CANBERRA, ACT, March 4 -- The Treasurer of Australia issued the following transcript:
Note
Subjects: December quarter National Accounts, Middle East conflict, tax reform, fuel excise, PRRT, petrol prices, EU trade deal
Jim Chalmers:
Well, growth in our economy was 0.8percent in the December quarter and it was 2.6percent through the year after revisions. Growth in our economy is now stronger, broader and very welcome. It's stronger growth than any major advanced economy. Per capita growth is the strongest in more than 3years. It's the strongest GDP growth in almost 3years, but it's the composition of that growth that we find especially encouraging.
There's more growth in business investment, dwelling investment, market sector productivity and consumption, but consumption came in a bit weaker than was expected. These are really encouraging numbers because they provide a robust foundation to confront the intense global volatility, which has been dialled up in recent days by the dramatic escalation of hostilities in Iran and the Middle East more broadly.
We have very substantial challenges in our economy, but these numbers show that we've got very substantial advantages as well. We are really well placed to deal with what's coming at us from around the world, and these numbers make that really clear.
Now, the big story of 2025 that we see again in these numbers is the recovery in the private sector, which is a very good thing. The pace of annual growth in private demand picked up in 2025. New public demand was lower through the year, and a key driver of the public demand in the December quarter was defence spending. That was a big part of the story in December when it comes to public demand.
Private demand grew faster and contributed over 3 times more to economic growth than public demand in annual terms, and if you compare 2025 to 2024, what you see is that within a year, annual private demand growth more than tripled, but annual public demand growth more than halved compared with 2024. New private demand was 3.2percent through the year, and the good thing about that is we had contributions from all 3 components - household consumption, dwelling investment and business investment as well.
Now, household consumption came in a bit weaker in the quarter, but it was still up 2.4percent through the year, and that's all about rising incomes - again, a very good thing. The same goes for the tick up in the household savings ratio supported by those rising incomes as well. The prices measure in the National Accounts was down a bit, and the wages measure was up a bit, and, again, both of those things are good developments, though inflation is still higher than we'd like in our economy.
If you look at the living standards measure, the real disposable incomes per capita, that rose 0.6percent in the quarter, it's now 2percent higher through the year, remembering that that measure was falling one and a halfpercent in the quarter that we came to office, and so we've seen quite a substantial through‑the‑year increase improvement in living standards.
Growth in annual per capita incomes is more than twice the average of the major advanced economies, according to the data released by the OECD. If you look at productivity, it was flat in the quarter, but it was up 1percent over the year, and that is above the 20‑year average. The really encouraging thing in the productivity numbers was that market sector productivity was up one and a halfpercent over the year, and if you look at nominal unit labour costs, they moderated to their slowest rate in nearly 5years at 3.3percent annual.
Dwelling investment came up again, another 0.6percent in the quarter, 5 and a halfpercent through the year, and that means we've had 8 quarters in a row now of improvements in dwelling investment for the first time in a decade, and, again, remember that measure was going backwards 3.6percent when we came to office, so we've been able to turn that around. Eight quarters in a row of growth in dwelling investment. Again, very good news.
Business investment was up again. This is one of the numbers which would surprise a number of the analysts. They were expecting a lower figure when it comes to business investment, but it grew again, half apercent and 4.4percent through the year, and if you think about that as a share of GDP, in the time that we've been in office, this government, we've seen business investment as a share of the economy go from 11.3 to 12.3percent - a very good development, and we saw that expectations for investment over the next year were revised up as well to around $200billion, and I think that augers well for our prospects in the economy.
Exports detracted a bit. Inventories made a bigger contribution. The export story was largely about - the net story was largely a story about imports, and inventories was largely a mining story and particularly coal and gold.
So, overall, what we have here is a really encouraging set of numbers, a really welcome set of National Accounts. We know that we've got 3 big, substantial pressing challenges in our economy - inflation, productivity and global uncertainty - and those 3 challenges are our focus as a government and as we get closer to releasing our government's fifth Budget.
But we face these very substantial economic challenges from a position of genuine strength - stronger, broader growth provides the best foundation to deal with what's coming at us in the weeks and months and years ahead, and these numbers are overwhelmingly good news in that regard.
Now, before I take some questions, I wanted to touch briefly on 2 other issues. Obviously, the government is closely monitoring developments in the Middle East, including the economic and financial market impacts. As you would appreciate, the situation is changing rapidly. The impacts are essentially uncertain, but we expect them to be substantial. And a big part of our work at the moment, a big part of my participation in daily meetings of the National Security Committee, is to monitor developments in oil markets, gas markets, also travel costs, fertiliser markets and in other ways to make sure that the government is keeping across developments in the global economy and what it means for us as well, and also, when it comes to insurance markets, too. You'd expect us to be monitoring all of those things very closely, and we are.
The last thing I wanted to touch on before I take your questions is I'm really pleased to be welcoming my mate Francois‑Phillipe Champagne, the Canadian Finance Minister, someone who is a wonderful friend of Australia and a great friend of mine as well and to other ministers in the government from his earlier roles in the Canadian government. Francois‑Phillipe, as you would have seen in the media, that he's done since he's been here, is just a terrific forward‑looking, energetic colleague. We really enjoy working with him, and I'm really proud to be welcoming him to Australia. We've got some big issues to discuss, particularly tomorrow, but we work really closely together on a whole range of issues in the global economy to make sure that we maximise this amazing friendship between the governments and the people of Australia and Canada.
Happy to take a few questions. We'll start with Cam, and we'll do this side and come back.
Journalist:
Treasurer, you note there that some of those impacts in oil prices, insurance, other things will be substantial. Those good numbers today might not be so good if the war is still ongoing in several months. So, will you perform invasive surgery on the Budget to get it in better shape to get us through those challenges?
Chalmers:
First of all, stronger, broader, more private sector‑led growth is a very good thing. Low unemployment, as we have in Australia, is a very good thing. And these are very robust foundations from which to confront the quite intense global economic uncertainty that we face. We faced it before developments on the weekend, but particularly now that hostilities have been dialled up and that this is essentially a conflict, which is involving all or most of the region. So, the economic consequences are uncertain, but they are likely to be very substantial.
Now, we were already very focused on the inflation challenge, which existed before developments in Iran, very focused on the productivity challenge, which has been a feature of our economy for too long - these welcome productivity numbers notwithstanding - and also this extreme global economic uncertainty, and that does inform our Budget for May. You know, we are meeting very frequently and often into the night with colleagues from the Expenditure Review Committee, and these things are obviously weighing very heavily on our organisations for the budget.
Journalist:
Treasurer, yesterday Governor Bullock said it was uncertain whether the impact of the conflict on inflation would cause an increase in oil prices or that would constrain activity and that would reduce inflation. What's your and Treasury's initial read of the situation, of the impact it will have on inflation?
Chalmers:
Well, I think those are the trade‑offs that, whether you're the Reserve Bank or you're a government like ours, that trade‑off is really the key one - the implications for prices from higher oil prices and other prices in the economy traded off against the potential for this conflict to weigh on growth. So, we would come at this analysis the same way that the governor and her colleagues do as well, and really, the big determinants of how substantial the economic impacts will be, will be the duration of the conflict, obviously, but also, you know, the reactions of the other oil‑producing countries. We are very pleased that OEPC Plus released another 206,000 barrels a day at their meeting on Sunday - that's a good development. Obviously, it depends very heavily on how much oil and gas infrastructure is damaged in the conflict. We know that there is a real risk of that. We know that there are tankers anchored in the Strait of Hormuz. That's obviously very concerning to us as well, and so those are all of the uncertainties. There is a very real prospect that it will put upward pressure on prices at the same time as it weighs on global growth, and the bank and the government will monitor those developments very closely.
Journalist:
Treasurer, in the past, the government has looked at the fuel prices when oil prices have risen. Is that something on the table? And on an adjacent car issue, reports you're looking at the tax treatment of EVs. The review into that isn't due to report back into next year. Could we see movement on it earlier?
Chalmers:
Well, in reverse order, I mean, first of all, as you rightly reference in your question, we've got a review underway of the EV tax breaks. That was a statutory review; it was legislated, we had to do it, and so, we kicked that off at the beginning of the year, Chris Bowen and I, and I'm reluctant to kind of engage in a running commentary on their considerations. We'll have a look at the review report when that's made available.
But I personally see the big take‑up in electric vehicles over the past few years as a very good thing - good for drivers, good for business and good for the climate as well. We think around 100,000 vehicles have been part of this policy already. We've got this review underway. That work is happening right now, and we'll continue to make sure that we've got the right settings in place to encourage people to drive EVs because it's good for them and good for the economy more broadly as well.
Now, when it comes to the fuel excise, that's not something that we've been considering. We've got a lot of cost‑of‑living help rolling out in other ways, ways that you are familiar with, and we've got 2 more income tax cuts on the way as well, despite the best efforts of our opponents. So we've found other ways to help people with the cost‑of‑living - cheaper medicines, more bulk billing, student debt relief, tax cuts and the like - because we recognise that whether it's petrol or in other parts of the household budget, people are under pressure, and that's why inflation is a really central focus of the government and our Budget deliberations.
Now, you've asked me about petrol excise. First of all, I mean, I've taken, I think, an important step in making sure that the ACCC is helping to ensure that service stations don't do the wrong thing by people when it comes to oil prices flowing through at the bowser. We don't want service stations to take advantage of people. We understand that there will be movements in the market, but retailers cannot be taking people for mugs. That's the first point.
Second point is my opponent, the new shadow treasurer, has now made his second serious error in only a couple of weeks in the job. Tim Wilson was wandering around the press gallery this morning saying that the excise goes up when the petrol price goes up. It doesn't. The excise is levied on volume, not on price, and he should know that. He's either deliberately lying about that, or he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. And so once again, just like the big gaff he made in this first week on the dual mandate calling for higher unemployment and higher interest rates, he's dropped another massive clanger today. And unfortunately, this is what we've come to expect from Tim Wilson.
Journalist:
Treasurer, last week, before other events took over the conversation around tax reform or speculation about it was reaching fever pitch - negative gearing, capital gains, company tax. Can you state definitively, are you actively considering new tax measures at the Budget, and do the events of the last couple of days around the world encourage you to be more cautious than you might otherwise have been?
Chalmers:
Well, first of all, I think I've made it clear - certainly since the reform roundtable in the room next door - that there is an appetite for more tax reform but that the government already has a tax policy and its focused on delivering 2 more rounds of income tax cuts for 14million Australians, the tax cuts that our political opponents said they want to repeal. So that's the focus of our tax policy, but also obviously we've got changes in the parliament around superannuation tax concessions and a boost to low‑income super tax offset and in other areas as well, and so that's the focus.
As I've tried to make clear and tried to be really upfront with all of you here and around the country when I'm asked this question, we've got a big agenda already, we will consider next steps in the usual way in the lead‑up to the Budget. We haven't taken any decisions. We haven't changed our tax policies, but any further changes in tax policies or any further tax reforms would be a matter for cabinet in the usual way.
Journalist:
Treasurer, yesterday the Treasury was talking about quite a substantial impact from what's been happening in Iran. Can you expand a little bit about that? Are they more worried about the impact on inflation or growth, and how worried are you that we get a repeat of what happened in 2022 when we saw, you know, a massive global energy supply shock?
Chalmers:
Well, first of all, the point I'm making is that the full implications are uncertain, but likely to be substantial. I mean, we've already seen since the conflict began, the Brent oil price is up more than 11percent last time I checked, but it had already come up quite substantially in the first part of the calendar year in anticipation of hostilities in the Middle East as well. You can see in the gold price that you would follow closely, Patrick, you can see in other prices and indicators in our economy that already markets, including commodity markets, are reacting quite significantly to developments, as we would expect that they would.
We analyse these developments in a calm, considered, methodical way. We know that if this conflict drags out for a long time - we know that it's not going to be days now, it's at least going to be weeks and potentially longer - then obviously the longer it drags out, the bigger the consequences for our economy, and so, we will monitor these developments as you would expect us to. And for the trade‑off between impact on prices versus the impact on global growth, obviously, both of those risks are present here, and beyond that, I refer you to my earlier answer.
Journalist:
Thanks, Treasurer. Earlier today, down at the Red Hill shops, Angus Taylor, Jane Hume, Tim Wilson gave a doorstop. They spoke of a cost‑of‑living crisis, blaming you, a standard of living crisis and a home‑grown inflation problem. Without being too political, can you put those - can you give us your response to those allegations in the context of the figures that are coming out today?
Chalmers:
Well, I think broadly we've acknowledged that even though inflation is much lower than it was under the Liberal Party, it's higher than we'd like, and it will be for longer than we'd like. I acknowledged in the parliament, and I think again today that this inflation challenge existed before developments in Iran, but the developments in Iran and the Middle East more broadly are more likely to make that worse. And so, I've been upfront about that. A big focus of the government is this inflation challenge.
On living standards, there are some really encouraging numbers in the data today when it comes to living standards. The measure of living standards growing a couple ofpercent. It was falling sharply in the quarter that we were elected, and so they don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to living standards or inflation. On all of these sorts of measures, they handed us a situation worse than it is now, and, you know, Tim Wilson wandering around saying - making things up about petrol excise is unlikely to help the economic credibility that was so damaged and outlined in the review of the Liberal Party's election.
So my focus is not on the Liberal Party or the National Party - my focus is on developments overseas, welcome news in the National Accounts and in putting together the government's fifth Budget. And that Budget will be very firmly focused on the inflation challenge in the near term, the longstanding productivity challenge and all of this global economic uncertainty, which is dialled up by events in the Middle East.
Journalist:
Treasurer, the National Accounts showed that part of that private sector investment equation was a big uptick in data centre fit out and construction. Are you concerned that that, which doesn't apply much in the way of long‑term jobs, is sort of shielding some other problems in that space? And also, the AWU, your union, has said the current PRRT system is cooked, it's not giving enough money back into federal coffers. They want you to consider some other options. Is that on the cards - considering other options for how the PRRT might work?
Chalmers:
Well, a couple of things about that. I mean, first of all, data centres is an important part of the business investment story, but not the only part of the business investment story. You know, we've seen really welcome growth in business investment over the last little while. You don't always see that reflected in the way people describe our economy, but one of the best things we've got going for us is the fact that business investment has come up, and if you look at the way that expectations for next year have been revised up, as I said before, that augers really well as well. So, business investment is a good story in our economy. Data centres are part of it, but not all of that. We welcome investment in data centres, so long as we get all of the natural resourcing and other questions right. It's a big opportunity for Australia and one that I embrace.
When it comes to suggestions from the AWU about the PRRT, I mean, I increased the PRRT so that that industry was paying more tax sooner to help us fund other priorities in the budget like strengthening Medicare and the like, and so, we've taken important steps to reform the PRRT. I consult a lot with union leaders, business leaders and others, and it's no surprise to me - I've spoken with Paul Farrow and others about the PRRT over recent years. But the government's taken, I think, some important steps when it comes to the PRRT, and so that hasn't been a central focus of our thinking and our deliberations.
Journalist:
Does the likely inflation spike from the war elevate the need to have a difficult conversation with the electorate ahead of the Budget to meaningfully cut government spending? And on the productivity piece in the Budget, can you confirm that you're considering corporate tax reform, an alternative approach to the Productivity Commission's cash flow tax policy?
Chalmers:
Well, first of all, we're very focused on a savings package before recent developments in the Middle East. You know, I've said publicly before that in all of our budgets, savings are a big priority. That's how we got $114billion in savings, including $20billion in December in the midyear update, to give you a sense of magnitude, it took our predecessors about 7 updates to find something like 20 or $22billion in savings. And so, we've put our shoulder to the wheel when it comes to savings in the budget. We've made some good progress, but we know there's more work to do, and so there will be more savings in the Budget in May. We've been upfront about that before and after developments in the Middle East.
When it comes to company tax reform, I have publicly and privately expressed a willingness for company tax reform so long as it's affordable. I do think that the tax system could have a role to play in attracting even more investment to making our pools of capital broader and deeper to help make our economy more productive, if we can find a way to pay for that. And I'm asked about the PC model frequently. I'm asked about other models frequently. I engage enthusiastically with business leaders and union leaders, and others, to see if we can find a way through there. I would like to do something in that regard, but it has to be affordable in the context of a budget, which you rightly point out, is incredibly tight.
Journalist:
Treasurer, you're obviously concerned about the impacts of what's happening in the Middle East on the federal budget. What about household budgets? People will be worried about the impact on them personally. What advice do you have to Australian households about how they should be preparing themselves to sustain whatever price impacts are coming at them, and what sort of protections should they take on board, what should they change in their behaviour to minimise the impact?
Chalmers:
Yeah, thanks, Mark. Look, I'm reluctant to give families and pensioners and households free advice about their own budgets; people make their own decisions, but from our point of view, we acknowledge that there were already cost‑of‑living pressures in our economy and developments in the Middle East are likely to make them worse, not better, and that's why we're rolling out cost‑of‑living relief. That's why we're cutting income taxes for every taxpayer. It's why we're helping to make sure that the service stations don't do the wrong thing by people. People are under enough pressure as it is. Developments in the Middle East do risk making that worse, and the government is very focused on this challenge, and that's why we're helping with the cost‑of‑living.
Journalist:
Treasurer, just following up your answer to Clare's question on fuel excise, you said that's not something that you've been considering. We are only 4days into this conflict at the moment. Do you have in your mind a threshold in terms of the price of petrol or the length of sustained period of high prices, where you might start looking at that sort of relief?
Chalmers:
We don't typically come at those kind of considerations in that way, and we're not coming at them in that way on this occasion either. We know that people are under pressure. That's why we're helping with the cost‑of‑living and a number of other ways. We've got to make sure that this cost‑of‑living help that we're rolling out is responsible and sustainable, and that drives all of our decisions in the lead‑up to the Budget.
Journalist:
Treasurer, one of the reasons some Australians moved to Dubai is for the low or even zero tax lifestyle that they get to enjoy there. Will any of those folks who are seeking repatriation to Australia be made to repay the Australian taxpayer for that?
Chalmers:
That's not something that we've been contemplating, no.
Journalist:
Treasurer, you said you don't want to see petrol stations taking punters for mugs. Today on the current fuel prices in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane - this is NRMA calculations - over half of the petrol stations have unleaded up 10cents up to 10cents above. And as you know, it takes at least 7, up to 10days for Brent crude prices to flow through the Tapis price and then into Australia. I mean, what's your advice to the ACCC on this? The NRMA has said today in a statement that this is price gouging, and what's your message to fuel retailers?
Chalmers:
Well, we take the views of the NRMA and other motorist groups very seriously, as does the ACCC. One of the reasons why we have asked the ACCC to put a lot of effort in here is because they have the capacity and the expertise to disaggregate usual fuel cycles from opportunism or price gouging. They are the best placed to make that assessment, and as they go about their important work, they will take into consideration the work of the motorist groups.
I say to the retailers: don't do the wrong thing by your customers. Make sure that you're not being opportunistic with your pricing. The ACCC has got an important role to play here, and we're making sure that they are as empowered as they can be to do that work.
Journalist:
Treasurer, one of the issues in the property market is the big lift in investor activity - investor credit rates up to a 10‑year high. Previous Treasurers and Prime Ministers have talked directly to APRA about tightening that macro pru around investor activity. Has that crossed your mind, and given Saul Eslake this week said that the February rate rise could have been avoided if not for what's going on in investor activity, do you think it is a contributing factor?
Chalmers:
I saw Saul's analysis. I think you reported it, and maybe others reported that as well. I saw that. I obviously take Saul seriously, but that's not the way that we've been thinking about it. I do discuss macro prudential levers with John Lonsdale. We meet pretty regularly, and one of the standing items in that agenda for those discussions is macro prudential levers. I haven't been directing him on that front, but I know that it's front of mind as he works through some of the issues and developments in the housing market.
Journalist:
Treasurer, so in the December quarter, the public demand, growth in public demand, was 0.9, more than twice that of private demand at 0.4. Are you comfortable with that sort of metric? And obviously, some of the public demand was defence spending. Do you think defence spending is inflationary or has no impact?
Chalmers:
Well, you're right to say that a big part - I think a key part - of the public demand in the quarterly figure is defence spending, and in both ways - not just defence investment but also defence consumption because of recruitment. And those things are good things. You know, the government invests enthusiastically in our capabilities, and I think one of the things that makes the December quarter unusual is how big a role defence spending is playing in that. And that's before you even get to the fact that a large chunk of it is state spending as well, as you would have appreciated in your reading of the National Accounts.
I'm not going to get into the pros and cons of that defence spending. I just think it's a fact that that's a big driver of public demand in the quarter. And one of the reasons why I've tried to encourage you to look across 2025 is because it is a pretty stunning story across 2025 - the private‑public distinction across calendar 2025 is really, I think, the biggest story in our economy, and it's laid bare again in these National Accounts.
You know, the way that private demand is taking over the course of 2025 from public demand is a very encouraging thing, a very deliberate thing. And there will be lumpiness in quarters from defence spending and in other ways, but overwhelmingly, the story is a very good one, and that is public in retreat, private growing substantially. And that's why when we talk about how encouraged we are by not just the strong growth in these numbers but how broad it is, is the fact that across all 3 of those private categories we've seen good growth. Consumption came in weaker than we thought it would, but it's still growing. But the business investment and the dwelling investment story is a really compelling one, a really good thing for private sector recovery that we were seeking in 2025, and which has been made clear in these numbers.
Journalist:
Treasurer, does the current economic climate make it less likely we'll see any more relief on childcare funding in the near future, or is there a potential for that to be a way to put more money in the pockets of working parents to increase productivity? Secondly, it's been described as rare‑odd, unsettling and uncomfortable variously by security experts I've spoken to - the Israeli President went to ASIO headquarters for a secret meeting, which was only made public after a question was asked in parliament. You're a senior member of the government who, no doubt, was in some way aware of the President's schedule. What do you say to those concerns that a non‑Five Eyes partner went to that building and had that meeting?
Chalmers:
Well, first of all, I wasn't aware of the detail of that. I didn't pore over the Israeli President's schedule while he was here. I've got a whole bunch of other things that I'm focused on. But I'm sure in their characteristically diligent way, our agencies would have made sure in every way that they could that that visit was appropriate, and I trust the decisions and the judgments made by our agencies.
Now, when it comes to early childhood education and care, we've got a huge agenda that we're rolling out, and one of the things I'm proudest of is the 3‑day guarantee. A wonderful development. It only just came in this year. Before that, the big steps in affordability, we've taken a whole range of steps. I pay tribute to Jason and Jess, and Anne Aly before her for the really big, substantial steps we've taken in ECEC that are rolling out right now. And beyond that, I'm reluctant to front‑run any other discussions or considerations of next steps beyond that.
Journalist:
Treasurer. I have 2 questions: the first -
Chalmers:
Everyone has 2 questions today. That's why it takes me so long to get from here to you.
Journalist:
I don't want to disappoint my colleagues who have asked. So, the first is: there is a suggestion from the ACTU about giving Australian workers an extra week of annual leave. Are more refreshed workers more productive workers?
Chalmers:
Well, obviously, we want to make sure that workers can balance their work and family responsibilities and that they can be appropriately refreshed and recharged that Australians do. That hard work is overwhelmingly the reason why our economy is delivering these kinds of welcome and encouraging numbers that we've seen today.
Now, on the specifics of annual leave policy, that's obviously a matter for Amanda Rishworth. I engage very frequently with ACTU leaders, as you would expect me to. That's not something that I have had the opportunity to discuss with them. I'm sure Amanda has. It's not something that we've been considering.
Journalist:
And my other question is in regards to petrol. Yesterday, obviously, Energy Minister Chris Bowen was saying there's no need to rush out and panic buy because we do have the stock levels. People are still queueing up in front of servos. Some around the country have actually run out, are you still confident in supply levels? And considering how fast the prices are going up at the bowser, can you really blame people for running out to fill up?
Chalmers:
I am confident that we've got the supply that we need, and that was the message that Chris was giving yesterday afternoon. There is no need to panic buy when it comes to petrol. And when it comes to the price of petrol, we're taking those steps with the ACCC to make sure that people aren't being taken advantage of.
Tom to bring it home.
Journalist:
Thanks, Treasurer. How likely do you think -
Chalmers:
How many questions have you got, Tom?
Journalist:
Just the one.
Chalmers:
Just one? Should have gone to you first.
Journalist:
How likely do you think changes to the luxury car tax are as part of the EU FTD?
Chalmers:
I want to pay tribute to Don and the work that he does on the EU free trade deal. You know, that free trade deal, I think, is a really important part of our economic plan. Trade policy more broadly, you know, we've been abolishing nuisance tariffs, Don's been doing all of this work with European friends and others. We've got this big engagement with our Canadian buddies tomorrow. All of this is about recognising that as the world is churning and changing and fragmenting our job that we embrace, the responsibility that we embrace, is to make sure that our people are beneficiaries rather than victims of all of the ways that the global is changing, and trade is a really important part of the story for us. You know, we are so reliant on trade.
Now, when it comes to the specifics of the EU negotiations, this is one of those times where I'm unaware of how much of it is public and how much of it is happening in committee rooms or on video teleconferencing facilities over the time. But certainly, from our point of view, we've indicated a willingness to include the luxury car tax thresholds in the discussions. I'm not sure how far that has progressed. I do know that we are trying to finalise that EU free trade deal as soon as we can. And in the important work that Don does and the PM does and Penny and others in this regard, they have a very, very enthusiastic supporter and colleague in me. Thanks very much.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
