Dave Richardson and Matt Grudnoff

Earlier this year the Australia Institute released a paper examining the worsening inequality of both income and wealth in Australia. It found that the share of Australia’s total wealth held by the richest 200 people nearly tripled during the last two decades – up from the equivalent of 8.4% of GDP to almost a quarter of GDP today.

A recent report also showed that capital gains now are greater than wages.

Capital gains are essentially profits made from investments – generally either investing in shares or property. If you buy an investment property for $500,000 and sell it 3 years later for $750,000 you have made a capital gain of $250,000.

This marks a great change to incomes and is a major problem because largely capital gains go untaxed

This also exacerbates inequality because overwhelmingly capital gain are earned by the richest in Australia.

That means we now have a situation where more income than wages is generated by capital gains most of which goes to the wealthy, but  only a small fraction of capital gains are taxed and even then they enjoy huge tax concessions.

People with taxable incomes of more than $1m a year made up just 0.2% of all taxpayers in 2021-22, but they made up 41% of the realised capital gains.

Our tax system has not kept up with these changes and it means that inequality is being increased because of our tax system, not improved by it.

Currently capital gains get a 50% tax discount – that means that capital gains are taxed at half the rate of wage incomes.

This has neither ethically nor economically justified.

In 2019 the Labor Opposition’s election policies included a proposal to reduce the CGT discount from 50% to 25%, which would have resulted in 75% of the realized capital gain being taxed. That policy proposal lapsed when Labor failed to be elected, and has not been revisited since Labor came to government in 2022. 

Reviving or extending to 100% of the realised capital gains, would reduce inequality and provide the government with necessary revenue to help address poverty.

Above all it would mean that those who gain income from investments that often only involve speculation would be taxed the same as those who get their income from work.  

Q: Does the government plan to re-introduce religion discrimination legislation that was shelved because of a lack of support, and what will the government do to protect transgender Australians?

Albanese:

We on the first issue, one of the things I said, and I maintain my position, you need broad support for legislation, we weren’t able to receive that. This is the last time in Australia, the last time that you would want to have a divisive debate about religion. So I’m up for legislation that has broad support. But we do not need further issues created. I’ve been about turning the temperature down, not up. On those issues. Which is what social cohesion requires. And on the last – I just respect people.

OK, here is one of those little political furphy’s politicians from major parties use all the time when it comes to progressive legislation. Albanese doesn’t need the Coalition to pass any legislation. There is always another pathway and in the last senate, it was through the Greens and the crossbench. There is nothing binding the Coalition to a particular policy from parliament to parliament – just because they voted for something once, doesn’t mean that they won’t reverse their position. Same with every parliament and political party. So the whole ‘we need bipartisanship on this’ is absolutely ridiculous. When major political parties don’t take the more progressive route through a senate it is because they don’t want progressive policy. And if the other major party won’t negotiate on it, they pretend there is no other option. It’s not true.

Prefacing this question with the fact that we do not need to open up any more gas fields in Australia to serve domestic needs. We can meet export contracts and domestic needs with what we already have. There is no shortage.

Q: You made it clear that gas is an important part of our energy transition. We’ve heaps of gas under the ground in Australia, yet we’re facing a shortage on the east coast, within a few years, that’s according to AEMO. After the election, if you’re successful, what is your message to the states in terms of boosting gas supplies, getting more gas out of the ground for the domestic supplies we so need?

Albanese:

We need more supply (we don’t) it needs to be done in a sustainable way, but we have also, you know, one of the things had happened during this election campaign is there’s been a range of things announced by Peter Dutton that are happening.

So, he’s announced for example housing infrastructure funding that he announced, I think, here a while ago. We’re doing it. Like it’s rolling out in partnership. We have had two rounds of that program he either doesn’t know exist, or pretends he doesn’t know exists. On gas, on the day of the election, in 2022, gas was $34, today it’s $13. We have mandated the gas code of conduct. We changed the Domestic Gas Security to ensure that we can intervene to ensure supply domestically. We’ve put in place all of those measures, all Peter Dutton has, a bit like his defence policy, is a blank media release with a headline on the top, and no detail.

He is asked again whether he will condemn Jerome Laxale’s father and says:

I don’t talk about people’s families and I think they should be kept out of it, to be very clear.

Q: Do you condemn those comments? Do you condemn the homophobic comments?

Albanese:

Seriously, people’s families should be kept out of it. It’s beneath you, beneath you to ask whether I support homophobic comments. Because of course I don’t. Of course I don’t. And frankly, it’s offensive. Even suggesting it.

Q: You wouldn’t condemn it though?

Albanese:

I don’t attack people’s families, is what I don’t do. I don’t think people should. What I’m concerned about, in terms of people handing out, is the mass handing out of, you know, Exclusive Brethren or whatever they’re calling themselves these days – it frankly doesn’t stack up that hundreds of people have just happened to turn up at polling booths, some travelling across state boundaries to hand out for the Liberal Party wearing Liberal Party suits. What’s the quid pro quo given that organisation doesn’t vote in elections? And given the views that they have.

Asked about reports that a Trump advisor had been advising parts of the Coalition, Albanese says:

I’ve been focused on Australia, of course. I’m concerned about some of the positions that have been put during the election campaign here. That people, commentators have said, resembles things that have been done, such as mass sackings of public servants, you know. We have a serious election campaign to run here. I’ve not been interested in fighting culture wars. I’m been interested in fighting for Australians, that’s what I’m interested in. The campaign of the Liberal Party has become more and more right-wing under Peter Dutton. That’s just the truth of the matter. Peter Dutton has had different positions, sought to raise culture war issues, and he under the Liberal Party has lost people like Christopher Pyne, people like Paul Fletcher and Simon Birmingham, they’re going at this election, will the last moderate in the Liberal Party turn the lights off? Will the last moderate turn the lights off? That’s what is happening. In the time I have been in Parliament, there were people like Petro Giorgio, people that were moderates in the Liberal Party, under Peter Dutton, he’s a deeply conservative man, there have been increased right-wing elements. We saw in Roger’s election, some of the elements in the Liberal Party, who are candidates at this election, I mean, their candidate for Fowler has said extraordinary things.

Q: I just wanted to know if you have spoken or you’re planning to speak to Jerome Laxale over homophobic slurs his father made to a Liberal volunteer? It happened while he was handing out how to vote cards.

Albanese:

You want me to speak to families? I want to keep families out of it. I have answered your question, if you yell you don’t get a different answer. Someone’s family member? I don’t talk about people’s family. I don’t like people talking about mine. I don’t talk about others. I don’t talk about Peter Dutton’s family. I would ask you, you haven’t asked me any questions about Peter Dutton’s family, if you had, you would have got the same answer. I don’t talk about people’s family. Jerome Laxale is the candidate and he’s a great candidate for Bennelong.

Q: In the final sprint, if you lose your majority, and you have to go in minority, I know you’ve been asking for majority, is that a loss to you? What right would you have to stay as leader if you do lose the government its majority? Secondly, I know you had a great time in there, but do you think it’s really appropriate to campaign to children?

Sounds like maybe a journalist is struggling to cope?

Albanese:

You bet. I think this election is about young Australians. I make no apologies for going into a school, because I’m giving schools better funding. That’s what I’m doing. How do you tell people we’re giving schools better funding without going into a school?

One of the great privileges I have had as prime minister and the member for Grayndler, over a period of time, going into schools and going into early education centres.

Q: The question about losing the majority. If you lose the majority and you go into minority, is that considered a loss to you?

Albanese:

What I’m about is maximising our position on Saturday. We take nothing for granted. No prime minister has been re-elected in this country having served a full term since 2004. … Minority government… We have a mountain to climb. It is difficult for Labor to be re-elected. I take absolutely nothing for granted at this election campaign.

My job is to go out there, put forward the policies that we have, the Australian people will vote. And we’ll see what happens on Saturday.

But I think we’ve run a positive campaign, we’ve run a clear campaign, we haven’t waited for elections to be called before – well, they didn’t really wait for the election to be called, they waited for this week – I don’t know if they’re costings are out there, anyone know that? No. Well, it’s… You know. I mean, for goodness sake, how do you take this mob seriously when they’ve to hide half that are shadow ministers, I mean, I’m sure Andrew Hastie hasn’t been in any schools, to be fair, because he hasn’t been anywhere.

You know, he’s the shadow defence minister. The shadow foreign minister, I was in his seat the other day with you, the member for Banks. He hasn’t been sighted. This is the alternative government of Australia. And Angus Taylor is busy counting numbers.

Q: Just to clarify something that’s been discussed in the last few days, the Australian public has delivered their verdict on the Voice to Parliament, what happens to truth telling and treaty if you get a second term?

Albanese:

Look, we’re focused on practical reconciliation. This isn’t something – one of the things I haven’t done – well, one of the things I haven’t done – is wait for an election campaign in order to announce policy. And I announced our policy at Garma last year, where not a single coalition member, federally, gave the respect that Indigenous Australians deserve at the most important cultural event that is held by First Nations people in Australia. I outlined it there, in a speech, it’s about economic empowerment, it’s about practical ways to close the gap. That is what I’m focused on.

While the prime minister answers his next question with an essay, it is worth taking a look at the differences in the leaders today.

Peter Dutton knows he has lost. His press conference was short, his answers shorter, his patience almost non-existent. He did not want to be in the press conference and did not want to be answering questions and had the look of a man who just needed to get through the next day before cocooning himself in his big dumb ute and ignoring the world.

Anthony Albanese, who is naturally more cranky of the two men in terms of personality, on the other hand, is having a ball. He’s answering questions in the future tense, he is talking about upcoming legislation and plans. He is giving very long answers, joking with the press pack and having a laugh. He knows he has won – it is just what the parliament looks like now that is the difference.

Climate change seems to have barely featured in the election coverage and in the contest between the major parties, yet it ranks as one of the top concerns of voters.

On the ABC’s vote compass survey of more than a quarter of a million people, about 12% rank it as their number one concern. Overall it’s in the top four, above housing, health and immigration.

“So why is it receiving so little attention? Perhaps it is because everyone has decided this is the ‘cost of living election’,” said Stephen Long, Senior Fellow and Contributing Editor at The Australia Insitute

“Fair call – but the reporting, commentary, and much of the campaign rhetoric largely ignores the significant role climate change plays in driving up prices.”

Australia Institute research shows a direct connection between climate change and the cost of living.

Key findings:

•  Insurance premiums have soared due to an increase in natural disasters, with some households now spending over seven weeks of gross income just to cover home insurance.

• Food prices have risen by 20% since 2020, with climate-related disruptions wiping out harvests and making it harder for some regions to grow food.
• Energy costs remain high due to a reliance on fossil fuels, underinvestment in renewables, and fossil fuel exports locking Australia into high global energy prices, forcing Australians to compete with the global market for Australia’s resources.
• The impacts of the climate crisis disproportionately affect lower-income and regional households, who are already feeling the financial strain more severely.
• Climate change-related cost increases have also kept interest rates higher for longer.

“The Reserve Bank has repeatedly cited sticky “services inflation” as a reason for its reluctance to lower the cash rate,” said Stephen Long.

“Rising insurance premiums – driven by climate catastrophes – has been the main driver of this services inflation.

“Despite the overwhelming evidence, there are still voters who don’t believe in climate change – but their insurance companies sure do.”