04-May-2009
Portfolio Media Releases, Emissions Trading Scheme
Topics: Rudd Government’s backdown on their ETS.
TONY JONES: Now back to our top story on the Government's backflip over the introduction of a carbon pollution scheme. Just a short time ago I spoke to the Opposition's spokesman on emissions trading, Andrew Robb. He was in our Melbourne studio.
Andrew Robb, thanks for joining us.
ANDREW ROBB: My pleasure, Tony.
TONY JONES: Has the Government turned the tables on you on this issue today?
ANDREW ROBB: Not at all, Tony. It's the Government that has the problem on this issue. I think what we saw today with the humiliating backdown was a confirmation that they had the design of the scheme wrong, and today's effort has not corrected the major design flaws that are in this scheme.
I think what you will see - well, I can confidently predict you'll see many more changes yet from this government to this scheme before it gets into some sort of order.
TONY JONES: The Prime Minister wants this voted for in the Senate before June. Are you really prepared to vote against this and create another and perhaps much more serious double dissolution trigger?
ANDREW ROBB: Tony, we will vote for the right scheme. That is - that is our intention. This is the biggest deliberate structural change to be introduced into the Australian economy in our history. This is - as the Prime Minister said today, this is a matter of great moment. We cannot have a situation where we support a scheme which will lead to tens of thousands of Australians out of work and with no substantial cuts in CO2 emissions into the bargain.
We will keep on this Government until they do the work. What they have done today by effectively pushing the scheme out to a start date, effectively of July 2012 with the way in which they've structured the changes, they have given Australia the time to get this scheme right. The report we had last week from the Centre for International Economics, the independent report said that no analysis has been done on the job impact in the next 20 years. No analysis of alternative schemes, no analysis of the global financial crisis, no analysis of a situation where some countries or all countries don't come into a scheme in the next five or 10 or 15 years.
That work must be done, should be done, can be done, and it is our proposition to the Government; do that work over the next six months, then present the legislation once the community and all of those groups who will be fundamentally affected, have had their chance and the benefit of that sort of work by the productivity commission.
TONY JONES: So you're saying - OK, let's get this straight. You're saying you'd be prepared to vote for it in six months, provided that the work you want seem done? But the Government's going to push ahead with this. So let me just put this to you. Do you think Kevin Rudd is prepared to press the double dissolution trigger on this issue?
ANDREW ROBB: Well, you'll have to ask him that, Tony. I mean, my point is..
TONY JONES: Your colleagues must be a bit concerned, as has been reported, that you may be manoeuvred into a position where you'll have to fight an early election on this issue.
ANDREW ROBB: Look, I think the Australian community, on an issue like this, will look for the politicians not to play politics, Tony. I mean, our fundamental concern on such an issue of such moment, is to get this scheme right. We will consider a scheme when we think the work has been done and that the fundamental flaws that exist in the current scheme are corrected. That is an imperative for us and, you know, what the Prime Minister does, that's up to him.
TONY JONES: But don't you see a political motive behind what's happened today?
ANDREW ROBB: Well, you could read, you could read that into it. But what I think happened today was that there was a major humiliation of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister who has said, you know, only a few months ago that it would be reckless and irresponsible not to proceed immediately with the scheme, has today pushed a scheme off until effectively July 2012. Quite properly, because the work has not been done. The work must be done and he mustn’t play politics with this. He must get this right. I think if he plays politics with this, he will do so at his own cost.
TONY JONES: So you think it could cost him if he goes to an early election on this issue?
ANDREW ROBB: Well, I'm not getting into any speculation on that. I do think that people do understand that this is an issue of great consequence. People expect us to do the responsible thing. You know, I've visited now, Tony, over 75 companies, and from all of the concerns that they've expressed and the figures they put in front of me and the impact on investment and on their jobs and their profitability and their competitiveness, I'm convinced that nothing that we saw changed today the tinkering that went on today has not in any way addressed the concerns of those companies and their employees.
TONY JONES: Do you accept that there does need to be some sort of scheme put in place as soon as possible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Australia?
ANDREW ROBB: Tony, we are as committed as the Government to seeing significant cuts in CO2 emissions, but we want to do it in a way which preserves the great strength of our economy.
TONY JONES: Have your views and the views of the Opposition been influenced at all by the arguments set out recently by Professor Ian Plimer in his new book, that CO2, in his argument, has no effect? Man-made CO2 has no effect on global warming.
ANDREW ROBB: Tony, our concern and our objective on reducing CO2 emissions has remained solid throughout this term of office. It was there leading into the last election. We are as committed as the Labor Party to see cuts, significant cuts in CO2 emissions, but it must be, it must be done in a way which preserves the jobs of Australians. It can be done; we have started to lay that on the table with some of the work that was presented in January by Malcolm Turnbull. We do see that there are ways in which you can cut and cut deeply into CO2 emissions without sacrificing tens of thousands of Australian jobs.
TONY JONES: Just give us a rough idea of the targets that the Coalition would propose before 2020 under any scheme that you put forward.
ANDREW ROBB: Well, we have said we will at least match the Labor Party and we think we can do a lot better.
TONY JONES: On the new targets as well? The new targets include, if there's a global agreement, 25 per cent cuts on the emissions. Would you agree to that as well? Could you do better than that?
ANDREW ROBB: Tony, the new targets are meaningless. The only guarantee, the only commitment that the Government has made on targets is for a five per cut by 2020. We believe that we can deliver at least that target and probably better without sacrificing tens of thousands of jobs and with giving business certainty.
TONY JONES: Well, it's not meaningless if there's a global agreement. That's the point. So if there's a global agreement on a broad carbon reduction plan across the world, what would the Coalition be prepared to go to? 25 per cent?
ANDREW ROBB: Tony, you know, the prospect of a cut to 450 parts per million, you know, is...
TONY JONES: Well, that would be a rise in fact. We're not at 450 parts per million. You're talking about a cut that would bring us down to that level by 2020.
ANDREW ROBB: That's right.
TONY JONES: Or hold it at that level by 2020.
ANDREW ROBB: A global agreement to that is - the Government knows that that's nigh on impossible that that's going to occur. And, you know, it's a hollow promise, it's a hollow guarantee. The only guarantee, and Penny Wong confirmed this tonight again on television, the only firm guarantee this Government has given is that they will seek to deliver five per cent cuts by 2020. We believe that we can deliver at least as good as the Labor Party is promising and better.
And if there is a global agreement, well, in many cases, in many respects, there would not be the debate that we've got now. Most of the companies, almost all the companies I've visited, when I've said if there was a global agreement, if there was a price of carbon, would we be sitting here having this discussion. And they said no. They are confident about competing on a level playing field. If there is a price of carbon across the world, none of our industries are concerned. They believe, in fact, that business opportunities would increase in Australia under those circumstances. So those sorts of issues, I don't think are relevant to the debate. What is relevant is if the rest of the world doesn't engage...
TONY JONES: You have to have a position to take to the major talks at the end of the year in Copenhagen, don't you?
ANDREW ROBB: Yes, we do. And the country, Australia, does have to - Australia has got a position. It wants to achieve deep cuts without disadvantaging our export-import competing industries. Now that is a very plausible position. It's one supported, supposedly, by both sides of Parliament, but the work has to be done on a scheme to get the design right to deliver that objective. This scheme is fundamentally flawed.
TONY JONES: Andrew Robb, we thank you very much. We're out of a time now. We thank you very much for coming to talk to us, tonight.
ANDREW ROBB: Thanks, Tony.
Media Contact: Stuart Eaton, 0433 298 620