news.ninemsn.com.au

  Home
  Cover stories
  Political transcripts
  Feature stories
  Arts & profiles
  Film reviews
  Investigative files
  Vote results
  About Sunday
  Meet the team
  Help & feedback


Search Sunday
More ninemsn news




  



Interview: Malcolm Turnbull
July 27, 2008
Reporter : Laurie Oakes

Malcolm Turnbull.Watch our report

SUNDAY's political editor Laurie Oakes talks to Coalition Treasury spokesman Malcolm Turnbull.

EF: Well, this program might be coming to an end after next week but one thing that's not going to change at around this time every Sunday morning is politicians having to face up to the forensic questioning of Laurie Oakes. His agenda-setting political interviews will be part of a revamped line-up on Sunday mornings. Our guest this morning is the Shadow Treasurer Malcolm Turnbull. Over to you, Laurie.

LO: Thanks, Ellen. Mr Turnbull, welcome to the second last ever Sunday program.

MT: Good morning, Laurie. It's an honour to be here on your second last Sunday Show.

LO: You were Kerry Packer's friend, his lawyer. You knew him well. What would he say about this?

MT: Well, it's hard to say. Kerry was a very commercial man, as you know, so he would have taken into account the commercial issues. But he was very committed to Sunday and it was a great innovation because what he was able to did, both with the Sunday show and of course with Mike Walsh at midday during the week, was to take parts of the television day that had been essentially left to reruns of movies or cartoons and turn them into exciting, interesting and, of course, lucrative programs. So he was a great innovator with television.

LO: OK, we'd better get on to some forensic questioning.

MT: Yes, OK. I'll brace myself.

LO: We've got to talk about the Opposition confusion over an emissions trading system. Now what is the policy - should an emissions trading system start in 2012 whether or not China, India, the other big emitters take action?

MT: Laurie, the only Emissions Trading Scheme that is really relevant today is the one that Kevin Rudd seeks to introduce …

LO: I Think it is called slip sliding.

MT: No, no. Let's just focus on the real issue. You see, we are not in government. We had a proposal for an Emissions Trading Scheme last year when we were in government, which was due to start in 2011 or not later than 2012, but we're not in government now. What Kevin Rudd is proposing to do is to start an Emissions Trading Scheme in 2010 which is far too soon. It is rushed and we're seeing signs of it being rushed and what it doesn't do is allow time to take into account some momentous developments next year which will influence everybody around the world. A new president, be it Obama or McCain, both of them are committed to a very different approach to climate change than George Bush, both of them are committed to an Emissions Trading Scheme for America, and then, of course, you've got the big UN framework Convention on Climate change meeting in Copenhagen in December 2009. Now, Kevin Rudd's timetable, which is simply designed to make himself look greener than the Greens, will not enable him or any of us to take into account those developments and that's why it's too soon.

LO: But I wouldn't like to suggest you're filibustering, but I'll get back to my question - what is the Opposition's policy, should an emissions trading system start in 2012 irrespective of what the other big emitters do?

MT: Our policy is as was stated last year, which is that an Emissions Trading Scheme should be started not later than 2012 and that it should be started in advance of but in the expectation of a global agreement on climate change, emissions reduction. Now, the timetable that we set out when we were in government was set out for a very specific reason because not only did it enable us to get the work done and get it right - it's much more important to get it right. You see, the start date, Laurie, you know, people debate the start date, the real issue is what is the scheme, what is the design of the scheme.

LO: But as far as your leader is concerned, the real issue seems to be whether the other emitters have agreed to action as well. Now, do you still support the Howard policy, which came out of the Shergold report and he said, "It is our view that the costs that are clearly there for taking action now are probably more than offset from the potential risks of not taking action"?

MT: Well Laurie, the Shergold report, as picked up in the Howard government's policy last year, we mains our policy.

LO: And Brendan Nelson…

MT: Brendan Nelson and I have been saying that, as has Julie Bishop, as has Greg Hunt, Helen Coonan, Chris Pyne, Joe Hockey, everyone that has been talking about it ever since the green paper came out. So we've all been singing off the same song sheet.

LO: But your Dr Nelson quite clearly seems to have briefed Paul Kelly and Andrew Bolt to the fact that he wants that policy changed at the party meeting in this coming week. Has he told you he wants the policy changed?

MT: Look Laurie, I'm not going to pre-empt what the party, what the Shadow Cabinet might discuss or what the party room might discuss. As you know, political party's policies are a living thing.

LO: Yep.

MT: They change from time to time. We debate them.

LO: Sometimes in Brendan Nelson's case, they change from day to day.

MT: Laurie, we were - our climate change policy that we take to the next election, which will be in the latter part of 2010, one would expect, will be different to the one we took to the last election and it has to be because we'll be in a different world. We may well have a Labor Emissions Trading Scheme in place. We will certainly have a new approach from a new US administration. We will certainly have the results of a Copenhagen summit. So all of that feeds in to the evolution of policy and we, you know, we are not fixed on any, um, you know, past decision. We will review our policies. But the one thing I can assure you will be enduring is a commitment to a globally effective climate change strategy that will enable the whole world to reduce its emissions with Australia playing its part and doing so in a way that protects our economy.

LO: Let me put it to you this way - if the Coalition changes its policy to a position which says we won't have an emissions trading system until China, India, the US, take action, that will be a step back from where John Howard was. It will make the Coalition browner than the Howard government, won't it?

MT: Well, Laurie, I'm not going to comment - you can run the commentary on what we do next week, if we do make changes. I'm not going to pre-empt what's going to be done

LO: And you're not going to disagree with me?

MT: Well, Laurie, I'm not going to debate the results of a meeting that hasn't yet occurred. Let me just say this to you, though, and this is a fact, a simple fact - unless you get agreement between the major emitters - the US, the Europeans, Japan and, above all, China and India, which, while they have very low per capita emissions, are growing very fast and represent the bulk of growth in emissions - unless they all agree to reduce emissions, whatever we do or indeed any other country does will be futile. So a global agreement – ultimately is – I mean, nothing will work. Let me give you another example. If you assume the global goal, as many countries argue, and as the G8 said in fact, should be to have by 2050, global emissions that are level equal to 50% of the emissions in 2000. If you assume that's your target and if you assume the developed world cut emissions by 100% - which is impossible, but let's assume you did - the developing world, China and India, would have to reduce its emissions by more than 60% from business as usual. So you know, there are political and moral arguments between the developed and developing world but the sheer laws of arithmetic tell you that everybody has to act. Everybody has to act. We'll act in different ways. We'll have different strategies. Not everyone will have an ETS. But we have to have global action.

LO: OK. Now I'll bring you back to the issue. If the Coalition adopts the policy, which Brendan Nelson is now briefing people that he wants, that will make the Coalition browner than John Howard. Do you think John Howard was too green?

MT: Well, he wasn't known for being too green, that's for sure. No, look, John Howard had a very good, I thought, in the approach to emissions trading and the approach to water for example – I mean, you know, let's - if you look at, um, you know, climate change is not just a question of emissions trading. If I could just say about emissions trading, Laurie, it's not an end in itself. The objective is to reduce your greenhouse gas emissions. There are many different ways you can do it. The reason people adopt an Emissions Trading Scheme is because most countries and most economists and certainly business believes it is more efficient and therefore less costly than having a carbon tax or trying to do it by regulation. But the objective is to reduce your emissions and different approaches will be taken by different countries. What we want is the end result. The ETS is a means to an end. It is not an end in itself.

LO: What do you think Brendan Nelson is up to here? Is he setting up this issue as a proxy leadership test, picking something where he thinks he can roll you in the party room, put you back in your box?

MT: Well Laurie, I have not been able to discern in anything Brendan Nelson has said publicly over the last – well since he's been leader - or indeed that I've said publicly - any difference. I mean we are both committed to the same policy. We’re both - I'm not expressing personal views here. What I've been talking about is the party's policy. Now, the party is entitled to change its policy and every member of the party room or indeed of the Shadow Cabinet or the party room, is entitled to propose changes to policy and, as I said, inevitably, our policy will change. I mean we can't have a policy at the next election which doesn't take into account all the developments of next year, possibly a Labor Emissions Trading Scheme passed through the Parliament, certainly a very different approach from the next US president. I mean John McCain, who is the Republican candidate, the conservative candidate, has an absolute commitment to an Emissions Trading Scheme in the United States, America acting ahead of China and India. He is very - he's very firm on that and he has been for a very long time. Now, and, of course, Barack Obama, has a similar approach, so you'll see a lot of changes in the US, which is, you know, the leader in this discussion and, of course, you've got the meetings, well actually in Poland this year and then, most importantly in Copenhagen next year. So this is a developing issue. But the real focus, if I may say so, must be on the Emissions Trading Scheme that is on offer from Labor and the way Labor is constructing it, we can see now, is going to do real damage to our economy, what they have proposed in their green paper would flatten our LNG industry, flatten the cleanest fuel that is being produced at the moment and that is being purely because of a rushed, poor design. This is the problem with rushing things. You've got to get it right.

LO: You say that the Government scheme is a real issue but the Coalition keeps making itself the issue. Now if …

MT: My job is to make the Government the issue. That's why I was in Western Australia most of last week talking to the resources sector there, up in Karratha, up at the gas plant there, looking at the tens of billions of dollars of investment that's going to go into producing a fuel - you know, every shipload of which when it goes off to China or Japan will reduce their emissions because it will replace dirty coal or dirtier coal in terms of emissions and what I've been talking about up there and listening to are the concerns of an industry, a relatively clean industry, Laurie, that has said the Labor Government doesn't take any notice of them, wants to flatten them.

LO: But all this really means that you need a clear policy. You need to be able to speak with confidence about where the Opposition says. Now, if Brendan Nelson wins in the party room this week, if he forces a change in policy, which everyone knows you are opposed to, are you saying that it won't have any implications - that if he rolls you or you roll him, it won't have any leadership implications?

MT: Laurie, whatever emerges from the party room meetings last week, we'll see a Liberal party that is united and committed to a common goal. Now, the fundamental facts are Australia must play its part in the global effort against climate change in terms of reducing our emissions. We must, however, promote a global agreement. Without that, we could reduce our emissions by 100%, it would make no difference. So we've got to get that global agreement. We have got to act in a way, recognising that different countries will have different approaches, that doesn't devastate our industries. There is no point putting a huge carbon tax on - carbon price on our steel industry, for example, and if all that does is shut it down and the steel gets made in Indonesia or China, the emissions still go up in the sky, what's the gain there? This is the problem with Labor's approach. This is a complex issue. We recognised it was complex. We recognised it was going to take time. That's why we set a timetable that allowed us to get it right. Labor's timetable is rushed and they are making mistakes. And 2010, I promise you - and I say this from my experience as the Environment Minister last year - is too soon to get this right. They are already making mistakes and there are more to come and it puts our economy at risk.

LO: Mr Turnbull, we're out of time. We thank you.

MT: Thanks, Laurie.


Click here for a printer-friendly version.

  




Should the Coalition support the Rudd government's carbon trading scheme?

Many of Sunday's best stories result from tip-offs from our viewers. E-mail us your idea or call 02 9965 2470 ... or, to find out more about leaking a secret, click here.

Other ninemsn businesses: iSelect Mathletics RateCity
© 1997-2008 ninemsn Pty Ltd - All rights reserved