14-November-2008
Portfolio Media Releases, Foreign Affairs, The Economy, Law and Order, Emissions Trading Scheme
Topics: G20, Global Financial Crisis, Treasury Forecasts, COAG, Secret Labor State Treasurers’ meeting, NSW Mini Budget, Emissions Trading Scheme.
DAVID SPEERS: To our guest this afternoon the Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, COAG and the Emissions Trading Scheme, Andrew Robb. Mr Robb, thank you for joining us.
ANDREW ROBB: Pleasure David.
DAVID SPEERS: Can I start by asking for your thoughts on this G20 Summit. Do you think Kevin Rudd should have gone to Washington or stayed at home?
ANDREW ROBB: Oh no, on this occasion I think it’s appropriate, very appropriate that he be there. I just hope that he spends more time listening and soaking it up, rather than lecturing.
DAVID SPEERS: Because your colleague Joe Hockey today said and I quote “The Government should focus on what is happening in Australia, Kevin Rudd should not be going overseas just to lecture the world about what he thinks is good for it.” But you think there is a case for the Prime Minister to be there?
ANDREW ROBB: Well as I say, I agree with Joe, he shouldn’t be there to lecture people. His job there is to listen in many respects and to make some assessment of the actions being taken by other major powers around the world. How it’s going to impact on Australia and how we can shield ourselves if you like from some of the worst effects on financial meltdown. It’s not necessary. Can I just say David? It is not necessary that we are affected as other countries are. We will be impacted but bear in mind we had no net debt twelve months ago. We still have no net debt because of sensible economic management for twelve years. You take the United States, their debt is 50% of their GDP. They're in a demonstrably worst position, there is no reason why we should be so affected but the Prime Minister has got to look at what the other countries are doing and see how we can avoid a lot of the worst effects.
DAVID SPEERS: There is, as you know, a lot of debate about the whether there’s a need of the overhaul of the architecture. By that I mean the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, whether we need a new international system to deal with global finance, essentially to prevent this sort of thing happening again or happening as badly as it has this time. Do you think there is a need for that sort of structural change on a global level and can it really be achieved?
ANDREW ROBB: I think there’s been an overreaction or a propensity to blame everything on regulation or lack of regulation or inappropriate regulation around the world. It’s almost as though all of those that see intervention as the solution to every problem in the world. Those people who want to control things, who feel that people can’t make good decisions for themselves, are going to seize this opportunity to put more and more layers of regulation. Now we have got to have regulation and Australian introduced sensible regulation over the last twelve years which is the envy of the world. But people have forgotten that a lot of the seeds of this were sown back in the Asian Crisis where a lot of those countries saw the disadvantage of not having reserves. They spent twelves year or more, building up reserves, eight, ten years building up reserves which had to be spent around the world. That created the bubble, created the bubble and because those Asian countries had fixed exchange rates, it exported a lot of problems to the rest of the world. Now again, it was the lack of a free market in exchange rates that really sowed the seeds for a lot of what we are seeing today. Then the regulatory issue compounded it so we can’t rush to see regulation as the answer, we’ve got to stay true to the market. That ultimately, people making decisions for themselves is the solution to having the best quality of life that we can achieve.
DAVID SPEERS: On the outlook for the Australian economy, I have to ask you Andrew Robb about your comments about the fact that there could have been some manipulation in the latest forecasts for growth, Ken Henry, the Treasury Secretary, says those comments were unhelpful can you just clarify what did you mean by saying there was a smell of manipulation about these figures.
ANDREW ROBB: It was really a query to the Government, not to Ken Henry, this document, this document of mid year forecast, is the Treasurer’s document, it is a document that he can change, and in fact it is a matter of public record that back in the 90’s, Paul Keating and Peter Walsh documented this in a book. Paul Keating physically changed the growth forecasts to enable the political selling of the One Nation programme.
DAVID SPEERS: And you’re suggesting that’s what Wayne Swan did here?
ANDREW ROBB: I wasn’t suggesting, I was probing and I wanted an answer from Wayne Swan, from the Government, what has happened here is the Government…
DAVID SPEERS: Well Ken Henry has given an answer, Ken Henry has given an answer that the figures weren’t changed.
ANDREW ROBB: This is a Government document. The Government has now spent months actually using a lot of officials as human shields to avoid probing and questioning. It is almost a McCarthyist approach, if you query anything about infrastructure you are against nation building, if you query immigration you’re a racist, if you ask questions about their emissions trading scheme, you’re a sceptic and if you question any of their documentation you are viciously attacking the officials. Now this is a technique of the government.
DAVID SPEERS: If you accuse the government of changing the figures supplied to them by Treasury and the head of Treasury says, no that didn’t happen, surely you must accept there was no manipulation.
ANDREW ROBB: David, this was a question that I was putting and the Opposition were probing this government. What I am saying to you is we have a really unfortunate situation developing where at a time of great pressure on the world economy and our economy, we have a government which is employing techniques to avoid probing and avoid questioning, we will not be silenced by this government and its techniques to avoid any serious questioning. In fact government decisions would be improved immensely if they would engage, if they would allow themselves to be accountable to be questioned and the way in which they used Ken Henry as a human shield rather than addressing the issue themselves was again another example of it.
DAVID SPEERS: OK, I want to move on, but just to clarify, are you still unsure as to whether there is manipulation or are you satisfied there was not.
ANDREW ROBB: Well I am satisfied with Ken Henry’s answer and that was the answer the government should have been giving and we should have had the opportunity to ask more questions of the government not only about that document but about other documents.
DAVID SPEERS: Now COAG, if I can get you to put your hat on as the Shadow Minister for COAG, the Western Australian Treasurer, Troy Buswell today has said that he wasn’t invited to a meeting of State Treasurer’s by the other Labor State Treasurer’s, he is of course the only Liberal State Treasurer from Western Australia, this meeting two weeks before the next COAG meeting, I have tried to seek comment from Wayne Swan’s office, they said they didn’t have anything to do with this meeting of State Treasurer’s, the New South Wales Treasurer, Eric Roozendaal’s office has not returned our calls. What’s your reaction to this, do you think there was a snub there of the Liberal State Treasurer?
ANDREW ROBB: Well it’s more than a snub, it’s a really concerning development, this is a secret meeting of State Treasurers where they have explicitly avoided inviting the Liberal Government of Western Australia, clearly it is a meeting designed to divvy up the billions of dollars that the Federal Government is intending to spend within the COAG context and I just say to you that a time of great pressure in the world economy and the Australian economy, putting the Labor Party, as these Treasurer’s have done, putting their Labor Party and their political skins ahead of the interests of Australians is a disgrace and we must have a situation where, at a time of great pressure, these people are looking to the interests and the future and the lives and jobs of every Australian not just their own jobs. Their own political skins.
DAVID SPEERS: But it wouldn’t be the first time ahead, a couple of weeks ahead, of COAG, that the Labour Treasurer’s, or Premiers or the Liberal Treasurer’s or Premiers do get together and have a bit of a caucus, a pow wow before they get into the full COAG meeting. It wouldn’t be the first time this has happened.
ANDREW ROBB: Look, this is off the back of Tuesday’s New South Wales Government’s mini budget, where they effectively scrapped a whole host of projects that last week were 100 per cent their responsibility, road and rail projects, and said now they’re the Commonwealth’s responsibility. In other words, the 12 years of reserves and surpluses that have been built up by sensible economic management have been basically lost in 12 months and what is left, they are looking to use as a slush fund to bail out failed Labor Governments and I’d say this secret meeting, secret meeting, no press allowed, no publicity given to it, excluding the state of Western Australia the Liberal Government, is an attempt to divvy up those funds to save their political skin. The New South Wales Government in particular is just a disgrace. It is finished. It is on the nose. It is costing New South Wales residents, you know, billions of dollars in mismanagement and failed management and it is just a great concern to see this sort of political game playing going on, when you know they need to be looking after the interests of every Australian.
DAVID SPEERS: Now, I want to ask you finally about your other portfolio area of the Emission Trading Scheme. The Government this is week facing some serious questions from big resources companies, Nyrstar and Woodside, threatening to take jobs off shore if this Carbon Trading Scheme goes ahead as planned. At the end of the day though, do you think these resources companies should be made to clean up their act or should we bow to them every time they threaten to take jobs offshore?
ANDREW ROBB: Well David. Penny Wong and Kevin Rudd and all the rest have said, including Ross Garnaut, they’ve said ad nauseam, there is no Australian solution to climate change, there is a world solution. We have to do something in concert with the rest of the world and what we have said, what has happened over the last 2 or 3 or 4 weeks, has confirmed the very fears we’ve had. We’ve said if this development of this Emissions Trading Scheme is rushed, if it is rushed, then they will get it wrong. The government will get it wrong and we will see Australian jobs, but as importantly, Australian emissions being exported to places like China and India where we will make the environment worse because of the more CO2 going into the atmosphere. Look the government has got a political agenda on this not an economic agenda. Again, they’ve tried to save political skins, Lindsay Tanner in Melbourne, Anthony Albanese, Tanya Plibersek, people who are under threat from the Greens at the next election, they’re trying to rush this thing through, get at a $10 billion tax in 2010 to balance their books, save their political skins, they are not looking at the interests of Australian business, Australian jobs and the future of the environment for that matter.
DAVID SPEERS: Andrew Robb, we will have to leave it there, but good to talk to you, thanks for joining us today.
ANDREW ROBB: Thanks very much David.
Media Contact: Stuart Eaton, 0433 298 620