E&OE….
Topics: Carbon Farming Initiative
GREG HUNT:
At the last election, we sought a mandate to abolish the carbon tax. We did that. We did that with the support of the crossbench and I thank the Palmer United Party for their support and savings from the abolition of the carbon tax are being delivered to families and businesses as we speak.
Electricity prices have had their lowest drop, their lowest most significant reduction on record. We also said that we would implement a practical Direct Action plan to reduce emissions. We committed to a $2.55 billion fund which would do real things to reduce emissions and to have Australia achieve our targets. We were crystal clear that we would abolish the carbon tax and we did that. We were crystal clear that we would support an Emissions Reduction Fund and bring that to the Parliament.
I am pleased today to announce that the Government has reached agreement with the Palmer United Party for their support in legislative passage of the Emissions Reduction Fund. We will do this by working together to support the Carbon Farming Initiative Bill of 2014. The Bill establishes the mechanism by which the Fund will be implemented.
Two big things occur. One – we protect existing projects. Two – we provide opportunities for farmers and for small businesses to improve their soils, to reduce emissions, for Australians to participate in energy efficiency on a grand scale. To do practical things such as cleaning up waste coal mine gas and waste landfill gas. These are the things that will actually reduce our emissions, without an electricity tax or a gas tax which we have abolished.
As part of the arrangements, we have agreed to amendments proposed by the Palmer United Party in relation to the Carbon Farming Initiative for things such as extending the capacity of Indigenous communities to engage in savannah burning. We appreciate the fact that they are not proceeding with their Emissions Trading Scheme Bill and similarly, as a gesture of good faith, we will not be proceeding with the Climate Change Authority Abolition Bill for the life of this Parliament and we have also agreed as a gesture of good faith that the Authority will conduct a review examining whether there are emissions trading arrangements in other countries and what form they take. There are more details on that.
But let me be clear – we set out to abolish the carbon tax and replace it with an Emissions Reduction Fund. We have abolished the carbon tax. As I said in Question Time, we abolished it lock, stock and barrel and that remains our position and will continue to be our position.
But this has been a very fruitful negotiation and I want to particularly thank Mr Palmer for that. He’s a good person to negotiate with.
CLIVE PALMER:
Thanks Greg.
I’d just like to say and congratulate the Prime Minister and the Minister on their initiative and it’s important for us. I stood before you all four months ago with Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States and we thought our environment policy in this country was under challenge and since that time we’ve been able, as a party, to achieve the retention of the Climate Change Authority, the Clean Energy Corporation and ARENA.
And today we’ve kept hope alive on an ETS with the Climate Change Authority under Bernie Fraser, carrying out an 18 month inquiry into the Emissions Trading Scheme, which will be a three stage process. There will be reports back to Parliament by November this year and then by June 2015 and then with a report for Parliament completed after the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris on 30th June 2016.
So we think we’ve kept alive an ETS and I think from our perspective once our trading partners all have an ETS, it is fundamental that Australia has one because if we don’t we will be saddled with a tariff effectively for the export of our products to those markets. So both from an environmental and a commercial view we think this must happen.
In understanding climate change we must remain ever vigilant and be aware of how Australia is part of the international community it is doing and more importantly what the global community can do together to make the lives of all of us who inhabit this world a much better one.
And I think Bernie Fraser’s had an outstanding leadership of public service in this country and I have every confidence in him and the Minister and the Government in conducting an initiative over this period of time to ensure that Australia remains at the forefront of international developments in this area. This is a much bigger issue than anything else in our generation and as President Obama said this is a situation where you don’t want to be on the wrong side of history.
I welcome the courage that the Prime Minister’s shown today, the Minister’s shown in allowing the debate on this issue and providing the resources for the Climate Change Authority to keep hope alive to look at the environmental trading scheme. And you know an ETS it’s not the Liberal way or the Labor way but we think at the Palmer United Party it’s the right way.
So again I think this is a major step forward for Australia. Certainly the Direct Action programme of the Government will go a long way to dealing with these matters in the short term and we’re happy to support them. The Government’s been very reasonable in dealing with some of our amendments in relation to the Carbon Farming so we’re all happy about that.
We hope this is a win-win situation not just for our Party, not just for the Government, but for all Australians. So I think Bernie Fraser will deliver real results for every day Australians and carry out his inquiry on this important issue. Bernie.
BERNIE FRASER:
Thank you Clive and Greg. From the point of view of the Authority, these are pretty encouraging developments and as you’ve heard already we’ve been given some pretty important tasks to do and we’ll set about those in the way that we’re required to and with appropriate reasonable resourcing in terms of funding and personnel. We’ll set about providing independent, but balanced advice on the implications of the projects that we’re required to undertake. That means taking a national view about things, not a sectional view, but a national view. We’re required to weigh up all sorts of implications for different members of different sectors of the community. We’re required to take a long-term view and as I say, with reasonable funding, reasonable resources we’ll do that job but as best we can.
But I think it is important that the Authority, with a charter to be independent and to provide balanced advice is a proper way about going about establishing the basics, the benefits and costs of some of these major and potentially very important schemes and that’s what we’ll endeavour to do.
Beyond that I’d like to think that what you’ve heard today is perhaps the beginning, the beginnings of an emerging broad, broader political consensus on climate change and the need to take effective action because that’s what this country needs more than anything else – the development of a broad political consensus.
GREG HUNT:
Alright. We’re happy to take any questions. Andrea? I think Andrea was first
JOURNALIST:
Can I just ask what the status is of your negotiations with Nick Xenophon, especially the safeguard mechanism and how quickly you could use those safeguard mechanisms to transform your current scheme into an effective ETS either through lowering the baselines or increasing the penalties or some other mechanism?
GREG HUNT:
We’ve have very constructive discussions with Nick Xenophon. We’ve indicated that we accept four out of five of his amendments that have been published and we don’t, we won’t be supporting a strategic reserve – that’s not our policy. But let’s be clear – those amendments represent what has been our policy since 2010. What was in the Green Paper and the White Paper.
So those amendments are acceptable, they are no change to the policy that was in place in 2010 and I do want to acknowledge and praise the work of Nick Xenophon and John Madigan in addition to Mr Palmer and then Senators from the Palmer United Party and Ricky Muir. Senator Xenophon has been extremely constructive.
But this is not and will not be a carbon tax or an ETS. There is zero revenue. I want to repeat this. There is zero revenue in our scheme. We have no plans, no intention and no belief that that will change.
JOURNALIST:
Businesses has said they wanted international carbon permits as a cheap way of potentially making good their commitments if they looked like falling short and also they were modelled to provide an easy way of meeting our emissions reductions targets by 2020. What was the reason that you rejected that proposal?
GREG HUNT:
Look, our policy has been expressed for some years on this. We very simply want to focus on domestic emissions reductions. I also note that the Palmer United Party had very strong views on this, and so we will focus on domestic emissions reductions.
JOURNALIST:
Two questions – if there is zero revenue, what incentive is there for companies who don’t bid into the ERF, to reduce their emissions? And the Reputex firm just put out a release a little while ago that they thought the Emissions Reduction Fund may get 30% of the way towards the 5% targets so on what basis do you think it will get all the way and on what basis do you think could Australia make deeper cuts after 2020 and could I get Mr Fraser’s view on that last point, please?
GREG HUNT:
Alright. Firstly, our position has not changed. Secondly, I haven’t seen the Reputex report and I apologise for that, but I’m not aware of it. Thirdly, we will achieve our targets. What we are seeing is that our emissions profile compared with what was always projected is dropping.
We are in a position to achieve very significant reductions. This policy today is about reducing emissions by cleaning up waste coalmine gas, by encouraging energy efficiency, by doing practical things in Australia right now that will actually reduce emissions.
JOURNALIST:
The modelling says you can’t get there. On what basis do you say you will get there?
GREG HUNT:
Well, I am very confident and we are committed and I want to express, we are committed to achieving our targets without a carbon tax.
JOURNALIST:
On what basis are you so confident?
GREG HUNT:
On the work that we have done over the last year and indeed over the period since 2010 and as I have worked through this, what I’ve found are the following things – that the indications are we will be able to purchase abatement at a lower cost than expected. We are likely to receive more abatement than we had expected and the gap we have to fill is lower than when we started out because our emissions had not risen, as we had lost manufacturing overseas, sadly, by comparison with what was expected.
JOURNALIST:
(Inaudible) release that modelling that Treasury has done, or if it hasn’t been done isn’t it time to do it?
BERNIE FRASER:
The Authority’s views on emissions reductions targets and so on were detailed in our report some months ago and that was a report to Government, an advisory committee report, which we are. Our views haven’t changed, but we haven’t honed in on the feasibility or cost of getting to the minus five, but we take Greg’s confidence on that point.
JOURNALIST:
(Inaudible) an allocation in the Budget. Does the Government intend to put forward additional funding and resources and if so, how much?
GREG HUNT:
So we will be funding it and we will make sure that it is appropriately resourced for its tasks. That is in fact part of the agreement.
JOURNALIST:
(Inaudible)
GREG HUNT:
We are working constructively with the Authority on that at the departmental level.
JOURNALIST:
Minister, you promised to abolish the Climate Change Authority as a part of the Coalition’s election campaign. Doesn’t this constitute a broken promise? And for you Mr Palmer, just four months ago you said that the Emissions Reduction Fund was a waste of money.
CLIVE PALMER
I think we’ve said all along that we believe that the future is an ETS that was our policy and we’ve said that for a long time. And we offered – we think that the ETS is so important to move that project forward that we would support Direct Action as a consequent of that.
But when you look into Direct Action, there is a lot of positive initiatives, especially now. We’re looking at a different – we’ve got a number of amendments to carbon farming which the Government’s accepted which is a different proposition. We think it makes it better and stronger, especially for Indigenous communities and others, so we’re talking about a solution. The thing about Australia is we’ve got divisive politics.
We want to bring the country together especially on something as important as the environment, and we’ve got to recognise the Government’s willingness to lead in this way, and it’s to their credit that they are prepared to look at issues and sometimes change their minds on things or refine them or make them a better solution, because in Parliament, we all want to do the best we can for the community.
JOURNALIST:
Broken promise?
GREG HUNT:
Let me say this – this is a tremendous outcome for the Government. One of our signature policies is being achieved. Something towards which we have worked since 2010, something which has been taken to elections and we are realistic about the Senate.
If the Senate was not going to accept that proposal, and if it’s an important gesture as part of the process, then we are achieving the outcome here of the Emission Reduction Fund, of strengthening the Carbon Farming Initiative, of reducing emissions and doing it without a carbon tax.
On the big things here, we do what we can which is abolish the carbon tax, done, implementing the Emissions Reduction Fund and the honest answer is that this is part of that process of both parties being flexible and achieving the outcome.
JOURNALIST:
Minister, just on that point, why is it realistic for you and why was it not realistic for Julia Gillard? Why was it a broken promise for her, but yet for you it is realistic politics?
GREG HUNT:
Well, very simply it was impossible for that to pass the Senate, and it is possible to pass the Emissions Reduction Fund which is a central pillar, a fundamental part of our environment program, our economic program and our climate change and emissions reductions program.
If we are able to achieve that, whilst recognising that some months ago the Palmer United Party said they would never abolish the Climate Change Authority, then what we have done is make a gesture of virtue and they have made important responses to that, and at the end of the day this is a pathway to doing real things which actually reduce emissions in Australia.
JOURNALIST:
The Government is in an invidious position now where it’s implacably opposed to emissions trading and yet funding an instrumentality to do an investigation into that and Mr Palmer, will you be expecting the Government to hold fire against on campaigning against an ETS and treat those investigations in good faith over the next 18 months?
CLIVE PALMER:
Well, actually, you know, we don’t want to foreshadow what Bernie’s results are before he has done the investigation, otherwise there is no need for an investigation, really. I would think the point of that is to have an open mind. If we have an open mind in this sort of issue it is to the benefit to the country.
An open mind is that you don’t prejudge things, that you’re open to possibilities, maybe some you disagree with. At the end of the day if you still disagree, perhaps this process will help us understand where other people are coming from, so we can get what’s the best solution. As I said, this is a very important issue for the whole world, not just for Australia, and we’ve got an international responsibility to not think of our partisan politics, but to look forward into the future and think what future generations will say to us. If we didn’t meet the challenge to consider all possibilities to reduce carbon emissions, I’m sure future generations would hold us in a bad light.
And I’m very confident in the Minister taking the stand and supporting to at least looking at the prospect of an ETS. We think it is a good idea, but we want him, the Government, other people to think. Whatever Bernie Fraser does, he is an honest man, he’s very capable, he has been around a bit, and we think he can come up with a report, the structure of the arrangements, whether it be reports back to Parliament every six months, whether it be reports after the international conference on climate change in Paris. Puts us out there with the rest of the world, you know on the world stage of not closing our minds but being open to further things. I just can’t see there is anything wrong with that.
GREG HUNT:
I will just finish with Mark’s question, and then Sid. This is a great outcome for the Government. Let me be absolutely clear. I have heard for some years now people saying we will never have the Emissions Reduction Fund through the Parliament, we will never get the carbon tax abolition through the Parliament. The carbon tax has been abolished and electricity prices are lower.
The Emissions Reduction Fund now has the prospect of being passed through the Senate in a short period of time. That is a fundamental success for the Government. I don’t think there is anything other than the ability to look at this and say the Government said it would do two big things – abolish the carbon tax, pass the Emissions Reduction Fund. We have never waivered from that. None of these things come without negotiations. That’s the reality of the Senate. Sid?
JOURNALIST:
I’m just interested, when does it go to the Senate? That’s the first thing, and then a couple of questions for Mr Fraser. Do you anticipate that your job remains the same as it was, given that you’re remaining in existence, is your job the same? So are we going to have recommendations on targets? Are you going to do a RET review by the end of the year, so what can we expect from you? Mr Hunt first.
GREG HUNT:
Bernie, go ahead.
BERNIE FRASER:
We do have a couple of legislative requirements that have to be satisfied by the end of this calendar year and we will meet those obligations. There’ll be reports on the CFI and on the RET. They will be very modest reports, partly because of timing constraints, but more significantly because so much else has been happening on both those fronts over recent months, and including today on the CFI and the amendments that have been alluded to.
As to the future work program, we will pursue that in the way that I indicated, in the way that we are required by legislation to do, to be balanced, to be expert in all the different relevant areas, to consult widely, to be transparent, all the things that we’ve tried to do in the few reports we have put out in the couple of years that we’ve been in existence.
GREG HUNT:
Look, I think the wisest thing for a Member of the House of Representatives to do is not pre-empt Senate timetables. We hope that they will deal with it as quickly as possible, but I am deeply respectful of Senate processes and the roles of Senators.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Palmer, can I ask you two questions…
CLIVE PALMER:
Well, you go first…
JOURNALIST:
Thank you. Could you rule out any of your companies, for instance, Queensland Nickel, bidding in for instance, energy efficiency projects it might like to fund and that are on hold in to the ERF, or any of your other companies and secondly can we expect a similar deal being done on the RET and a back down from you on that?
CLIVE PALMER:
No, woo he have’ made our position clear on the RET and our position clear on the ETS and this for a long time, we’ve been very consistent on that and I’m happy the Government’s shown some leadership looking at some of the facts and realising we’ve got to have a broader net.
In relation to my companies, I’m not a director of Queensland Nickel. I’ve have retired from that role. I’m a full-time politician. I don’t think there are any prospects that I’m personally aware of that are happening. That’s all I can say, really. What was your question?
JOURNALIST:
An ETS is clearly not Government policy. Do you have realistic hope that there is a report coming back that this is a good idea, that the Government will seriously consider this proposal? Have they promised you anything?
CLIVE PALMER:
No well our Party, the Palmer United Party only has four members in Parliament, right? And we think what’s the most important thing is not so much how many members you’ve got, but the battle of ideas. We think if it is a good policy, if people support it, we think Governments of all persuasions will be convinced by it.
If we have a pre-eminent report from Bernie which says this is what we should have for Australia, setting out new facts and new findings, I’m sure the Government should consider that in a future time if it was different. And on the converse, Bernie may find that we shouldn’t have and ETS. You know, we’ve got to let him do his work totally independent and not pre-judge what he finds out.
So I would just like to say that this does indicate that the Government has been prepared to discuss these things openly and reasonably and they have been prepared to adjust for a better outcome for Australia. It’s not about Clive Palmer or Greg Hunt winning anything or the Government winning or losing, it’s about trying to make the whole of the country win.
GREG HUNT:
I will take one more question from somebody who hasn’t asked one and then we do have to go.
JOURNALIST:
If the Authority does come back at the end of this and says that it is in Australia’s best interests for an ETS, is that a position you would be prepared to take?
GREG HUNT:
Look, I was clear in Question Time today on our position. Our position was to abolish the carbon tax. Our position hasn’t changed, but as an important part of the negotiations and as a show of good faith, we have accepted and agreed on the terms of reference provided, but our position hasn’t changed.
At the end of the day, we said we would do two things at the last election. We would abolish the carbon tax and that’s done with the help of Mr Palmer and his senators and other crossbenchers. Secondly, we set out to and said we would achieve our targets through the implementation of an Emissions Reduction Fund, and my hope, my belief, my expectation is that that will now be done.
Thank you.
(ENDS)