that people of faith sometimes do get a hard time. I do accept that. People are entitled to their views in this country and people of religious faith are entitled to respect just like people who hold other views. But what I don't understand is why the Treasurer of Australia feels the need to sort of drive across two paddocks, cross 3 rivers, to get to a bridge to talk about Penny Wong's remarkable speech.Who knows? Maybe Scott Morrison has faced the same sort of bigotry that Penny Wong has, undoubtedly Australia's most well known openly gay senior politician. Either way, Malcolm Turnbull isn't concerned about the prospect of any violence, hatred, bigotry being unleashed if he goes ahead with this plebiscite on gay marriage.I respect the common sense and the values and the decency of the Australian people. I respect the people that I serve enough to believe that they can have a civil conversation about this issue. Mr Shorten plainly does not.The PM has been challenged, though, by one of his own Liberal senators on this issue. You may recall on Monday night the PM was appearing on the Q&A program when he was asked about comments by Cory Bernardi on same-sex marriage and he said that he had had firm discussions with a number of colleagues. Well, Cory Bernardi says by saying he'd had firm discussions with a number colleagues, Turnbull gave him explicit support to the claim:

Now yesterday, Bill Shorten refused to go on Eddie McGuire's radio program in Melbourne after the comments made by the Collingwood President about wanting to drown a female journalist, comments he's since apologised for. Today Bill Shorten agreed to go on the radio program of Kyle Sandilands in Sydney. Kyle Sandilands may not have said he would like to drown a female journalist u be he's had controversial things to say over time.Why do you think he's scared of FM shows?Some fat slag on the Telegraph website, sorry, on your hair is very '90s and blouse. You haven't got that much titty to have that low-cut blouse. Change your image and watch your mouth or I will hunt you down. Have you had sex?I already told you the story. I got raped when I was 12 years old.Is that the only experience you've had? You sound like an absolute clown telling the guy to bugger off back to Hollywood or we will kill his dogs. You sound like an - an insensitive banker. The conversations did turn to the usual stuff, you will hear there things about, well, where he's had sex and indeed whether he'd ever been to a strip club.Never have I ever been inside a strip club.I have. Kyle has.Heaps of times. We know Rudd was. You never?Once or twice. Way back in the day. Uni days.Sometimes -I left once I real ietz - real ietzed what it was.He may have only been joking about not realising he was in a strip club. These venues rarely disguise what they are about at the door. Kevin Rudd was probably the politician with the most famous strip club visit and he always insisted he wasn't in a strip club at the time.I made a foolish mistake. It was 4 years ago. I had by that stage drunk too much and we ended up not a at a bar but a nightclub and the rest is history. We can't actually recall anything that you wouldn't see in most pubs across Australia but that doesn't absolve me for going in that door. I called Terese my wife, the next day, explained to her what happened and told her I'd been a bit of a goose.In fairness it didn't do Kevin Rudd any harm at the time back in that election campaign. Tom colonel has been following Bill Shorten this week. He's with me now in Sydney. Tom, these FM radio interviews, they can be high-risk, they can be high reward though in trying to tap into a lot of un decided voters who may not be following politics closely. Has he done many of them? Does he do them well? Do they work well for him? He's done a few of them. Only earlier this week he did one with Nova in Melbourne. He'd done Nova before and you could tell as soon as he came on there was a rapport. They said welcome back mate. We can't believe Malcolm won't come on but you will. If you can get this sort of exposure to voters, it is valuable. You are tapping into people that are not normally engaged in politics. On that Nova program as well, the toughest question he got on Medicare was Bill, can you explain to us what happens when they privatise Medicare. And the follow up was along the lines of how are you going to stop it? You can get a bit of a free run. We saw on Kyle and Jackie O not what he got. We had questions as well what about a bit of copulation in the laundry room. Not the sort of questions you can even bat away successfully, I don't think, David. You've got these questions put to you. This is a race to be PM, isn't it? You don't like very prime ministerial being asked these questions and given the history of Kyle and Jackie O I'm not sure what anyone was expecting. I dare say we won't see Bill Shorten on there as well and I dare say we won't see the PM Malcolm Turnbull on that particular program. Who knows, maybe a few vorts out there thought Bill Shorten was a good sport and he's won a few votes over there but pretty un comfortable. I think that was obvious by the way he swatted away the question can you name the strip clubs, can you name them. He said it was a long time ago I won't. Maybe that was a reflection on him thinking that probably wasn't the best idea.Probably the smartest way to deal with it at that point. You're right, why do you go on those programs, you know you're going to be asked about copulation in the laundry room. What about the seats that Bill Shorten's targeting so far this week, final two weeks of the campaign? Can we read much into where he is this week?Interesting that yesterday in Melbourne he only targeted a couple and both of them Labor seats. There's been plenty of talk that perhaps in Victoria the CFA issue is really hurting. In some of the marginals they want to win such as Corangamite, this sort of semiregional seat, if you like, and the volunteer issue between the Country Fire Authority and the union, that's not playing out well at all and that's some of the feedback we're getting. Interesting today as well, only one seat Bill Shorten visited this morning, the seat of Reid. Clearly Labor thinks they've got something there to head along there. And they were duelling trucks going along around and around the block, one with the Labor candidate and one with the local member. And you've got the Liberal Party launch there this Sunday. This close out to the election, and you've got the Opposition Leader going to one seat only. He did meet later on in the day with some victims of financial services but you would have thought this close to the poll when you're seen as behind, you do a bit of a rush. Perhaps you go to 4 or 5 seats in a day and I say without realising I might be creating a bit more work for me and my colleagues but it's probably more of what you would expect. It's perhaps a sign in the modern day it's more up to the ground level work, if you like, from candidates and if Bill Shorten wants to put out this Medicare message he doesn't want to dilute it by going through 5 or 6 seats, goes to a GP surgery instead, puts out that message and lets his candidate do the rest. I thought swrun was going to clock me. But go back to you.Tom, you take care there, I hope you're OK. Looks like you are. The perils of live television. Now Barnaby Joyce, the Deputy PM, the Nationals leader was st a National Press Club today. He did make a few spending announcements, in total more than $100 million and they go to National Party heartland issues. Another $44 million to boost assistance for families with kids in remote areas who need to go to boarding school, increase assistance for them who are eligible. But also one that has been more contentious is the issue of student income support and how long you have to, well, work to prove that you are independent of your parents' support. At the moment it's 18 months, Barnaby Joyce has said $83 million commitment to make it 14 months. That will only be one gap year, specially, you'd have to take to prove you're independent to receive income support. As always with Barnaby Joyce, it was the more colourful lines in the answers to the questioning that gained more interest including his views on the potential Australian agriculture has as the dining boom becomes a bigger thing in this part of the world.The world is looking for protein. Their standard of living is increasing, their buying capacity is increasing and they're searching for protein. Guess where one of the great est venues of that production of protein? Here, our nation, our nation. And you can see it, if it walks, if it's not human, somebody around the world wants to eat it.Well, he may be right about that. Some other news, police have discovered a body during the search for a man missing in floodwaters near Launceston. 63-year-old Peter Watson had been missing since June 7 when he was swepted swept away in floodwaters. His partner was airlifted to safety at the time. A body was discovered in the South Esk river around midday. While a postmortem is to be carried out police believe it's the body of Mr Watson. After the break we will be joined by Mathias Cormann and Andrew Leigh. Plenty to talk about from asylum seekers to gay marriage and when we will be see those Labor costings.

You're watching PM Agenda. Plenty to talk about as we were canvassing before the break and I'm pleased to say with us this afternoon, both here in the Canberra studio, the Finance Minister Mathias Cormann and the Shadow Assistant Treasurer Andrew Leigh. Thanks for joining us. Asylum seekers, Malcolm Turnbull said today 28 boats have been trying to come to Australia, 734 passengers in total under the Coalition's watch. So they haven't tried to stop coming here.But we've been successful in stopping them coming here and that's because we had a very clear policy framework with temporary protection visas with regional processing and with a commitment to turn the boats around where it's safe to do so. And of course what we know is that more than 50 Labor members and candidates in open defiance against Bill Shorten's assertion that he would continue the strong policy framework of the Coalition.A few candidates overnight have been expressing -Including in ACT.Let me ask you, Andrew Leigh, would this specific boat, from what we know, the boat was intercepted, people taken aboard the Navy and Border Force vessels, their boat was scuttled in the water and flown back to Vietnam after being processed at sea, is that what Labor would do?We've said we'd pursue the same set of policies the Coalition would in terms of deterring people coming to Australia. But we don't believe that it's necessary to have people locked up in punitive conditions in Manus and Nauru in order to achieve that.But on the turn backs though, you'd do the same? Scuttle the boat, process them at sea and fly them back home?We debated at our national conference last year, but Bill Shorten's argument carried the day. Labor's committed to offshore processing, to the refugee resettlement agreement and in extreme cases to boat turn backs. These are operational matters you're asking about but in terms of policy we've made that decision on refugee resettlement and turn backs.The big difference you have is temporary protection visas for those that are here already. Would this make a big difference, do you think, if there were no temporary protection visas, those people here were allowed to stay permanently? They're a fundamental Pilar of our border protection framework. That's what takes the product away from people smugglers to sell.Doesn't sending them off shore send that, or sending them back?All 3 pillars are been central to our policy protection framework. You take one away you obviously weaken the broad - border protection policies we have in place. Andrew says they have the same policies as the Coalition. They don't. They don't have a commitment to temporary protection visas and Kevin Rudd in the lead up to the 2007 election was saying the same thing that Bill Shorten is saying. He was talking tough on border protection and after the election, the left of the Labor Party got on top of Kevin Rudd and he went weak at the knees and we've had 50,000 illegal people here arrive illegally.On the temporary protection visas, Andrew Leigh, do they send the wrong message by Labor saying we'll get rid of them, you can stay permanently if you're here?There's no deterrent impact on people who might come to Australia from mistreating people who are already in Australia. The deterrent impact from people making the journey comes in the refugee resettlement agreement primarily but also partially from turn backs. But it is also important to make the point that Labor's policy is different from the koemings's in terms of our generosity. We double the refugee intake, we'd give another $450 million to the UNHCR. We have mandatory reporting of child abuse in our detention facilities and we'd have a children's commissioner in place. So all of those things represent our willingness to be decent with those who we accept but also to make sure that people don't lose their lives coming to Australia.People smugglers are able to tell potential victims that as long as they get to Australia they will be able to say, that is the incentive that people smugglers have been using to encourage people to get onto those leaky boats, taking temporary protection visas away, helping people smugglers sell a product of if you get to Australia you can stay in Australia. That is what has put so many people at risk when they went onto leaky boats on the sea. There's no evidence of that. You look back through the introduction of TPVs -The evidence is 50,000 people arrived here illegally. 1,200 people drowned at sea when you were last in government. More than 800 boats arrived here illegally.You look at the introduction of TPVs in 1999 and they have almost no impact on asylum seeker flows. After the horrendous Siev X disaster, the Howard Government made policy changes which seemed to have an impact on asylum seeker flows. TPVs are a way of treating people who have arrived in Australia. They don't have an impact on -Let's move on.You're confirming that you don't have the same strong board - border protection polls as the Coalition.In terms of people coming to Australia, we support turnbacks.If you're saying Labor wouldn't - there's no point punishing or penalising those that are here to try to stop others coming, could you apply that to Manus Island and Nauru as well and say there's no point punishing them to try to stop others coming?The point is to say to people don't get on a leaky boat because if you do you won't be resettled in Australia. That's what has the deterrent effect. That's why after Labor put that policy in place in 2013 we saw a 90% fall in asylum seeker boat arrivals. That's a Labor policy, put in place and reconfirmed at our last election. We need to move on. Gay marriage. Mathias Cormann you are opposed. Have you suffered the same sort of bigotry that Scott Morrison says he has?Well look, I've got a personal view which is well known and I support the Coalition policy to have a plebiscite should we be successful at the next election. In Australia there's a diversity of views on the issue of same-sex marriage and in a democracy the way to resolve a diversity of views is at the ballot box. That is the appropriate way forward.I'm just wondering whether you've received any sort of personal abuse or bigotry because of your position? Australia's a democracy. There's a diversity of views and of course, in a democracy a die versity of views gets debated and that's appropriate and we would expect in the lead up to the plebiscite there will be a debate in Australia about the right way forward and ultimately there will be a vote and that will determine the way forward and that will hopefully achieve a more permanent resolution of this issue than has been achieved so far. I mean this has come before the Parliament on a number of occasions now. Every single time the Parliament has reconfirmed the current definition of marriage. The Coalition has decided in order to facilitate a more permanent resolution the best way to deal with this is to put it to a vote for the Australian people to settle.Will you follow that?I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here. I'm on the record of saying if Australia support same-sex marriage then I will respect that verdict. I'm long on the record.I think he said yes. Would the Liberal Party have a conscience vote in the next Parliament on this?You know, we - obviously all of that detail is yet to be announced. What we have said -I thought that was dealt with in the last party room conference.On the other side of the election there will be a plebiscite and the plebiscite will determine obviously the way forward.But I thought it was decided that you would have a conscience vote?That was not decided. What the Coalition has decideside that we would have a plebiscite should we be re-elected. Andrew Leigh, do you think there would be the sort of hatred and violence that some fear if we do have a plebiscite on this issue? It's certainly a risk, David. You look at the Irish experience where you saw young gays and lesbians accessing mental health services in increased numbers during the period of the referendum.Was there violence?I'm not sure on terms of violence.That's the claim being made, what's the evidence that there's going to be some violence? There were increased calls for help to suicide help lines by young gays and lesbians who faced campaign essentially saying that their own sexuality was wrong. I don't want to see young Australian gays and lesbians be subjected to that. I think Parliament should just -Just to be the clear, your concern is more about the anguish that gay and lesbian Australians will face through this process rather than actual violence per se?The violence itself is a possibility. You open up -But based on what because as you've heard the PM and others say, they have greater faith in the Australian people?Well, I think that once you open up this sort of a debate, once you give taxpayer dollars to haters, then you've got a real risk in this campaign. There's certainly aspects of those who argue against same-sex marriage through decent views, but then there's a nasty strand there. I don't want young days and lesbians to be subjected to that, particularly, David, given that some in the Coalition party room say that they will just ignore the results of the plebiscite. Regardless of what it comes through with, they will vote exactly the same way.Let's turn to Medicare and try and settle this argument that's been going for a few days now. In fact, let me ask you both, why is outsourcing or privatising the payment system of Medicare such a bad idea? Andrew Leigh, you first.David, this is the very heart of Medicare.The payment system.Absolutely. The payment system is critical to Medicare. Labor has always supported Medicare, the Coalition spent 25 years trying to destroy Medicare. Let's get to this question though, why would outsourcing, and improving it at the same time, be such a bad idea?I don't know of any evidence, David, that would improve it. I certainly know that it would continue down a pathway the Coalition's long wanted to go down. In 2009 Malcolm Turnbull said that he would like to see everyone with private health insurance. In 2014 you saw the Coalition bring down a budget which had GP tax in it. You've seen the Coalition at every turn look to decrease the public role.Let's stick to this issue about the payments system, would it be such a bad idea?Bill Shorten is running a des operate lay on this. Bill Shorten knows we're not privatising Medicare. He clearly hasn't got anything to talk about it when it comes to the economy, jobs and growth. He has already had to admit he will deliver bigger deficit and higher taxes so he doesn't want to talk about that. Chris Bowen, when he was the Labor Human Services Minister looked at the appropriate ways to modernise the Medicare payment system -Is that such a bad idea?We looked at the appropriate way to modernise the Medicare payments system. We will be doing it in house. We will be ensuring that the Medicare payment system is as user-friendly as possible for patients.Why is that? Is it because you don't trust the private sector to handle that information, I'm trying to get a why?We've looked at this whole issue and we will be modernising Medicare in house, in public hands, that is our commitment. But I mean this is ish issue, Bill Shorten has set out to deceive the Australian people. He was called out today for his lie about a national president of the AMA who clearly spelled out that what Bill Shorten is trying to say is completely false.Do you accept that, that the Government, the Coalition won't actually privatise the payment system? They've made that pretty clear now for a few days.Believing that the Coalition don't want to privatise Medicare is like believing the Rolling Stones are going to stop touring. Frankly -Trust me, they will.They want to do it, they always want to do it. Their fans want to do it. The Coalition have been against Medicare at every turn. This freezing of the rebates is effectively increasing the private share. It requires an inquiry out of pocket costs.If freezing the rebate is effectively privatising Medicare why did you do it?We did it for a matter of months. This has been in the deep freeze for 6 years.Was that a temporary privatisation?You're comparing 6 months with 6 years, really, what the Government is doing in freezing the rebates -If the out of pocket costs equals privatisation, we've had privatisation then for a long time.Look what's happened under the Coalition.Bulk-billing rates are higher than under Labor.At the last election 2013, you had Tony Abbott saying no cuts to health and then immediately goes around and rips $10 billion out of hospitals. If you believed that then maybe you should believe Malcolm Turnbull when he says they won't privatise Medicare.Let me get to what is still a big outstanding question in this election campaign. When are we going to see Labor's costings?We haven't seen bottom line from either party, David. You will see Labor's costings ahead of polling day and you won't see them on the last Thursday before polls close. When will we see them?Which is when you saw the Coalition's costings.So earlier than Thursday next week, can we assume this week or will it just be a day or two earlier than Thursday?People will get to see them well before the blackout period which is when the Coalition put out their costings last time around. They were too scared to have them subjected to public scrutiny. They waited until the media blackout period, the Thursday before polling day before they finally put them out. Frankly, neither party has put out its bottom line. I wouldn't be surprised if ours -Firstly, we delivered the budget on 3 May, which showed that we were paying for all of our spending commitments with savings and other parts in the budget, which was ticked off by the Secretaries of Treasury and Finance independently in the preelection economic and fiscal outlook. There have been additional commitments in the election period which are significantly less than the unfunded spending spree that Bill Shorten has been on. We will pay for those with savings in other parts of the budget. More than pay for those in savings in other parts of the budget. And you will see that in good time before the election. Zbll Thursday next week? Some time obviously between now and the election.So it might be Thursday or Friday night before the election?I'm not going to give you the date today. I know you would like me to announce it.I would like you both to announce it.We've released a budget. That budget was given the tick of approval by the Secretaries of Treasury and Finance. Labor has already admitted that they will deliver bigger deficits which 3 rment - respected economists have said will threaten our AAA credit rating. That's why Bill Shorten doesn't want to talk about the economy, that's why he wants to run a dishonest and deceptive campaign on Medicare.You will get something from Labor that you won't get from the Coalition. That is 10-year numbers instead of 4-year numbers. We have savings that build over time, negative gearing and capital gearing -You won't include in that 10-year figure what you will spend on hospitals.We will include all of our promises.So you do have a 10-year funding commitment on hospitals.All our funding will be in the 10-year numbers and from the Coalition you won't get a 10-year number because they have like a stick of dynamite with a long fuse a company tax cut that blows out the budget in the 10-year period. The way you had a budget to boost investment and economy.0.1% to households.He wrote opinion pieces on it in Australian Financial Review and in fact he said it was important to spread it out to bigger businesses when he was arguing against the paper.And if you look at economists you ask Australia's top economists, 2 out of 3 say you should do education rather than a company tax cut. Henry - ken Henry said the beneficiary is the workers.Big business have been a little concerned about the PM's language saying if you don't want the tax cut to go to the biggest business chuck us out in 3 years. Is that really the message?Obviously we're putting forward our 10-year enterprise tax plan which will boost investment and growth and increase real wages over time. We want to deliver our 10-year enterprise tax plan and we would like to see people re-elected at this election and hopefully at the 2 or 3 subsequent elections. But the point the PM was making was a self-evident point that over a political system you
10-year period in the Australian political system you have 3 elections, because every 3 years the Government appropriately has to front to the Australian people and the Australian people get to decide whether they continue to support our plan for jobs and growth or whether they want to go for the alternative which doesn't have a plan for the economy, which wants to jack up taxes. It's a 10-year plan with a 4-year costing. Primary school kid could tell there's - You've learned from your leader how to lie, clearly.On that pleasant note.Looking forward to your 10-year costing, if you can match Labor with 10-year costings.We are looking forward to seeing the costings of both of you. People are voting early and I'm sure as soon as we can see what the impact will be on both sides that will be great. Thank you both for joining us this afternoon. We'll take a quick break, back with more.

Alright, time to bring in our panel this afternoon. Kerry Chikarovski and Darren Barnett and a Labor source tells me today is your birthday, Darren, is that correct? Look, I must say, David, thank you very much for pointing that out and I'm overwhelmed by the response. Frankly from all sides of politics, so thank you very much.Happy birthday to you, I'm sure there's no better way you'd like to spend it in the middle of an election campaign. Talking politics is exactly what you'd like to be doing. A story that's dropped on the Sydney Morning Herald. It's about a Liberal Party fund-raiser and an apology the parties now issued to no less than Lucy Turnbull. A fund-raiser that was charging $3,000 a head, and she attended it and was happy to do so, but the point is they billed it her capacity, at least, not as the PM's wife but as the chief commissioner of what is it, the greater Sydney commission, which is a government, a State Government appointment and, you know, that, I guess, crosses the line of what you can do with a political fund-raiser having a government appointee there.From my perspective it's inappropriate to promote someone in a government role in that way for what is explicitly a fund-raiser and I feel sorry for Lucy Turnbull. She clearly didn't know that she had been promoted in that way. She said to the reporter from Fairfax out the front that she thought that she was there in the capacity as the PM's consort and that would have been entirely appropriate. So given that the invitation came out from Michaelia Cash, I think she's got questions to answer. I know the Liberal Party is now distancing itself from the event and has apologised to Mrs Turnbull. But, it's not a good look.I think they're donating the cash that was raised to a charity, which Kerry Chikarovski, is probably the best way to deal with at this point. But someone's stuffed up sending out invites flagging Lucy Turnbull in her government role?Well look, and I would think at the moment the Labor Party are doing what the Liberal Party are doing and that is they're raising significant funds from their supporters but you've got to be really clear about, you know, the people you're asking and in what capacity and to embarrass the PM's wife like this is not a good look for the Liberal Party if they were the ones who sent out the invitations. Look, I know Lucy would be scrupulous about her roles. She attended a function that I attended recently -She's done nothing wrong here.She attended a function for Our Watch, that's in her capacity as, you said, the consort of the PM. So she's done absolutely nothing wrong and I think somebody needs to take a fairly close look at how this happened.Consort of the PM.I wouldn't use that word but that's what Darren said she is. Did she describe herself that way?That's her quote, not mine.Now, perhaps that segues us to gay marriage. Kerry Chikarovski, what did you make of Scott Morrison responding to Penny Wong, her claims overnight by saying I too have faced bigotry, you know, white middle class heterosexual Christian, do you accept that he's faced bigotry on anything like the scale of Penny Wong?Look, I think that both sides of the debate are facing some criticism and I actually think it's fair to say that the people who support gay marriage are facing criticism and perhaps some unnecessarily harsh language. But it is also true that those who don't support it are being accused of, for example, being homophobic. You don't necessarily not support gay marriage and be homophobic. So I think that there is scope for the plebiscite to be conducted with a lot of decency. I was trying to find out today, David, and yu might know the answer, or Darren, I tried to find out whether the accusations that a plebiscite of this sort will only provoke hatred and anger and attack on gay people. Did that happen? In Ireland? The Irish have just gone through a whole legal process around this and I couldn't find descriptions on the internet of that having happened to those who were advocating gay marriage. It's a good point. Darren, Andrew Leigh was just telling us there's a high demand for support services for gay and lesbian people in Ireland but it doesn't seem to be any record, maybe we're wrong here, but doesn't seem to be any record of a high level of violence during that referendum campaign?Well, we all hope that everyone will be on their best behaviour during that debate but, you know, it's hard to say how it's all going to unfold. But to go back to your earlier point, I think it's ridiculous to equate any sort of oppression that Scott Morrison may have received compared to that of Penny Wong. It's overreach from Scott Morrison and I don't think their level in the debate in that sense.Asylum seekers, now this difference between the two major parties, a lot of claims that Labor wouldn't turn back boats and we can argue that but we do know the big difference is Labor wouldn't have temporary protection visas. Darren Barnett, you first on this. It is a difference, it does give the government an opening, doesn't it, to say well there is something that people smugglers could use to market at the very least to asylum seekers?It does but by the same token, I think in many ways today's story is the politics of the timing of an announcement. We've had 1,000 days of radio silence on asylum seekers and then suddenly it's no longer an on water matter and the PM volunteered this information without even being questioned at his press conferenced. So what has changed to suddenly make it publicly digestible set of facts and the answer is politics. As we get closer to an election, I think we're going to see the boat card played more and more by Malcolm Turnbull and his ministers.It's certainly a stark difference, isn't it, Kerry, when for a wrong - long time there it was on water operational matters can't comment today. They couldn't have done any more to promote a boat was intercepted and turned back.I suspect that's as much message to the people smugglers as Els where in the community. I know there are politics around this, obviously. But the problem for the Labor Party But is that if this is starting now, 2 weeks out from an election, or less than 2 weeks out from an election, the message that must be being given out in the areas where these people are starting to come from again is oh, look, you know, there might be a change of government, there might be a softening of the attitude so let's get in early, let's start going now. So whilst I absolutely accept there's politics in this, and there always was going to be politics and much the same as we're about to talk about Medicare, the reality is that the messages must be starting to go out that the Labor Party will soften things. And the TPVs are part of that. So if you're actually saying to people, and this is, you know, a very complicated message to explain about what's the difference between a TPV and other forms of visa and your opportunities, if you're a people smuggler all you're saying is the Labor Party are going to make it easier for you to get in the country and that's the message that desperate people will be listening to.Darren, I've got to say, I was never convinced of the need for the secrecy around turnbacks anyway. I think putting it out there that yes, we've intercepted and turned back a boat, you would think achieve the aim the Government wants here, to telegraph that message to the people smugglers.True, but I think once again we are less than 2 weeks from an election and everything has a political component. What I think is that it shows that Labor's Medicare campaign has been working -That's why -This is like for like. You play one card, we'll play another.Do you accept that, Kerry, that this is trying to at the least shift the argument away from health and Medicare?I have no doubt that the Government doesn't want to be talking about Medicare, although interestingly enough, I went online today and Heath Aston did a vox pop at a hospital to ask if people believed that Bill Shorten was correct and Malcolm Turnbull was going to privatise Medicare and of the people they put on - and of course it's a selective one, one assumes it could be selective the way it's going to come out, but only one person had any vague belief that the Coalition was going to privatise Medicare.So it hasn't worked.I'm happy for the Labor Party to keep on spending their money on that because I don't think the ads are working. I do have a concern, I'm told that there are calls going in to elderly people in marginal Seitz - seats with that message and that's all about frightening them into voting for the Labor Party and against the Coalition and I don't like those sort of tactics. You know I don't like those sort of tactics, I've said that before.As opposed to frightening people that the boats might be coming again when essentially the trade has stopped. But you're talking about a kid in a hospital, you know, who has clearly got a lot of stress on their shoulders and the family as well. That was not a good look yesterday, I thought. But anyway, politicising children, Darren, not even - I mean you wouldn't support politicising kids like that with a camera in their face.It's a very risky exercise, I agree.I think we can read into that brief comment from Darren. Now a final one, Kerry, you know, you've been there, done that, politicians going on a radio show like Kyle and Jackie O it's always risky terrain and you kind of know what you're going to get and so questions about, I think one of them was have you ever had sex up against a washing machine and then have you ever been to a strip club and so on. That's kind of, you know you're going to get that, right, so no great surprise. Is it worth the risk, though?Well you're appealing to a different demographic and I suppose that's why you would do it. You're appealing to a younger audience who obviously think those things are amusing. The problem you've got is that if your answer is something which the general media think is more interesting, you then become the story of the day. I mean I actually went on the ABC and confessed to smoking marijuana. That wasn't one of those programs, it was regional ABC. I then became the story of the day because I'd smoked dope. Probably not the response that my media team wanted when I went to a regional interview with the ABC. But that's the risk you run. Look, you know, I think it's kind of like he should have just said yep, I've been to a strip club as did every other 18 and 19-year-old boy that I knew. But he didn't inhale.That was the problem with the response. The response was too much like a Clinton, oh, yes, I didn't inhale, I didn't enjoy it.I didn't realise I was in the strip club, please. When you walk through the door you know where you are. It looked like he was tongue in cheek. Of course you know you're in a strip club. And that's the problem that it becomes reported in hard copy because you don't actually get the information.Kevin Rudd was a bit of an injoke about Kevin Rudd because he famously and unbelievably kept arguing that he didn't realise when he was in the New York strip club that it was a strip club.Because he was too drunk to remember.The thing with Kevin Rudd, though, that humanised him with the electorate. It was one of those kind of amazing moments in politics where it became a net positive for Kevin and that was sort of, you know, to the bewilderment of many that it humanised him and he became more popular, not less popular.On that note of reminiscence we are going to have to wrap it up, Darren Barnett and Kerry Chikarovski.Go the Blues, tonight, State of Origin.I'm with you on that. Happy birthday, Darren. We'll be back after this.

Captions by