E&OE….
Topics: Australia’s quarterly emissions figures, ABC Q&A programme
TOM ELLIOTT:
I understand the war on climate change has just been won here in Australia. This is big news. Joining us from our Canberra studio, the Federal Environment Minister, Greg Hunt. Good afternoon.
GREG HUNT:
And good afternoon Tom.
TOM ELLIOTT:
So is it true that Australia's carbon emissions have been cut to the point where the North Pole is now saved?
GREG HUNT:
Well what I'd say is that we've just had the lowest what are called quarterly emissions – so for a three month period since 2004 on what's called trend terms, which is what the Department of Environment recommends we use. In other words we are doing very well.
And many of the critics who said we couldn't get rid of the carbon tax and reduce emissions have been palpably wrong. And the good news is, electricity prices are nine and 10 per cent lower than they would have otherwise have been, and emissions are down.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay, now what is the reason for this? And apart from the, you know, brilliant policies that your Government has introduced, I mean is it for example that houses are getting more efficient, is it that, I don't know, electricity has perhaps got expensive enough that people are using less of it? What is the reason our emissions are lower?
GREG HUNT:
Sure, so you have a number of things. One is that houses and industry are becoming more energy efficient. That's this long-discussed efficiency dividend where technology is producing the ability to do more with less in terms of electricity.
Secondly, and people will have very differing views on this, the emissions from coal mines are less than had otherwise been expected to be the case. And thirdly, there is unfortunately some reduction in the agricultural production because of drought.
So you have a policy outcome in terms of efficiency, you have an impact because of global elements, which is not within our control, and then you have the drought as well as the – this is all before the Emissions Reduction Fund kicks in with the 47 million tonnes of emissions, so…
TOM ELLIOTT:
So when you talk about agriculture, you talk about we've got fewer cars – cows, I should say – farting methane, is that what it is?
GREG HUNT:
Burping. That is an element. That's a simple statistical fact. It sounds a little bit odd, but you put all of those things together. And of these, the fact that our houses are more efficient, our businesses are more efficient, that our average consumption of electricity per household is the most significant and the most important.
TOM ELLIOTT:
But can I just say, I find that odd. Because I mean look, I know what I – when I renovated my house my house became more efficient, and I sort of get that, if you put in double glazing and if you stick in insulation in the walls not just in the ceiling, you will – you'll be cooler in summer and warmer in winter. But I mean only a small fraction of our total houses every year are renovated. I mean, can that really be making much of a difference?
GREG HUNT:
But it's not just the operation of the house, but the appliances in terms of refrigerators, freezers, you might have televisions, washing machines, dishwashers. These appliances are progressively becoming more energy efficient.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay, so you actually mentioned this a couple of weeks ago on the programme – so is it the case that we can just rely upon new and more energy efficient appliances to sort of do the job for us that the carbon tax was supposed to do, is that what you're saying?
GREG HUNT:
It's an element. What it's doing is producing a dividend. Effectively we're becoming more efficient in our houses, our businesses, and our industries. And then on top of that you've got to have the right policy measures.
And the right policy measures are directly to go and clean things up, which is what we're doing. The wrong is to drive up electricity prices, which of course is what the ALP or Shorten policy is, massively higher electricity prices.
And what we've shown is that was never a great way to do it, and it was a very unfair way to do it, and it was a very costly way to do it.
And by comparison, we're getting our emissions down, and we'll start to see the huge benefits of directly reducing emissions through focusing on the emitters rather than punishing the pensioner. And that will progressively produce better and better benefits. So, we'll get there.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay.
GREG HUNT:
We'll achieve our targets and we'll do it easily.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay. Can I turn to something that disgusted me on the ABC last night and I'm sure, well, I'm guessing you might have your reservations about. There was a tweet on the show Q&A and the subject of tweet just said “I prefer one's Twitter feed to their biographies”.
And there was no – that was fairly innocuous, but the Twitter handle, the person who sent that tweet to the ABC and which the ABC in its infinite wisdom chose to put up on the screen of national television, was by someone whose handle was “Abbott loves A – N – A – L” and I can't – I said it once earlier on in the program – can't bring myself to say it again.
Now, I don't believe this was an accident. I believe the ABC has a vendetta against your Government. And I also think that whoever filters tweets at the ABC that night looked at it and said “oh yeah, it's okay to give the Prime Minister a hard time, let's stick it up.” What do you reckon?
GREG HUNT:
Look, do I think that this was an accident? It strains credibility. There's a history. And it's just tasteless and it's indicative of a mindset.
Now they can say it was a terrible accident but why would you choose a tweet which says “I prefer one's Twitter feed to their biographies”? It's almost completely meaningless.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Exactly, I mean, it had very little to do with the conversation anyway. It didn't add anything to it.
GREG HUNT:
The substance of the tweet was not the reason it was chosen.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay, so – because we, you know – there were protests a couple of years ago against Tony Abbott by a grab bag of sort of leftist organisations, you know students and socialists and whatever. And prevalent I remember were all these young people wearing “F Tony Abbott” t-shirts. Is this part of the same trend?
GREG HUNT:
Look I think what you'll find is some on the left are very, very quick to not just criticise the Government but to use vile language against Tony Abbott. If, however, there's criticism of somebody in the other direction, that will be elevated to a great crime of language.
And so there are two different standards here. And I think we need to call it out. We accept that this is a democracy and people are entitled to debate. But Q&A is a mainstream programme in terms of its audience and its hours. Obviously, the starting point is, when I go on it I presume it's an away game. That I will be probably one of five from…
TOM ELLIOTT:
…so you wear the white shorts and a different coloured jumper?
GREG HUNT:
Absolutely. It's an away game. Having said that, I'm always happy to appear on it because I think as a Member of Parliament you have a duty to argue both in easier and more difficult environments.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Sure…
GREG HUNT:
And as somebody’s…
TOM ELLIOTT:
…but just to go back to what you just said, you said that it strains credibility that this was an accident by the ABC. So are you saying that there are people, persons within the ABC, or a person or people in the ABC, who basically want to, you know, bring the Government down or at least criticise the Government, you know, no matter what sort of language they use? Is that what you're saying?
GREG HUNT:
Look I think it's overwhelmingly likely that there are people who would want to do that. How would I imagine this was…
TOM ELLIOTT:
…but people in the ABC?
GREG HUNT:
Of course there are people in the ABC who want to be critical of the Government. There are people in each media organisation who will have a particular partisan view and then there are some who are absolutely professional. The question here is, is there a trend, is there a pattern, is there a style?
And imagine if this had been said about Julia Gillard. What a furore there would have been.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Well, that is a very good point. I mean, we – earlier on in the program we had a brief discussion with Rita Panahi about feminism. But I mean, the feminists in this country, if someone said Julia Gillard loves A – N – A – L, they would go absolutely berserk. I mean, they would go nuts about it. I mean, and they would be frothing at the mouth, and arguably rightly so.
And yet, nothing about the same thing being said about Tony Abbott. Well, what about the fact that it took the ABC until this morning – and only when being prompted by Malcolm Turnbull – to apologise?
GREG HUNT:
I think that, shall we say it's indicative of a certain mindset. Having said that, there are many parts of the ABC, in terms of their news, their foreign affairs, which I think are excellent. In this particular case, there is a pattern and a style. Now, I'm not afraid to appear on it because I think that's my duty and I like that challenge and that debate.
But I also think that we need to call out crudity for what crudity is. And we need to identify where there is a pattern or a perception of bias. Because clearly somebody thought “oh gosh this will be fun, let's just put that Twitter handle up” – because it wasn't the tweet, it was the Twitter handle which was the reason that subtext ran right across national television.
TOM ELLIOTT:
And indeed is still being talked about. Greg Hunt, thank you so much for your time.
GREG HUNT:
Thanks very much Tom, cheers.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Federal Environment Minister, Greg Hunt.
(ENDS)