Barnaby Joyce has found himself in another tense exchange with Sarah Ferguson, returning to one of the ABC’s most prominent current affairs programs in combative fashion.
The One Nation MP appeared on 7.30 on Monday night to promote the party’s sweeping new housing policy, which would let renters and mortgage holders access up to a quarter of their superannuation contributions over three years.
It marked Joyce’s first time back on the program since July, when a moment in which he shouted at his dog Stella during a live interview went viral.
‘It’s an absolute welcome to be back,’ Joyce told Ferguson as the interview began.
But the discussion soon became disorderly, with Joyce appearing ill-prepared as Ferguson pressed him on whether he and One Nation leader Pauline Hanson had modelled the inflationary impact of the party’s controversial superannuation proposal.
Ferguson then challenged Joyce to model the lifetime losses Australians of different ages would incur if they opted to act on the policy.
‘Well, once more, how long is a piece of string?’ Joyce fired back.
‘Here we go folks, I’ll try and answer something which we’ll need an annuity table and will also need a sort of lineal regression, but I’ll do it for you, straight down the barrel.
Barnaby Joyce appeared to ABC’s 7.30 for the first time since becoming an internet meme
7.30 host Sarah Ferguson became increasingly frustrated with Joyce’s inability to answer questions on One Nation’s bold superannuation policy
Ferguson interrupted: ‘Barnaby Joyce, if I may, obviously this is a policy that your party has come up with, so we would expect you as the Treasury spokesman for that party to be across it, just try it.’
Joyce snapped back: ‘The Treasury spokesman [yes], not Jesus Christ.
‘You need to give me the details of these things if you’re going to put them forward to me.’
Ferguson pressed on, reading out figures that a 30-year-old earning the average wage of $108,000 would be $94,000 worse off, a 40-year-old $51,000 while a 50-year-old would be $27,000 worse off.
‘Well, folks, how on earth. I mean, this is ridiculous. This is like saying, “Well, look, I’m now going to give you an incredibly complex question”. Now, Sarah, I’m happy to come back to you tomorrow. And as I said on another stable, and as long as you’re prepared to pay my accountancy fees, we can do this regression analysis,’ he said.
The aim of the policy is to give Australians breathing space by allowing them to access more of their own money while facing cost-of-living pressures, without touching existing super balances.
Employers would continue to make the full compulsory 12 per cent super contribution.
Aussie workers would then be able to choose to receive three per cent as wages, while the remaining nine per cent would go towards their retirement nest egg.
The last time he was on 7.30, Barnaby Joyce (above) interrupted the interview to yell at his dog
Nothing would change for those who opt to keep the full 12 per cent in super.
Under the proposed scheme, a couple earning a combined $168,000 a year would take home an additional $4,300 a year after tax, or $82 a week.
An individual worker earning $90,500 would pocket about $2,300 extra, or $44 a week, for three years.