Event: Business Debate between Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor

Speakers: Business Council of Australia Chief Executive Bran Black Treasurer Jim Chalmers Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor Moderator, Laura Jayes Council of Small Business Organisations Australia Luke Achterstraat

Date: 23 April 2025

Topics: Productivity, tax, industrial relations, artificial intelligence

E&OE

Laura Jayes, Moderator: Welcome to the Business Debate. Before we have the Treasurer and the Shadow Treasurer on stage for the next hour with questions from the floor, please allow me to introduce the Business Council of Australia Chief Executive, Bran Black.

Bran Black, Business Council Chief Executive: Thanks, Laura and thank you to everybody for making the time to be here today. Welcome, as Laura said, welcome to the Business Debate. Let me begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet and paying my respects to Elders past and present.

Today’s event is an important conversation about Australia’s economic future, and it’s a privilege for the Business Council of Australia to co-host it with our colleagues at the Council of Small Business Organisations. Ladies and gentlemen, we are just one day into early voting, and less than two weeks from polling day. This debate marks the first time we’ll see the Treasurer and the Shadow Treasurer go head-to-head before an audience of small and large businesses. I take this opportunity to thank Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor for accepting our invitation to be here and I also thank Jane Hume for joining us.

Today’s debate comes at a pivotal moment in a much broader sense. All businesses in Australia are navigating an increasingly uncertain global environment. The recent and ongoing challenge of negotiating US tariff policy is the most acute demonstration of this point. At the same time, Australia’s changing demographics present a great intergenerational challenge, with proportionately fewer workers, and proportionately more retirees living longer and with increasingly costly care needs.

Meanwhile, our average productivity growth over the last decade was the lowest in six decades, and it’s declined 1.2 per cent over the past year. And I want to take a moment here to note what we mean by ‘productivity’ and why it’s important. It’s not about making everyone work harder. It’s about how we deliver more outputs with the same or less inputs. And it’s critical because productivity growth and real wages growth is symbiotic, and that makes the linkage between productivity growth and our collective national prosperity iron-clad.

Ladies and gentlemen, both major parties can speak to their policies implemented or proposed which have increased or which would increase national productivity. At the same time, both parties have implemented or proposed policies that disincentivise investment and make it harder to run a business. We know both parties have broad constituencies that necessitate balancing many different and often competing interests.

However, if our overarching national objective is improving quality of life from one generation to the next, we think it’s important to remember that: Businesses large and small contribute around 80 per cent of our country’s economic output. Six of every seven Australian jobs are in the private sector. And businesses and the people they employ contribute more than half a trillion dollars in taxation to Commonwealth coffers. Simply put, when businesses – of all shapes and sizes – succeed, Australia succeeds. And so what’s clear is that the many and concerning challenges Australia faces right now necessitate a broader and more ambitious reform agenda that will meaningfully support Australian businesses to invest and to grow.

An agenda that best positions us to control those things that are genuinely within our power to control – amidst so much global uncertainty – by backing businesses to drive national prosperity. Ladies and gentlemen, that’s why we’ve asked both of our speakers today to put forward their plans for Australia’s long-term economic future, and for how they intend to empower Australian businesses to deliver on it. So, I thank them once again for taking the time to be here and I thank you for doing likewise and so welcome once again to the Business Debate.

Jayes: On that note, welcome to the Business Debate, please welcome the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers and Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor to the stage. This is the last time the Treasurers will go head-to-head in a debate before election day. The rules have been agreed to before now, there has been a coin toss. Angus Taylor won that coin toss. He has elected to go first. Each leader has six minutes, over to you.

Angus Taylor, Shadow Treasurer: Well, thanks, Laura. Thanks, Jim. Thanks to the BCA and COSBOA for this important event. Bran, you rightly pointed out that we are facing deeply uncertain times and the IMF has emphasised that just overnight when they’ve said that on current settings, we can expect a resurgence of inflation, a slashing of economic growth, lower employment, higher unemployment and a drop in commodity prices. And of course, the point about this is that over coming years, we are going to need strong economic management to get through these uncertain times.

The key question as we approach this election, and of course people are already starting to go to the polls, the question I think Australians will be asking themselves and need to ask themselves, is, are you better off or worse off than you were three years ago? And in these uncertain times, can you afford more of the same? Can you afford more the same? Now, we strongly believe that we've seen the wrong agenda from Labor over the last three years, and their record shows in household budgets, in the government budget and in Australia's aspirations. We have seen the wrong priorities and the wrong decisions at a time when we needed the right priorities and the right decisions. Households have seen their budgets slashed, the biggest hit to our standard of living, Australian standard of living in history, bigger than any peer country around the world. And the result is Australian households are having to dig deep into these savings, they’re having to cut back on non-essential and even essential spending, and they’re having to work extra hours and take on extra jobs as well to get through. Meanwhile, the government budget now has red ink as far as the eye can see, there were monthly, was monthly balance when Labor came to power, but we're on our way to $1.2 trillion of debt, $180 billion of deficits over the four years of the forwards, and that is red ink that means Australia has not got the buffers it means to face the deeply uncertain times that we're in right now.

For many Australians, hope is fading. Hope of buying and owning a home and paying off that home over time. Hope of starting a business and building and growing that business over time. We think there is a better way. We think we can restore hope, we can restore household budgets, and we can restore the government budget as well. But central to that will be beating inflation sustainably, and that means cutting waste and slashing red tape. It means boosting growth and investment, and that means backing businesses small and large, because business, at the end of the day, is central to a strong economy in this country. It means fixing energy and housing by getting more supply into the market and driving affordability as quickly as possible. It means restoring the budget to protect the nation, and put ourselves in a position where the homegrown inflation that we've seen over the last three years can be reversed in terms of the impact it's had on tax brackets.

We have over recent months laid out very clearly the importance of investment towards all of this. Business investment is absolutely central if we are to get this country back on track. That's why we'll establish Investment Australia, consolidating and streamlining those agencies that are central to the decisions made by the Federal Government that drive investment in this country. We need to see a construction sector that is affordable. We need to see a financial services sector which is accessible to small businesses and large in this country, and we've been seeing the exact opposite in recent times. We need to see environmental approvals made in a timely way, so that investment can occur in a timely way in this country. Investment has dropped to 12.1 per cent of GDP, the lowest since 1991, the recession we had to have, and it needs to be reversed fast. Small business is central to that, and that's why we're providing investment incentives for small businesses – Instant Asset Write-Off, the entrepreneurship accelerator we announced over the weekend and a range of other incentives for small businesses to get out, invest and grow their businesses in the coming years. We need to re-establish the fiscal guardrails that Peter Costello put in place in the 1990s that have been thrown out by Jim and his government in their very first Budget.

Before politics, before politics, I spent 25 years working in economics and business. I started businesses. I played a role in our family farming business. I advised chief executives, some of whom are in this room today. I was very privileged to play a part in some of the fastest growing industries in Australia and the region. And I learned through that process that investment is the absolute key to making sure that you have a strong economy, and the private sector will be central to addressing those challenges we have with household budgets, with the government budget and with hope and aspiration for all Australians. We can get our country back on track. We can get investment moving. We can get business moving. But the key to this is the people in this room and the hard-working business people right across this great country being empowered and getting the opportunities they need without government getting in the way to make investments to drive productivity and to help all Australians to get ahead. That is what it will take to get this country back on track.

Jayes: Thank you. The Treasurer.

Jim Chalmers, Treasurer: Thanks very much, Laura. Thanks Angus. Thanks Jane as well, for being here, and the BCA, COSBOA, the ABE, and all of the businesses here, not just for joining us today in Melbourne, but also for all of the jobs and opportunities that you all create right around our country.

Today's a very welcome opportunity to go beyond the day-to-day headlines of an election campaign and to talk about how the global economy is being reshaped, and what it means for our people, our own economy, what it means for our businesses and our business community. And also, to outline our plans to make the most of the progress that we've made together over the course of the last few years, and how we make our economy more resilient and more productive in the face of all of this global economic uncertainty.

Now, the World Economic Outlook, which was released overnight, did paint a pretty concerning picture of a world economy which is made more volatile and less certain. Already we've seen those wild fluctuations on markets, equity markets, currency markets. We've seen oil down and gold up. We've seen faith shaken in US treasury bonds, all as a consequence of the tariff announcement out of Washington, DC. And these escalating trade tensions are now really the fourth major economic shock that we've all been through in the course of the last two decades. A financial crisis, which was a demand shock, a pandemic supply shock, a global inflation spike, and now a trade war as well. And it's all occurring against the backdrop of some of those intergenerational issues that Bran spoke about a moment ago.

Now I am confident that as Australians, that we can do better than just weather and withstand all of this churn and change we're seeing in the world. We are a very trade reliant economy and we do have a lot to lose, but we’ve also got very robust institutions and systems. We've got well-lead businesses, and we've got a highly skilled workforce and resilient people as well. And all of that makes us confident, but not complacent, because we've got the right plan to make our economy more resilient, we've got a lot of progress that we've made together already, and all of that puts us in good stead for what's coming at us from around the world.

Now where I differ from the story that Angus told a moment ago is to remind you that when we came to office, inflation was much higher, and it was rising fast. Real wages and living standards were falling sharply. Business investment was very weak when we came to office, and we were already on our way to $1 trillion of Liberal debt. Now, together, we've seen inflation moderate very substantially, it's less than a third of its peak in 2022, it's now around the middle of the target band. Interest rates have started to come down. Real wages have been growing for five quarters. Real disposable incomes are growing again as well. We delivered two surpluses in our first two years, our predecessors delivered none. This year's deficit is smaller than what we inherited. There's less debt, and that is saving us tens of billions of dollars in debt interest. More than a million jobs have been created during this parliamentary term, that's a record. Stronger jobs growth than any advanced major advanced economy. We've achieved the lowest average unemployment of any government in Australia in the last 50 years. And we've made all of this progress on inflation without paying for it with higher unemployment or a shrinking economy, and that is rare both historically and also in global terms. And now we've got growth rebounding in our economy, and the private sector is resuming its rightful role as the primary driver of that growth, and private demand as a consequence is expected to more than double next year.

Now, in the last few weeks, I've taken time out of the campaign to confer with my counterparts in Japan, South Korea, Indonesia and the UK, as well as business leaders and the heads of our major economic institutions. And the predominant sense we get from those discussions is that no economy will emerge unscathed from this economic uncertainty. But in this time of profound volatility, we are as Australians in relatively good shape. Now some people do want to talk our economy down, but when they do that, they're talking Australians down and they're talking Australian businesses down as well. They point to 29,000 insolvencies this term, when 850,000 new businesses have been created in the same period. Insolvencies now are occurring at half the rate they were under John Howard. Business investment was its highest level in over a decade last financial year. On average, new business investment has grown 4.6 per cent under us, compared to going backwards 1.3 per cent under our predecessors, and we thank you for that and for the role that you have played in that.

Now, despite all this progress, we know that business conditions are difficult, and we know that our economy, like almost every other advanced economy, is not productive enough. But this problem didn't show up a couple of years ago, it showed up a couple of decades ago. We saw the slowest productivity growth in a full decade in the 2010s, the worst productivity outcomes in 60 years. So in our first term, we focused primarily on inflation, without forgetting our responsibilities to make our economy more productive – big reforms to competition, capital flows, modernising markets and tax reform as well. A National Productivity Fund that we worked with the BCA on, built to rent, production tax incentives, streamlining our foreign investment and mergers regimes and more. Our second term will focus more heavily on productivity without forgetting inflation. We've got the Productivity Commission doing the work that we have asked them to do. We've got the non-compete clauses. We've got the changes to occupational licensing.

So we've made a lot of progress together, rolling out reform, providing relief and repairing our budget, but we know that there's a lot more work to do. We want to work with you in the usual, considered, methodical way, listening to your views, even when we don’t necessarily share them. And it's in that spirit of working together that I'm looking forward to speaking with you today.

Jayes: Okay, let's get into the first question then. You both reference global volatility and a rapidly changing world. We're talking about escalating trade tensions. We're talking about rising protectionism, and the world in which we could be potentially asked to choose between the US and China. You've also both referenced the IMF overnight, slowing global growth, downgrading global growth, Australia could slow to 1.6 per cent. If that happens what is the single most important economic decision Australia must make in the next term, and how would both of you ensure that your party gets it right? Treasurer, first to you.

Chalmers: Thanks, Laura. The most important thing that we can do in this difficult global environment is make our economy more resilient. And we make our economy more resilient by rebuilding incomes, tax cuts for every Australian taxpayer, rolling out ongoing cost of living relief and we make our industries deeper and broader and harder as well – our Future Made in Australia agenda, which we've worked with a number of people in the room to put in place. So making our economy more resilient in the face of this global economic uncertainty is a big priority for the government and here there's some important choices to be made. Because while we are cutting taxes for every taxpayer, Angus wants to legislate to increase taxes for every Australian taxpayer, including 1.5 million sole traders and small businesses. He talks about wages and productivity, but on his watch under the last government productivity and wages were both weak. We came to office with real wages falling, living standards falling sharply, inflation rising quickly, and we've been able to turn that around, working together with people in this room, and that's put us in good stead to face the challenges ahead, but we know that there's more work to do. We need to be more resilient, and that's what our economic plan is all about.

Taylor: Thanks, Laura. And can I say up front that that picture might help the Treasurer, but it's not what people are experiencing around Australia, and it's not what I hear as I get around Australia with 30,000 now insolvencies, a record level, we've never seen this number before. A near 6 per cent drop in labour productivity since Labor came to power, we have never seen that before. A near 8 per cent drop in disposable incomes for Australian households, we have never seen that before. The buffers are gone and we've got to rebuild, we've got to reset, and we've got to make our economy resilient again.

Now the key to this, the key to this, is investment. It is the people in this room choosing to vote for Australia and for our economy. Every time you make a decision to invest, and every small business person and large business person in this country makes a decision to invest, you are investing in your business, you are investing in your communities, and you are investing in this country. And that's what we need. That has been my career, and that's what we've got to focus on above all. Now, how do you do that? You've got to slash the unnecessary red tape. We've seen overreach from regulators in sectors like financial services. We've seen that with APRA, we've seen that with ASIC, and we've got to make sure they're focused on the regulation that is necessary, but not overreaching to make it hard for you to make investments. We've seen that with approvals, environmental approvals, the North West Shelf, I mean, there's a fight going on inside Labor so they just can't get the approval through.

Jayes: We’ll get to red tape in a moment but Shadow Treasurer if I could interrupt you’ve spoken about buffers. How do we have any of those buffers that you've both spoken about today, when we have a decade of deficits, do we really have the fiscal flexibility needed for any trade shock ahead. When you have matched Labor on big spending items in a populous way, particularly on health, you've added another $20 billion to the defence budget today, yet you won't tell us even broadly where you're going to cut. Can you tell us today how much you're going to need to cut and broadly where from?

Taylor: Can I actually challenge what you just said there, we've opposed over $100 billion of Labor spending, not in essential services, not in health, as Jim likes to say, but in places that are not necessary at a time like now.

Jayes: You’re still going to need to cut.

Taylor: Let me just answer the question. We've said, for instance, if we build zero emissions nuclear generators where we've got existing coal fired power stations, we don't need to spend tens of billions of dollars on 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines.

Now is not the time for government to say it's going to build houses.

We need the private sector building houses for this country, and we've made those hard decisions over three years, over three years, to free up over $100 billion of spending. And that ensures, that ensures that we can make sure we're investing in small business so that they can get the Instant Asset Write-Offs when they make an investment.

That ensures that we can provide that short-term relief that Australians need but most importantly, we can make sure we get our economy back on track over time, so that investment drives productivity, drives growth, and growth is the key, Laura.

If you've got a growing economy, you strengthen your budget position. You strengthen household budgets. You strengthen businesses, an 18 per cent drop in the incomes of small businesses in this country over the last three years. That's how you get things moving again. It is very, very clear, and we've seen the exact opposite under Labor.

Jayes: Revenue to government spending is at about 5.5 per cent year on year, is it not? Growth, I mean, growth year on year. My question to you, Treasurer, as a follow up is, can it be business as usual? Can it be big government spending in the next term, or do you need to change tack?

Chalmers: First of all when we came to office, we got spending as a share of the economy from almost a third of the economy down to a quarter of the economy, and it's settling around 26, 27 per cent and that's because, unlike our predecessors, we were able to deliver two surpluses. They delivered none. We’re able to get this year's deficit down.

We've actually engineered the biggest ever positive improvement in the budget a single term ever, $207 billion turnaround. We found $95 billion worth of savings.

We banked most of the upward revision to revenue, and all of that has meant that responsible economic management has been one of the defining features of this Albanese Labor Government, and there's a pretty clear contrast.

Now when it comes to making room in the Budget for our investments, the things that Angus didn't say a moment ago is when he said that growth is the key, which is a slogan, not a policy, sort of like a year nine economics assignment.

But when he said that, what he neglects to tell you is he wants to cut funding for housing. He wants to cut funding for TAFE and training.

He's described indexation of pensions and payments as wasteful spending. And I think the defining thing in this campaign, the thing that's becoming clearer and clearer 10 days out, probably the most important issue, is that, whether it's Angus or his leader or his finance spokesperson, none of them have come clean on what they will cut to pay for their nuclear reactors, to pay for the defence policy they announced today, to pay for their long lunches policy.

We go to this election as Labor people with a record of responsible economic management, making progress together with Australians, and we're the only ones going to this election with a costed, coherent, credible economic plan to deal with all of this economic uncertainty.

And I think today is the best opportunity for Angus to come clean on what he would cut from the budget if he thinks there's too much spending in the budget, he should tell us what he would cut to pay for his nuclear reactors and to pay for all of these other policies that they are announcing in an increasingly desperate fashion.

Jayes: Let’s get to some questions and quickly respond in 30 seconds.

Taylor: I mean, this is the Treasurer who has had an over $400 billion windfall, and highly credible economists in this country had made the point that he spent pretty much a lot of it, and he hasn't watched as we opposed bills for spending that is not necessary at a time like this. He's in love with $42 billion of spending on housing, where he admitted at the last debate that not a single family is living in one of those houses. Not a single one.

Chalmers: That’s not true, Angus.

Taylor: Well, let me finish. I let you go.

Jayes: That’s 30 seconds. We can get to the cuts. We can get to the cuts in a moment.

Taylor:  We have been clear on where the savings are and it’s not health and is not essential services. Jim, you should be honest with the Australian –

Chalmers: Well, tell us where they are.

Taylor: You should be honest with the Australian people.

Chalmers: Tell us.

Taylor: As we have been all this term when we have opposed your bad spending.

Chalmers: Well, tell us where the cuts are coming from, Angus.

Taylor: I've just been through where we have voted in the House against your bad spending. And so you should be honest with the Australian people and not run scare campaigns when they're not justified.

Chalmers: You’ve got to find hundreds of billions of dollars to pay for nuclear reactors.

And your leader has said that he’ll tell people…I am saying 600, I am saying 600. And I’ll tell you why.

Jayes: Anthony Albanese didn’t last night.

Chalmers: I'll tell you why I’m saying 600. There's a reactor being built in the UK right now. It costs 87 billion dollars. These guys who couldn’t build a carpark…

Jayes: Let's get to some questions from the floor, and I'll just remind our questioners. Please state your title when you step up to the mic. First is Rohan Mead.

Rohan Mead, Australian Unity CEO: Thank you, Rohan Mead from Australian Unity. And Treasurer and Angus, thank you very much for subjecting yourself to the crucible of public life in Australia, my question is on tax. We have the third least competitive business tax regime in the OECD. We were once ranked in 2004 as the 4th most competitive economy, and we are ranked 13th today. My question is two pronged. What are your policies and incentives to promote business investment in capital, R&D and technology? And will you commit to no new taxes on business as we seek to recover the business economy?

Taylor: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, we have absolutely no plans to impose taxes on Australian businesses like yours, Rohan, and that is, I think, essential that we bring taxes down, not raise them. And so that's why we'll raise the threshold for the Instant Asset Write-Off for small businesses, and we'll make it permanent.

This is incredibly important, so that small businesses have the certainty, not like they’ve faced this year where Labor is still playing games with months before the end of the financial year, so small businesses don't know if they're going to have access to the Instant Asset Write-Off until the very last moment. That's completely unacceptable. So we'll make it permanent.

We'll raise the threshold to $30,000, we'll also, as we said over the weekend, encourage people into business by starting a business with the entrepreneurship accelerator, where they'll get tax breaks for the early years when they're getting going with that business. And that's, we want younger Australians to take the plunge. And it's a big plunge. It's a big deal to take the risk of starting a business, getting moving and really having a crack.

We need to make sure that they're doing that. We've also announced over the weekend the technology boost, the digital technology boost, which will provide a tax break for small businesses to invest in digital technologies of all varieties, of course, because we know that is the key to them making their business stronger, making the economy stronger and making Australia stronger.

And increasingly, that technology investment is central to the success of businesses in this country.

Jayes: Okay, that is your two minutes. Dr Chalmers.

Chalmers: Thanks Laura, and thanks Rohan as well for your question. I know that there's always an appetite for taxes to be lowered.

I think when you combine taxes at all levels of government, Australia is actually below the OECD average, we’re in the high 20s, the OECD average is 34, I think, in the most recent data, I heard Angus say a moment ago, the most important thing is not to raise taxes, but to lower taxes. He's going to this election with a policy to raise taxes for 14 million Australian taxpayers, including –

Taylor: That’s not right.

Chalmers: Beg your pardon?

Taylor: You're telling lies again.

Chalmers: Beg your pardon?

Taylor: You’re telling lies again. You really shouldn’t.

Chalmers: What’s wrong about that? What's untrue about that?

Jayes: He’s referring to the income tax.

Taylor: We are reducing the fuel excise by 25 cents...

Jayes: But is he talking specifically about income tax?

Taylor: We're providing a low to middle income tax offset as well. We're providing tax breaks for Australians when they buy a new home, and that will mean lower taxes for Australians.

Chalmers: You’re increasing taxes.

Taylor: You should be clear about that, and that's why we will re-establish what you've thrown out, which is a tax to GDP threshold of 23.9 per cent and you've clearly, you threw that out in your first Budget. And the reason is you wanted to raise taxes, unrealised capital gains on Australia's superannuation. You're going after it, Jim. And we know he's done the work...

Chalmers: Here we go.

Taylor: to go after negative gearing and capital gains tax. We know that. We know that. And Jim, you should fess up. You can right here and now.

Chalmers: Angus, you are going to this election with a policy to increase taxes on 14 million Australian taxpayers. That's a fact. That's your policy, reiterated again this morning by the Leader of the Opposition. So you've made the first big mistake of this debate in pretending that that's not true. It is true. And of that 14 million Australian taxpayers is one and a half million sole traders, small businesspeople that you are going to legislate to increase their taxes. Now you talk about the tax to GDP cap. The only governments that had breached the tax the GDP cap that you want to impose were the Howard Governments, the highest taxing government.

Taylor: Your plan is to breach it

Chalmers: Tax to GDP last year compared to this year, goes down, Angus. And you should stop lying about that as well. We are nowhere near the tax to GDP cap that you want to impose on people. If you want to hit the cap, that means higher taxes.

Jayes: Gentlemen, if you don’t mind, if I could get back to the question that was a guarantee, a guarantee, not a we have no plans to, but a guarantee that there will be no new taxes on business, that means no super profits tax, no resource rent tax, and no bank levy increases or anything that else might fall under that umbrella. Do you give that guarantee?

Chalmers: We've already made it really clear that the PRRT changes, the multinational tax change, they are our agenda when it comes to business taxes. We're cutting taxes for one and a half million small businesses, and Angus wants to increase taxes on all of those people. 

Jayes: Can you give that guarantee?

Taylor: I've just given it, Laura. I say it again, absolutely. So look, our plan is to reduce taxes for businesses like yours in this room and, Jim, the problem you've got -

Chalmers: Will that be in your costings?

Taylor: No, we are not going to raise the company tax.

Jayes: No, no, you're going to cut it.    

Taylor: We have already when we were in government cut company tax.

Chalmers: Will it be in your costings?

Taylor: Jim, the trouble for you is that when we were in the last election campaign, you made lots of promises on taxes.

Chalmers: You just said you’re going to cut company taxes. But will it be in your costings?

Taylor: And the problem is you break those promises. You break those promises. And one of those was going after Australian super and you still...

Chalmers: Will it be in your costings?

Taylor: You will see the costings next week. I'm looking forward to…

Chalmers: You just said you're going to cut company taxes. Will it be in your costing?

Taylor: I've already said the answer to that, mate, but let's be clear.

Chalmers: I don’t think you did.

Taylor: Let's be clear. What you will see in our costings, lower taxes for businesses.

Jayes: Mr Taylor, Will you be cutting company tax? Is that a surprise next week?

Taylor: Lower taxes for businesses, small businesses will get access to the Instant Asset Write-Off. Small businesses will get access to the accelerator, the entrepreneurship accelerator, to the technology, the digital technology boost, and they are tax cuts for small businesses, Jim. And you know why? Because we need small business investment. We need small business growth. And we need business succeeding in this country, which is the exact opposite of what we've seen, under Labor, with 30,000 insolvents.

Jayes: Our next question, if you don't mind, Christine Pope.

Christine Pope, Elemental Holistic Health Owner: Thank you, I'm a small business owner with a clinical practice in naturopathy and nutrition, and my question goes to the small business tax reform. So given a lot of small businesses have significant difficulties accessing finance, what I'm looking for is an undertaking to pursuing genuine tax reform, whether that’s a reduction in the corporate tax rate, to around 20  per cent would be nice, and also looking at making the Instant Asset Write-Off permanent, and I would really like to see a commitment from both sides for that,

As well as looking at indexing personal tax rates to eliminate bracket creep.

Jayes: Okay, there's a couple of things in there. Treasurer, which one would you like to address first?

Chalmers: I might start and go in reverse order. I mean, the point about bracket creep’s a really important one, and we've touched on it in a couple of different ways so far, already in the debate, only one major party is going to this election with a policy to return bracket creep. The other party is going to this election with a promise to make bracket creep worse. And that's really one of the major differences in this election campaign.

It's a fact that our policy legislated through the parliament in the last week of the parliamentary session was to return bracket creep to 14 million Australian taxpayers. The policy of the Opposition, made clear again today by the Opposition Leader, is to legislate to increase taxes, return less bracket creep, retain more bracket creep under the Coalition, if they are elected. And so that is a really important difference, an important part of your question. 

Jayes: Treasurer can I touch on that for a moment, because income tax has become a big topic of this debate today. You're talking about bracket creep. Don't your own Budget papers show that bracket creep is actually going to catch up to that $5 within a couple of years so you're not really doing much about bracket creep long term.

Chalmers: I dispute that.

Taylor: It’s your own Budget papers.

Chalmers: This is the third round of tax cuts that we are providing to every Australian taxpayer, about $50 a week on average when you combine the three rounds of tax cuts. And if Angus is really fired up about bracket creep, then he needs to explain to people why he'll make the problem worse not better. He has a policy to make bracket creep worse not better. That is his policy that they're taking to this election. And so I think that's a really key difference. If you want to pay less tax, then you vote Labor. If you want to pay more tax you vote for the Coalition. Those are the policy differences, the factual policy differences. And so I think a really important part of that question was about bracket creep.

Now there's more than one way to return bracket creep. And we found the fairest way, the way that it's best for workforce participation, of course future governments of either political persuasion, when they can afford it or so, will try and return more bracket creep. But we've only been here three years, and we have already legislated three rounds of tax cuts, and that's because we think bracket creep is an issue and unlike our opponents, we're doing something about it.

Jayes: You unpicked one of them.

Chalmers: Beg your pardon?

Jayes: You unpicked the Stage 3 and redesigned them.

Chalmers: So that every Australian taxpayer got an income tax cut.

Jayes: Sure but that would –

Taylor: Their income taxes have gone up.

Jayes: Can I just get to the business part of the question –

Chalmers: In what way have they gone up, Angus? In what way have they gone up?

Taylor: $3,500 –

Chalmers: Because wages are higher.

Taylor: $3,500 –

Chalmers: Because wages are higher.

Taylor: Well real wages have gone down under you.

Chalmers: No, they haven’t. They’ve gone up for five quarters in a row.

Taylor: So $3,500 increase in personal income taxes personal income taxes paid by every single Australian. Double income family, $7,000. You know what, that's what homegrown inflation does.

Chalmers: It’s what wages growth does, Angus. It means people are earning more and keeping more of what they earn, and under you by hiking everybody's taxes, they will earn less and keep less of what they earn.

Jayes: We’ll get to your answer in just a moment, Treasurer, Instant Asset Write-Off permanent? And also an economy wide investment allowance for big and small business. Just a quick answer, please.

Chalmers: Ours is more targeted. We've got an Instant Asset Write-Off that we're extending at $20,000. We've also got a series of other tax breaks. We've got the Build to Rent tax breaks that Angus doesn't support. We've got the production tax incentives, which Angus doesn't support. There are a range of ways that we are providing tax relief, tax incentives to businesses, small and big in our economy, rather than going for a headline change in the rate. And that's because we've got to make it all add up.

Jayes: Mr. Taylor, if you could address the original question.

Taylor: Yeah, so a couple of things. I'll also deal with some of the mistruths that we've just heard from Jim. We will make the Instant Asset Write-Off permanent, because we don't want to see shenanigans every year as it goes through the Parliament, as small businesses and their advisors try to guess whether or not Labor is going to support it the next year –

Chalmers: You held it up for nine months. You held it up for nine months in the Senate. Jane and you held it up for nine months in the Senate.

Taylor: Jim, can I finish? Labor has always played games with this, because they don't believe in the important role of small business, because they can't unionise it. Now, when we move to income tax, when we when we move to income tax, you have seen under Labor in their three years that they've been in power, an increase in personal income taxes being paid by $3,500 per person, $7,000 for a double income family. That is despite his so-called tax cuts – 

Chalmers: It’s wages growth.

Taylor: People are stuck paying more tax. I think that the so called tax cut he’s boasting about is 70 cents a day in 15-months time. We've said there's a better way to provide a tax break to Australians than 70 cents a day in 15-months time, provide immediate cost of living relief, 25 cents a litre of fuel tax at the bowser, the low to middle income tax offset $1200 for 85 per cent of tax paying families across Australia. As well as, as well as giving young Australians a chance to buy a new house, to get more supply into the market and make that tax deductible and the combined value of those tax cuts is the same as Jim's. But I tell you what, it's restoring hope. It's restoring household budgets. It's restoring the prospect of owning a home rather than giving Australians 70 cents a day.

Jayes: The priority of this particular small business woman, though, was the Instant Asset Write-Off being permanent and an economy wide investment allowance. Yes or no quick access to both of them.

Taylor: The small business Instant Asset Write-Off being permanent, is economy wide. That's absolutely every small business in the economy will get access to it, Laura.

Jayes: Investment allowance?

Taylor: Well that is an investment incentive. I’m not quite sure what is meant by an investment allowance. 

Jayes: Our next question. Alex Joiner.

Alex Joiner, Australian Business Economists: Thanks, Laura. Alex Joiner, I'm here on behalf of the Australian Business Economists, but also I’m the Chief Economist at IFM Investors. My question is in economics we understand that good intentions don't necessarily guarantee good outcomes. And given that, my question is to you both, what are the key economic outcomes you'd like to see for the business sector over the next three years? And despite its importance, and we've talked a little bit about productivity here today, we haven't really heard too much about it through the election campaign so far, so I'd like you to identify what specific policies you're proposing to improve outcomes of the productivity space, and importantly, businesses, they can do the same.

Jayes: Treasurer, first to you.

Chalmers: Yeah, thanks. Alex, for your question. In the years ahead, we want to see productivity growth, we want to see real wages grow broadly in our economy, with a bigger and bigger role for the private sector. And one of the most encouraging things about the recent data we’ve been getting in the economy – and I read your stuff when you analyse it as well as a number of people, Stephen and others in the room today – one of the encouraging things is we're making progress on a number of those indicators, but not all of those indicators. We do acknowledge that our economy like most economies in the developed world has a productivity problem. And as I said before, this problem didn't show up in the last couple of years, it’s been a permanent feature of our economy for the last couple of decades. And what we've done in our first term, whether it's our investments in skills, whether it's the National Productivity Fund working with the states, whether it's our efforts to strengthen and streamline regulations in areas like foreign investment, mergers and acquisitions, a lot of this has been about making our economy more dynamic, more competitive and more productive. Because we acknowledge that productivity over the medium term is the key.

And one of the things that I've done is I've asked the Productivity Commission to do five detailed pieces of work to report in the second half of this year, so that either political party who wins this election on the 3rd of May will have some fresh thinking on our productivity challenge. But we haven't waited for that piece of work. If you think about some of the initiatives that we're rolling out right now, the single front door, which is about speeding up approvals for transformational projects, whether you think about the national occupational licensing regime that we're putting in place to make us more productive, to cut red tape. You think about the changes we're making to non-compete clauses, which is all about more productivity, making it easier for people to find better paid opportunities. All of this is part of our productivity agenda, because we do acknowledge that there's a challenge there. It is not a new challenge. It's a long-standing challenge. It will take us some time to turn around, but so much of our economic agenda is directed towards turning around productivity, because with productivity, with real wages growth, with economic growth, getting on top of inflation, all of this would do justice to the progress that Australians have made together over the course of the first three years of this government.

Jayes: Mr. Taylor, your plan.

Taylor: Well, thank you for the question, Alex. And as you well know, the hit that Australia has seen in terms of labour productivity and our standard of living, our household disposable incomes is unrivalled. It’s the worst of any of our peer countries around the world, and that's been a result of getting the settings wrong. Now we can get them right, to get back on trac. And establish Investment Australia, streamlining our agencies, so we can get approvals through much faster. The EPBC, I mean the North West Shelf, as an example I cited earlier, we've got to get approvals like that through at pace. We can get the decisions right, as we did when we were last in government for those really critical projects, and that will get investment moving. And we know investment is the key to getting later productivity back to where it absolutely needs to be. We also need to prevent some of the regulatory overreach we’ve seen.

Jayes: How do you do that? Everyone talks about the EPBC. How do you actually get reform when the Greens hold the balance of power in the Senate. If you two agreed, we could actually get something through the Senate, could we not?

Taylor: So can I say that an important part of this is to get rid of bad legislation, or fix bad legislation and make it better and regulation.

Jayes: Ok so you both agree the EPBC is not perfect. You both blame the greens for standing in the way. Am I missing something here?

Taylor: We have put to Labor twice in our last term in government, reform of the EPBC and twice Labor rejected it. I'd love to be able to have another go and get it through with Labor’s support.

Jayes: Is that true, Treasurer?

Taylor: We’d very much like to do that, but if I may finish. Getting the expectations around our regulators, right, not just legislation and regulation is absolutely crucial, because we are seeing regulatory overreach in this country. It is holding back investment, it is holding back productivity, and it is holding back the prosperity of all Australians, and that is absolutely central in what I laid out at the Press Club some weeks ago to get to the sorts of outcomes we need to get to that you talked about Alex.

Jayes: We are quickly running out of time. Just quickly on the EPBC, give us something.

Chalmers: We said that we need to do more work to try and build consensus when it comes to the EPBC.

Jayes: Is it urgent?

Chalmers: Well, it's a priority. And I think if Angus really wants faster approval times, then sacking 41,000 people, some of whom are responsible for processing approvals, would be a pretty strange way to go about it.

Taylor: Jim, you've made government bigger 41,000 as you rightly cite, and yet approval times have got worse.

Jayes: All right, let's quickly get to the next question. We'll have to, we're running out of time gentlemen. So please. Kellie Parker, with the next question.

Chalmers: Kellie’s been waiting very patiently.

Kellie Parker, Rio Tinto Chief Executive Australia: So yes, I'm Kellie Parker, CEO of Australia for Rio Tinto. And thank you, Treasurer and Shadow Treasurer, for your comments, and particularly your insights on how you would lead the Australian economy if you're elected. And the Australian business is keen to work with you. We're keen to see improvements in productivity and particularly competitiveness. But we have been concerned with the IR laws that have been passed recently, and particularly some of them just cause cost and disruption, which is what we're now seeing. So, my question is, you know, what are you going to be doing that would be new in IR that helps drive productivity, and what metrics we use to measure that?

Jayes: Treasurer, I go first to you on this because there's been a lot of change this term.

Chalmers: First of all, I want to acknowledge I spend a lot of time with Kellie bilaterally and via the BCA and its board, and I appreciate that. And one of the reasons I appreciate it is because we have the opportunity to be upfront with each other about where we have an identical agenda, whether it's skills or in some of these other areas, infrastructure, and where there are genuine differences of opinion. We've always been upfront about that Kellie and I really appreciate that. And so I'm going to do today what Angus can't do and is say that the changes that we've made in industrial relations in our first term, I think are an important way to get wages moving again in our economy in a sustainable way. And the reason why I say that's different to Angus’ approach is to depending on what audience Angus is in front of, he says he's going to either unwind our IR changes or he's not going to unwind our IR changes. We've been upfront about our changes and why. We've tried to be as consultative as we can, and we've acknowledged and understood where there are differences of opinion.

Now Kellie’s question goes to a second term, if we are honoured with a second term. And our priorities in industrial relations are first of all on gender, I think the Fair Work Commission did some really important and useful work and reported not that long ago. So obviously, there's a big agenda there for us to grapple with. Secondly, we know that there's the Modern Awards Review underway. We do genuinely want to make it easier for businesses to use the award system, and so that's part of our agenda. And the third piece that I would mention would be the changes to the non-compete clauses. And again, I know that that's not unanimously supported in this room, but I think it's really important. The Productivity Commission modelled the impact of abolishing these non-compete clauses where they are not necessary for millions of workers and they modelled the impact on productivity and growth, and wages and all of these indicators, and so that will be an important part of our industrial relations agenda moving forward as well, if we get the opportunity to implement the changes I announced in budget week.

Jayes: Okay, so no surprises in terms of what is already on the table and changes to industrial relations reform next term. I note that penalty rates has also been put on the table. Why won’t you let that be part of your Productivity Commission review? Why interfere with the independence of the Fair Work Commission before you have that review?

Chalmers: Well, obviously I don't agree with the way you've characterised it. But penalty rates are a really important way that people provide for their loved ones and get ahead, and we want to make sure that they're protected. And the Coalition has a different view about a lot of these issues, and they should be, they should have the same story to tell in a group like this, as they do on other occasions. We've been clear, we believe in penalty rates. We want to see them to be a permanent feature of our industrial relations architecture, and I’ve laid out our other priorities for a second term.

Jayes: Your priority is also to grow the private sector as well. Do these, what you’ve put in place, and there's a long list of, I would say, union demands, if you don't mind, Treasurer that you've implemented this term, no doubt that you believe in as well. But does it really make for a flexible, dynamic labour market that you're going to need when we've spoken about uncertainty this entire debate?

Chalmers: I believe it does. If you can think about the changes that we've made combined with the changes we're making to early childhood education and care, to boost participation, you think about the changes we're making in the tax system to support aspiration, all of these things are of a piece, which is to recognize that if we want our economy to be productive and competitive and dynamic, people need to get fair reward for their efforts. We need to make sure that there's decent and sustainable real wages growth and that’s been a big priority of this government in the first term, and it will be a big priority if we get a second term as well. 

Jayes: If you see it dragging on private sector growth would you change anything? Or would you persist?

Chalmers: Well, what we're seeing in the economy is a rebounding in private sector growth, and that's very welcome. And if you look at the Treasury forecasts in the most recent budget and in the pre-election outlook, one of the most encouraging things is we had that period of softness in our economy. We had a role being played by public final demand, but what we're seeing in our economy is the return of private final demand, and that's really important. It's supported by our tax cuts. It's supported by getting wages moving again, and those things, the increase in consumption is good for business too.

Jayes: Mr. Taylor, what is your IR policy? I noticed in the last week that you have said that you don't agree and you won't push ahead with that penalty rate change when it comes to the Fair Work Commission.

Taylor: So can I start by thanking Kellie for the question and saying that I have seen up in the Pilbara the extraordinary achievements that you've made, your organisation has made. I was privileged enough to work in that area before politics, and I saw some of the best paid, most productive workers in Australia. And it was a great example of industrial relations that has been good for workers and good for Australia and good for the companies as well. And we do not want to see that being lost, it's incredibly important we keep it for one of the biggest and most successful industries in our country. Now, we've been very clear that we do need to restore common sense in industrial relations, particularly for small businesses where that common sense has been lost. We've seen it in the construction sector where the CFMEU with deep, deep links to the criminal underworld, a militant union that is holding our construction sector to ransom needs to be deregistered. And that affects your industry. It affects many of the industries people represent in this room. We will be deregister it. Labor’s not prepared to do that, because they rely too much on the CFMEU. They've relied on it for tens of millions of dollars of donations. We'll reestablish the ABCC, the Business and Construction Commission, the tough cop on the beat, and we'll establish racketeering laws so the criminal activities by organisations, militant organisations like that are not going to be acceptable in our economy because they hold every Australian taxpayer to ransom. We have to pay more for roads, for schools, for mines, for everything.

Jayes: What else is on the list? In the interest of time.

Taylor: I'm very happy to keep going, so we've said to small businesses that we will go back to a simple definition of casual I mean, you need a legal department in a small business these days to work your way through some of the changes that Labor has made. And we need that flexibility between small business owners and their employees to be able to find ways of working together, which is good for workers because they want flexibility and good for employers as well.

Jayes: What about multi-employer bargaining and intractable bargaining?

Taylor: We’ve been very clear about this. We don't have a plan to change that, but, but it's important that we keep the productivity, as I said, in relation to my comments on the Pilbara earlier, we need to make sure that we continue to have those extraordinary, competitive industries like yours Kellie.

Jayes: So no changes on multi-employer bargaining and intractable bargaining?

Taylor: No.

Jayes: Let’s get to our next question. Charlotte Keane.

Charlotte Keane, City Haven Massage Therapy Owner: I’m a qualified massage and myotherapist and small business owner based in Melbourne, I run two clinics and employ four people. Our profession is predominantly female, with many working part-time to balance family commitments. But small businesses like mine are increasingly burdened by rising employment costs and a complex web of industrial relations changes. What will each of you do to reduce red tape, support employment and help small healthcare, businesses like mine grow and succeed?

Jayes: This one, because I think we haven't heard a lot about your IR policy for this election campaign, so if you could speak specifically to those challenges for small business?

Taylor: Yeah, well, I'm happy to talk about those and other red tape as well, but I think I touched on some of this in my answer to the previous question. And thank you for your question, Charlotte and your business, and businesses like you play an enormously important role, an increasingly important role, in our economy. So thank you for that. But I've made clear in my previous answer that the changes that Labor has made to the definition of casuals, quite seriously, I talk to small business people all around the country now who say I can't employ a full-time lawyer. I haven't got a legal department, and I'm struggling to work my way through this and to know that I'm compliant, and small business people want to be compliant with industrial relations laws. They don't want to be in breach of them. But if you've got laws so complex that it's extremely difficult for you to know if you're in breach, that has a big impact on your business. And I can't tell you how many small business people I speak to who say it's just not enjoyable anymore. It's too hard. I spend too much of my time dealing with the red tape, green tape as well, and government regulation that is often extremely difficult to interpret and to follow through with. We've seen that in flexibility and arrangements in the workplace that Labor thinks it's right to legislate how employers and employees should talk to each other. Now we want employers and employees to come to sensible arrangements with each other, but every workplace is different, and you need to make sure you've got that flexibility. So again, this is common sense regulation that we will restore that has been taken away by the Labor’s completely inappropriate changes.

Jayes: Treasurer, are the settings right? Because you would have heard some of these complaints from small business that there is just a lot of compliance to get to. Do you agree with that? What can you change to make it easy to do business?

Chalmers: Well, we're investing, I think, $168 million in all kinds of different ways to streamline approvals processes, to cut red tape. I think some examples, environment, foreign investment, energy planning, cultural heritage. We've got the planning approvals process going on with the states and the housing accord. We've got the Accelerated Grid Connections Fund. All of this is about recognising that where we can strengthen and streamline approvals and cut red tape of course we should be doing that. I think there's a really important part of what Charlotte is asking us about, and I thank her for the opportunities that you create for your four workers. And we want to help you find great workers, whether it's our investments in skills, early childhood education, so that people can work more and earn more if they want to, the tax cut that we're giving your four workers, all of this is about recognising that one of the big challenges that you have is attracting and retaining great staff. And so much of what we're doing in our broader industrial relations agenda, our tax agenda, and in other ways, early childhood, is about making sure that you can continue to access those great people that you employ.

Jayes: Let's squeeze in one more question. Antony Shaw.

Antony Shaw, HSBC CEO, Australia and New Zealand: Treasurer, Shadow Treasurer, just a quick one. We've talked about the decline in productivity growth, AI has a critical role to play in halting that decline, but as we've seen in some jurisdictions, particularly the EU they've done a pretty good job at driving that investment abroad through blunt overregulation. So what are your plans to make sure that business in Australia can harness AI for investment growth without bogging it down with red tape or overregulation?

Chalmers: Huge opportunity for Australia. You think about the big changes underway in our economy, from IT to AI, from hydrocarbons to renewables, the way that our population is aging. So much of the change that's happening in our economy right now is exciting, and it's driven by technological disruption. You and I have spoken about this on a number of occasions before. And so we see this as a very exciting opportunity AI, and we see it as a game changer for our economy and for the global economy as well. It's why my colleague Ed Husic is busily putting together an AI capability plan we were talking at our table before about how we do need to focus on capability and not just on regulation. The most important part of this is the opportunity, not just the guardrails. And so that's the approach that we are taking. So we've got the capability plan that Ed's doing. We've got the TAFE digital skills centres of excellence that we're rolling out with the states. We've got the national AI centre. We've got the strategic review of R&D, and all of this is about seeing things exactly as you see them, which is a massive opportunity for our country, a game changing opportunity for our economy, and something that we want to be part of. And I think one of the most compelling parts of this opportunity for Australia, this productivity opportunity, this technological opportunity is there's a lot of interest in Australia in data centres, for example, because, as you know, and a lot of people here know that you need huge data centres to train the AI. Australia is a very compelling destination for that capital because of energy and skills and reliable laws, and we've got space, and we're in the best, most dynamic region in the global economy. And so I'm really excited about the AI opportunity, and if we're re-elected on the third of May, I work really closely with Ed and the PM and other colleagues to make sure that all of you and all of us as Australians fully grasp this immense opportunity.

Jayes: Mr. Taylor, might this be a rare area of bipartisanship?

Taylor: Well, I certainly agree with Jim that this is an important opportunity and a big one. And if we're to get productivity back on track after the collapse we've seen in the last three years of labour productivity, this is one opportunity to do that. I think, done right, it can be done in a way which is great for workers, which raises real wages, and that's what we all want to see. The starting point, though, for me, is probably different from Jim, which is, it's not about bigger government, it's about government getting out of the way when businesses invest. And I think the European approach is, not one we are focused on or attracted to in any way. Of course, there will, over time, need to be sensible regulation, but the starting point should be let businesses get along with it and encourage them to do it with appropriate investment incentives, like the Instant Asset Write-Off, like the tech boost, like making sure that venture capital in this country has a real opportunity to make investments, which is why we’ll raise the thresholds for our early stage and later stage venture capital structures. So these are the important enablers. The other big enabler, as Jim actually did point out, is data centres, and that means energy. That's why we need affordable, reliable energy in this country. We need more gas into our domestic gas network in the shorter term, and we need zero emission base load generation, because you know what data centres are base load customers, and so that's incredibly important if we’re to seize this opportunity and make the very most of it.

Jayes: Once and for all, can we finally nail down a cost for the nuclear plan? How much is it?

Taylor: We’ve been clear all the way along it’s less than 20 per cent of what Jim quotes.

Jayes: What is the total cost for the Coalition plan?

Taylor: It's under $120 billion in investments. And keep in mind, and that's investments that will get a return for taxpayers. And keep in mind that Jim has committed over $80 billion of off budget spending in the last three years -

Chalmers: You want $600 billion of off budget spending.

Jayes: Is it $600 billion? Why the golf here? I mean you’re talking about the Smart Energy Council -

Chalmers: Well the Brits are building one right now. The Brits with all their experience are building one right now and it costs $87 billion, he wants to build seven of them. The last time that we had a debate, Angus said, we want to build seven of them at $20 billion each, which is $120 million. For starters, it's $140 million. But you're wrong, you can't build them that cheaply, and that's what the Smart Energy Council and others have pointed out.

Taylor: The CSIRO differs and the Smart Energy Council donate to the Labor Party. Let’s be clear.

Jayes: Okay, well, whatever the modelling you're looking at –

Chalmers: I just want you to tell us how you're going to pay for these nuclear reactors. You've had an hour to do that today and you can’t do it.

 Taylor: Absolute nonsense.

Jayes: One more opportunity. Or do we have to wait for costings?

Taylor: The real question is how Jim’s going to pay for his own $180 billion of red ink, which we know what he wants to do. He wants to come after the family home and he wants to come after negative gearing –

Chalmers: Angus, how will you pay for nuclear reactors?

Taylor: We’ve known that for a long time. You know what? He said that back in 2017 before politics and he's got the Treasury working on it.

Jayes: You both have a minute now, uninterrupted.

Chalmers: I was in politics in 2017.

Jayes: Are we seeing a preview here of what could be the future leaders’ debate? Might that happen next time around?

Chalmers: I wouldn’t have thought so.

Jayes: No? Maybe. Neither of you are willing to go there.

Chalmers: Neither of us are coming at that.

Taylor: Jim might be there.

Jayes: Maybe.

Chalmers: I don’t think so.

Jayes: OK. We’ll leave it there. Now Angus started this debate that means Jim is first at closing. One minute, please.

Chalmers: Thank you. When we talk about building Australia's future, we talk about modernising our economy and maximising our advantages in a really uncertain time in the global economy. Now we're the only party going to this election with a credible, coherent and costed economic plan. Our opponents, they stumble from one shambolic policy announcement from the other, to the other. He can't even tell us how much his nuclear reactors will cost or what he will cut to pay for them. He can't tell us what his policies will cost or what he will cut to pay for them. He can't tell us what that means for Medicare or pensions and payments or housing and skills. They've just stumbled from one shambles to another, getting increasingly desperate in this election campaign. And so I think the contrast is really clear, and it's an important one. In these uncertain times for the global economy, we offer stability and responsibility, and those the opposition offer only risk. There's never a good time to take a risk. Now is the worst time to take a risk on higher income taxes, lower wages and secret cuts to pay for nuclear reactors.

Jayes: Angus Taylor, your final minute.

Taylor: This election is about who can manage the economy better in uncertain times. That's absolutely right. Now, Australians did take a risk before the last election, and that risk has been a disaster for household budgets, for the government budget, business budgets and for the future of this country. For housing, for energy and for the things Australians care about most. Our plan will establish a strong economy by beating inflation sustainably, by boosting growth investment and investment, by backing business, by fixing energy and housing, by getting more supply into the market, and by making sure that we have a budget position over time that can protect our nation and defend our nation, as well as provide those lower personal income taxes that Australians want to see. Before business, before politics, I worked in business. I worked in business and economics, creating businesses, working on the family farm and advising senior chief executives or senior business leaders in this country. I want to bring that same experience to running the economy. I want to bring that same experience into being Treasurer of this great nation. We can get this country back on track.

Jayes: Please thank the Shadow Treasurer and the Treasurer. Well, I think we all learned a few things over the last hour, really. Thank you for joining us on this stage for the final Treasurer's debate of this campaign. We really appreciate your time. It's a super important debate and it's one that we needed to have, particularly in this room. So, we will let you gentlemen go. We will invite now Luke Achterstraat, the Chief Executive of the Council of Small Business, to the stage for closing.

Luke Achterstraat, COSBOA CEO: Firstly, a big thanks to all the businesses, small and large, for attending today. I think Bran will agree without the input, the volunteer hours and the expertise of our members, our jobs and near impossible. So to Christine, to Charlotte, to all the other small businesses and COSBOA members in the room, thanks for the work you do, the people you employ, the people you train, and the tax you pay, although that should be less, and we are working on that.

With small businesses telling us they now spend up to 15 hours per week on paperwork we know how valuable your time is Charlotte and Christine. My thanks also to the COSBOA team, to Laura Jayes, of course, and to Bran Black. And to the BCA team, thanks very much for helping buy lunch today. Perhaps if the Government could make business lunches tax deductible for us small businesses, we could chip in a bit more next year, Jim.

Secondly, to Jim and Angus, thank you for agreeing to this style of debate. Policy makers are only as good as the advice they get, and that advice needs to reflect lived experiences. So, we appreciate you both fielding live questions from Aussie enterprises, the extent to which they were answered or not, will reserve judgment on. But as you've heard today, the cumulative impact of tax and red tape is weighing down businesses of all shapes and sizes. In our view, and I'm sure Bran shares this view, red tape reduction should be a bipartisan project. We need legislators to put themselves in the shoes small business owners and of all business owners as well.

Folks, despite their challenges, small businesses are still more likely than anyone to sponsor their local footy club, to give your son, your daughter, your niece, your nephew, their first job. In return, small businesses are simply seeking a fair go. Now one of the goals of today's debate was to bring together a cross-section of the business community. I think we've done that pretty well. Each business is unique, but we see that there are shared challenges, industrial relations, as raised by Kellie, a multinational mining company, but also echo in a slightly different manner, by Charlotte, a small business, myotherapist in Doncaster. There are shared challenges, and that is why we are so delighted to work with the BCA to see where there is common ground.

I just want to leave you with a final reflection point before you get back to your what is hopefully busy and productive day. Reg Williams started a small business in 1932. He learned his trade locally, making pack saddles and riding boots. His workshop grew slowly but fast-forward to 2025, that business now has 68 retail outlets, a thousand employees, stores in London, New York and Copenhagen and exports products to 13 countries around the globe. And I dare say if Jim or Angus aren’t wearing their RM Williams boots today, I’m sure some of their colleagues are.

You see, folks, for every R.M. Williams, there is a genesis story as a small or even micro business. It is why we need to ensure that we get the policy settings right in the first place, to get people into small business so they can set up and open that workshop in the very beginning. It’s also why we need to ensure policy settings support early-stage growth, mid-stage growth and allow businesses to scale to grow and employ.

Whether they become an iconic Australian brand or not, we need those policy settings to give businesses a fair go at success. And again, it is why we are pleased to partner with the BCA to promote policies that we can all agree will shift the tide for businesses.

So once again, thanks to Jim and Angus. Thanks for your commitment to public service. I was going to say thanks for taking time off the campaign trail, but there was a bit of campaigning going on today. That’s okay, we welcome that. We do wish you well, Angus and Jim, over the remaining course of the campaign. And in conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, I want to thank you in particular for being here today. We hope to see you again at another business debate very soon. Thank you so much.