Mr Abbott, Nick Butterly, from the West Australian. Premier Colin Barnett said this week that he would like to see you sign up to his plan for WA to get a greater share of GST. What's your response to that and do you think, yes or no, if WA should get a greater share of GST payments?

 

 

Well, Nick, I like and admire and respect Premier Barnett, as I do all my Coalition Premiers. They are all doing a good job and part of their job is to fight ferociously for what they see is the best interests of their State. So I applaud Premier Barnett for going into bat for the people of Western Australia. Now, my job is to be a national leader, not a parochial one. So, what I'll be doing is carefully considering the national interest, not the interest of any particular State. What I do want, is to see a system which is fair and which is seen to be fair and above all else, what we need is more transparency because at the moment what goes on inside the black box of the Commonwealth Grants Commission is literally unknown to everyone outside that charmed circle.

 

Deborah Nesbitt, Thomson Reuters. On your plan to remove the carbon tax you've said that if you're elected in September, but you face a hostile Senate that won't pass the bill to abolish carbon pricing, that you will call a second double dissolution election in 2014. Isn't that akin to saying that the Australian people…you don't trust them to know their own minds, to elect the right parliament? Doesn't that show an arrogant disregard for the Australian people's right and ability to elect the parliament that they want in September first time?

 

 

Well, Deborah, if the Coalition has a majority in the House of Representatives and is in a position to form a government, we will have the clearest possible mandate to repeal the carbon tax. Now, I doubt very much that a Labor Party which has lost an election, which is a referendum on a carbon tax, would wish to perpetuate a long period in opposition by mindlessly rejecting the people's verdict. I doubt very much that the Labor Party would do that. I have sufficient respect for the political intelligence of my Labor colleagues on the other side of the Parliament to think that they would not want to lose election after election by persisting in a tax which has been rejected by the Australian people. But if I turn out to be wrong in that judgment and the Senate does frustrate the mandate of an elected government, there are mechanisms in the constitution that allow deadlocks to be resolved and I would not hesitate from using them because the public are sick of governments which chop and change. They're sick of politicians who say one thing and do the opposite. They want someone to lead them who does what he or she actually says and if it takes a double dissolution to do it I won't hesitate to have one. I don't believe it will but if that's what it takes that's what will be done.

 

 

Michelle Grattan, from The Age. Mr Abbott, you've declined to have a reshuffle in Opposition, will you…

 

 

Sorry, Michelle?

 

 

….declined to have a reshuffle in Opposition of your frontbench team. Will you take your whole team from Shadow Ministry into the new Ministry if you're elected or will you be looking for Ministries for Arthur Sinodinos, Mal Brough and Christian Porter and while I would normally obey Steve in all things, your mention of The Lodge does prompt me to ask whether you will live there?

 

 

Well, it would be an honour to live there, Michelle. As far as I'm concerned it would be absolutely first rate accommodation. It would be a home fit for a Prime Minister. I want to make that absolutely clear. Second thing is that I haven't substantially reshuffled my frontbench because I'm very happy with the job that my frontbench is doing, all of them. I can't think of a single member of my frontbench who isn't doing a good job. Some of them are more often in the media than others because there are some subjects where we want to talk to the portfolio constituents rather than go out and dramatise things, but all of my frontbenchers, regardless of how many times they're mentioned in the media, in my judgment, are doing a good job. So, I think all of them can expect to go into government in their current positions.

 

 

Phillip Hudson from the Herald Sun. Your central theme in this speech is trust and not telling fibs. You went through a list of promises and then you said you can trust me to keep these promises. You also mentioned part of your record in government and one of the things you were proud of is the Medicare Safety Net. I want to ask you when you were Health Minister you gave a rolled gold iron-clad pledge that the thresholds on the Medicare Safety Net would not be changed and then after an election they were changed, you broke your promise, why should anybody watching this broadcast believe you will keep your promises if you get the chance to be in government again?

 

Well, Phil, look, it's a very fair question. It's not one that hasn't been put to me before, but the truth is that I was rolled by my senior colleagues on that particular issue. Then, I was a man under authority, now, if I could put it crudely, I am the authority – and that's the difference.

QUESTION:

Alex Hart from the Seven Network. According to an email today that's been published in an online newspaper you basically revealed you don't think people think you're a good bloke. Why was that your priority in today's speech, to convince us you're a good bloke and not release anything new as you just conceded?

I think anyone who knows me well would know that I have quite a healthy self-esteem. I can live with the fact that not everyone likes me. I will do my best to put forward policies that will be good for our country, that will involve change for the better and I will leave the judgment about me to the people of Australia. That's where it ought to be. It's up to the people of Australia to make their judgment about the people who aspire to lead them and I'm quite happy to put myself in their hands.

 

 

Chris Johnson from The Canberra Times. Mr Abbott, yesterday the Prime Minister said she revealed the election date to provide some certainty this year. I was wondering if you're of the same mind and are willing to provide a little certainty for public service department heads and let us know if you're planning a wholesale removal of the secretaries should you win the election or do you have a greater faith in the neutrality of the public service?

 

 

Well, Chris, I have spent many years working with the Australian public service as an Employment Minister, as a Workplace Minister, as a Health Minister, as Leader of the House of Representatives. I spent an enormous amount of time working with the Australian Public Service and I came to really respect and admire the professionalism of the Australian Public Service. They always get the job done. I'm not saying that it's always perfect and that it can't be improved, but I respect them very much and I understand that if a government is going to get done what it wants to do, it has to work through the agency of the Australian Public Service. Government can't do anything on the ground without the involvement of the Australian Public Service. So I respect them and I'm going to work with them. Can I say that every single departmental secretary will stay in his or her existing position? No, I can't, but there certainly won't be anything resembling a night of the long knives or a blood bath of the public servants, not at all.

 

 

Laura Tingle from the Financial Review, Mr Abbott. An election promise that's a bit closer to home I'm hoping for. Will you give a commitment today to stop walking away from press conferences, especially the ones that you've called and to regularly hold press conferences in Canberra between now and the election and if you're elected as prime minister? Also, what steps have you taken to establish whether anyone who is closely associated with the federal Coalition and the LNP financed, or is continuing to finance, the legal and public relations costs of Mr James Ashby?

 

 

Well, Laura, what Mr Ashby's doing is a matter for Mr Ashby. Absolutely a matter for him. I can say with my hand on my heart that as far as I'm aware, no member of the federal Coalition has had any involvement with the Ashby matter, none whatsoever. As I've said before, let me say it again, the Ashby matter raises two matters. It raises the question of whether or not sexual harassment took place – and I don't think anyone should minimise sexual harassment, it’s a very, very serious matter, I don't think anyone should be in a hurry to start bandying around accusations of malice against people who bring these claims – people have a right to bring a claim under law if they believe that laws have been broken. Second point I make is that in the end the whole Slipper imbroglio raises questions about prime ministerial judgment and these are going to be inevitably front and centre for the Australian people as we approach polling day.

 

 

First question about press conferences…

 

 

I'm sorry, Laura. I'm very happy to get my press office to pull out the records and to compare the number of media interviews, the number of press doorstops that I've done with those of my opponent. I'm very happy to have my record stack up against that of my opponent. I think you will be very surprised at just how many media interviews I do. But I don't believe all political wisdom resides in the Canberra Press Gallery. Much political wisdom, Laura, resides in the Canberra Press Gallery, but there's a lot of commonsense, a lot of decent Australian commonsense that resides in journalists who work outside the Press Gallery in Canberra.

 

Lane Calcutt from the Nine Network Mr Abbott. Just back to Alex's question before about those emails that have leaked, presumably you took Hirsty’s advice and dropped from your speech a nasty….or cut that you were going to make in government. Did you take that advice and was it the school kids' bonus that you wanted to announce that you were going to cut?

 

Well, at the risk of dobbing in my principal Press Secretary, we did have a discussion via email about a matter, whether it should be in or out, it was the school kids' bonus and as you know it's in the speech. It's not going to happen under a Coalition government because it's a cash splash with borrowed money that has nothing to do with education. Now, we are confident that families will be better off under the Coalition, very confident that families will be better off under the Coalition because we will eliminate wasteful and unnecessary government spending. We will thereby produce a stronger economy but we accept that government can't be like Santa Claus. A government that tries to be like Santa Claus is a government which will in the long run hurt every single Australian and I keep saying that this election is going to offer a clear choice to the Australian people, and frankly the choice on offer is whether we remain a relatively low taxing, relatively small government culture and economy, or whether we go down the European path of being a big taxing, big spending, big government, low creativity, low innovation society and that's the last thing I would want to see happen here in Australia.

 

Sid Maher from The Australian, Mr Abbott. The Coalition has promised to scrap all expenditures relating to the mining tax, I believe, and also in your document at the weekend you said there wouldn't be substantial changes to superannuation. But there's something called the low income super contribution which I think is funded from mining tax and scrapping it, I think, would make superannuation more expensive for people earning under $37,000 a year. So I'm just wondering if you can….does it stay or does it go? Can you just reconcile that?

 

 

Sure Sid, well I said there'd be no unexpected detrimental changes and the change you allude to is one that we've put on the record many months ago and yes, that stands.

 

 

Colin Brinsden AAP. Mr Abbott, in your Real Solutions booklet and reminiscent of the 2004 election, you talk about keeping interest rates low. Why should voters believe you this time around when clearly you failed between 2000 and 2007 to keep that promise?

 

 

Well thanks for mentioning the booklet, Our Plan, Real Solutions. You’ve given me a chance to wave it around on national television, Colin, thank you so much. While I'm at it I should probably let people see this as well, A Strong Australia. Now both of these documents can be downloaded from the Liberal Party website and I would encourage all Australians to do so. Look, the promise that was made before the 2004 election was not that interest rates would never go up – no government can make such a promise because as we know in our economy, interest rates are set by the independent Reserve Bank – what was said before the '04 election was that interest rates would be lower under a Coalition government than under a Labor government because of the better economic management, the more prudent fiscal approach that you could expect a Coalition government to take.

 

 

Paul Bongiorno, Ten News, Mr Abbott. As I understand it by 2015 the carbon tax or the fixed carbon price abolishes itself and morphs into an emissions trading scheme very close to the plan put up by Prime Minister Howard and supported by his then adviser Arthur Sinodinos, a market-based mechanism to make carbon pollution or global warming gases more expensive. Would you be happy to see the carbon tax replaced by a market-based mechanism whether you need to go to a double dissolution or not to achieve that by 2015 anyway?

 

 

The short answer is I would not be happy, Paul. Let me now develop it a little. Look, in the Coalition we believe now, as we did back in 2007, that climate change is real, that humanity does make a contribution and that you need a strong and effective policy to deal with it. What's changed since 2007 is that it became absolutely obvious after the Copenhagen conference that the rest of the world was not going anywhere near carbon taxes or emission trading schemes and that's why the Coalition is absolutely right to say no to a carbon tax and to say no to an emissions trading scheme. As long as a carbon tax or an emissions trading scheme damages our economy, without reducing emissions because it's not being copied anywhere else, we would be crazy to go down that path.

 

 

Lenore Taylor from the Sydney Morning Herald. Can you please clarify for the Australian taxpayers who, as you say, are struggling with cost of living pressures, whether the personal tax cuts that you have provided will be in addition to the ones that they've already got as compensation for the carbon tax and whether they will feel them in their pockets in your first term?  Just following on from Laura's question about the Ashby case, can you tell us whether you think it was proper or correct or acceptable behaviour for Mr Brough to ask Mr Slipper's staffers to take from his private diary?

 

Look, I will leave claims about what Mr Brough did or didn't do to be answered by Mal. He's been very upfront about this, he's done lots of interviews about it and if you've got a question for him I think he'd be only too happy to take it from you.

 

On the first subject, the tax cuts associated with the carbon tax were carbon tax compensation, that's what they were, they were carbon tax compensation and what we said prior to the introduction of those tax cuts was that there would be tax cuts without a carbon tax. Now, the quantum of the tax cut that you will keep and the savings, the quantum of the savings that we will need to fund them is something that we will make crystal clear to the Australian people in good time before the next election.

 

 

Lyndal Curtis from ABC News 24. Mr Abbott, I’ll break Steve Lewis’ rule because there's some news just broken while we've been here that the ABC's had confirmed from Craig Thomson's lawyer that he's been arrested by NSW Police. Does this mean the Coalition will now refrain from commenting on Mr Thomson given the possibility of impending court proceedings?  A couple I was going to ask on the economy, just some specifics, what sort of growth rate do you need to have what you call a strong economy and what size surplus would you consider to be a strong budget surplus?

 

 

Lyndal, we have certainly respected or tried to respect the rule that you do not comment on the specifics of cases which are currently before the courts and we will respect that rule. George Brandis has been scrupulous and my other colleagues have tried to be scrupulous in observing that rule. But the Thomson matter isn't just about what Craig Thomson may or may not have done, what he did or didn't do, it's always been about the judgment of the Prime Minister and I'm afraid the judgment of a Prime Minister who was running a protection racquet for Craig Thomson for months and years, long after it was obvious that there were issues, is something that remains very much in question. You certainly can't expect that there won't be questions raised about prime ministerial judgment by the Coalition. I mean let's face it, this very day there are questions being raised all over Parliament about the Prime Minister's judgment by members of the Labor Party and if members of the Labor Party are allowed to question the Prime Minister's judgment surely we are too.

And if I could get the specifics what sort of growth rate would you consider to be enough for a strong economy and what sort of surplus is a strong budget surplus?

 

Well again, I think that the best guide is what was achieved under the Howard Government. Now, a GDP per head under the Howard Government was considerably stronger than it is today. Today's GDP per head growth is about a third of the level achieved under the Howard Government and that, as always, is our model and that would be what we were aiming for. If we could do better that would be great but certainly that's what we would be aiming for and again, under the Howard Government we tried to achieve a surplus of one per cent, approximately, of GDP. We thought, we think that government should only take from taxpayers that which is absolutely necessary to run the administration and to provide decent services. It shouldn't take any more than is necessary other than what's needed for a prudent, frugal buffer and one per cent of GDP we thought was about right and we still think that.

 

David Lipson from Sky News, Mr Abbott. Isobel Redmond has stepped down today from the South Australian Liberal leadership. Do you think that turmoil has any threat of spilling over into the federal campaign and would you welcome a return to politics for Alexander Downer?

 

Well perhaps Alexander might be able to speak for himself here. Can I say, I miss you, Alexander, I really do miss you and I think you have so much to contribute to our public life in one capacity or another. But as for Isobel, look, she did a very good job as the leader of the South Australian Liberal Party. She really did win the last South Australian state election. I think the two-party preferred vote was 52 per cent. It was only by some electoral malfeasance in a couple of seats that the Labor Party was able to fall over the line. So Isobel Redmond deserves the gratitude of the South Australians and in particular the gratitude of Liberals right around Australia. Who leads the South Australian Liberal Party is obviously a matter for the South Australian Liberal Party room. Whether Alexander is further involved in Liberal politics in South Australia is obviously a matter for him but what the people of South Australia really do need is a change of government and that's what we should all be working for.

 

Mr Abbott, Karen Middleton from SBS. You spoke in your speech about a tax on the middle class from the government and I think you mentioned private health insurance. I'm wondering if you can tell us whether you will remove the means test on the private health insurance rebate or can you rule that out?  How on earth are you going to pay for this? I know you said you're not going to tell us until after the budget but really, the list is getting longer and longer. And if I may also break Steve Lewis's rule, can I ask you given your work in Aboriginal communities what your view is of calls to compensate federally the members of the stolen generation in the Northern Territory.

 

Look, I think it would be a big step to move from facilitating people to bring to court any claims or actions that they feel they have to move from that to some kind of a national compensation scheme. So it's a big step which I'm not persuaded to support at this point in time. On the other question, Karen, what was that? Private health insurance. Look, support for private health insurance is absolutely in our DNA, absolutely in our DNA. One of the big differences between the Coalition and the ALP is that we wholeheartedly support private health insurance. The Labor Party reluctantly supports private health insurance and will do whatever it can to damage the private health system because it basically wants to see everyone in the public system. Now, we fiercely opposed the means test on the private health insurance rebate. We would like to see that means test gone because we believe in a universal health system. There's no means test on Medicare. Why should there be a means test on the private health insurance rebate? But given the fiscal situation that we are in we haven't set a time frame and I'm not setting a time frame now as to when we might be able to do that.

 

Mr Abbott, Colin Bettels from Rural Press, Fairfax Agricultural Media. Congratulations on your speech. I'm not sure whether it was better than the Prime Minister's effort yesterday or whether you've just brought more family and friends along with you to this event. My question is about the rural independents Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor, whether you agree with their decision to go with Labor or not, they've succeeded in putting some important rural issues at the forefront of governments thinking during this term of government? I was just wondering if the Coalition is elected and wins this upcoming election, whether or not some of these rural issues will simply disappear and also on that do you think that the two independents deserve to be re-elected?

 

 

Look, my business is not to run around the countryside offering commentary on independent members of Parliament. My business is to promote Coalition candidates for all seats and so we've got a couple of terrific candidates running in the seats in question, really, really good candidates. Richard Torbay in New England is an outstanding candidate. David Gillespie in Lyne is an outstanding candidate. I know David Gillespie extremely well. I was his best man. He was my best man. He is a great servant of our community. He is someone who could bring tremendous integrity and insights to our Parliament and I'm delighted to have this chance on national television to say g'day to Dave and to say the people of Lyne will be very well served should David Gillespie become their local member.

 

Now as for rural issues, the Coalition, both the Liberal Party and the National Party have country representatives at the heart of our structures. Eight of the 20 members of my Shadow Cabinet, eight out of 20 members of my Shadow Cabinet live outside metropolitan areas. Zero members of the current Cabinet live outside metropolitan areas. So I accept that this Government has done a bit of pork-barrelling in a couple of seats as a result of the hung Parliament. But this Government doesn't have rural Australia at heart. How could it? It doesn't know rural Australia. But any government that I lead will have rural Australia's interests at heart because almost 50 per cent of the people sitting around the cabinet table will be from rural Australia.

 

[ends]