BILL SHORTEN, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Good afternoon everybody. Id like to make some comments about the Budget and about climatechange and then get the Leaderof Labor in the Senate toupdate on where governmentlegislation is at and howLabor is treating it.
With theBudget, this will be the lastweek that Parliament will besitting for five weeks. Isincerely hope that Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey use the nextfive weeks to talk to realAustralians about their unfair Budget. I hope that Tony Abbotthas got the courage to talk topensioners and explain why theyshould be paying for cuts inthe pension. To explain todoctors about the GP tax. To talk to teachers about cuts inschools. To talk to nursesabout cuts in hospitals. Tohave the honesty to sit downwith a single mum earning$50,000 a year and explain tothem, explain to the mum whyshe should lose up to $6,000 infamily payments and othermatters because of this unfairBudget.
Tony Abbott just doesnot get how much his Budget ishurting ordinary Australians.They're not talking to realpeople. Because if they were,they wouldn't be perseveringwith this unfair Budget. And tomake matters worse, you've gotJoe Hockey threatening tobypass the Parliament, to makemore cuts by regulations. Thisis a Budget in disarray.
BeforeI hand over to Penny though, I wouldlike to make some commentsabout climate change. TheAbbott Government has beenhurting Australians with itsunfair Budget, and it will hurtfuture generations ofAustralians with itsbackward-looking approach on climate change. Today, TonyAbbott has made Australia thefirst country in the world to reverse action on climatechange.
History will judge TonyAbbott very harshly forrefusing to believe in genuineaction on climate change. TonyAbbott is sleep-walkingAustralia to an environmentaland economic disaster. TonyAbbott has demonstrated timeand time again that he is anenvironmental vandal with noview of the future. He will tryand do and say anything toavoid the science of climatechange. He still believes, as hefamously said, it is absolutecrap.
Australians now know whoTony Abbott is. He's lied whenhe says he's fair dinkum aboutclimate change, just as he haslied about his unfair Budgetand his pre-election promises.And it is truly extraordinary, reports emerging today that theACCC has told business thatthey will only take action toforce lower prices in theenergy sector. Again, anotherlie from Tony Abbott.
He wasthe person who said that undera carbon price, a leg of lambwould cost $100. He has liedabout climate change eversince he ambushed MalcolmTurnbull in 2009, and today hehas taken Australia backwards.I believe in this next fiveweeks that Tony Abbott needs toget out and talk to the realpeople and understand that realAustralians do not cop hislies.
I might hand over to mycolleague Penny Wong.
SENATOR PENNY WONG, LEADER OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SENATE: So Iwill just make some commentsabout the Senate which isvoting again. We've had a busy morning. Weve had a lot of chaos inthe Senate this last fortnight, and it's chaos that has arisen because of the way theGovernment is handling theChamber.
I'd like to emphasisethat we have seen time andagain the Government changingits mind aboutwhat legislationis a priority. We've had anumber of motions rearrangingbusiness, chopping andchanging, putting things on,taking them off. Now, we arecooperating with the Governmenton the bills that they regardas important, and the Senatewill sit tonight until 11o'clock, and we'll sit againtomorrow if required to dealwith the legislation that'sstill on the agenda.
A numberof important pieces oflegislation are on the agenda.Obviously the mining tax bills,which include the low-incomesuperannuation contribution andthe Schoolkids Bonus and theIncome Support Bonus. Now,Labor will continue to stand upfor low and middle-incomeAustralians against what isabsolutely a harsh attack ontheir incomes.
We also are currently debating the assetrecycling bill. That is, MrAbbott's privatisation agendaand as my colleague AnthonyAlbanese has said, we will bemoving amendments and we lookto the crossbench to supportthem to ensure transparency andaccountability and to ensurethose funds are not used forCoalition pork-barrelling.
And of course wealso have the Qantas Sale Act.And we're pleased that finallythe Government has agreed toLabor's amendments on that andthat will be dealt withtoday.
SHORTEN: Happy to takequestions.
JOURNALIST: Are there anycircumstances in which theLabor Party would support TonyAbbott's Direct Actionpolicy?
SHORTEN: We believe that to takeeffective long-term action onclimate change, an emissionstrading scheme is the best wayto go. In 2009, Labor made amistake in 2010 when we settledfor second best. In hindsight,we should've taken theemissions trading scheme to anelection. We settled for secondbest with a fixed carbon price.Labor fundamentally believesthat climate change is real,that Australia has a role toplay in tandem with the rest ofthe world to address this mostimportant environmental issue. So we will be backing in an emissions trading scheme.
JOURNALIST: Inthe meantime, is there any wayyou'd support Direct Action?
SHORTEN: Ibelieve that most seriousexperts, in fact all seriousexperts, view Tony Abbott'sDirect Action as nothing farremoved from a boondoggle, aninefficient mechanism where youpay wads of taxpayer money tobig polluters for little likelyresult. So why should Australiasettle for Tony Abbott'sclimate sceptics' policy ofDirect Action?
JOURNALIST: On your ETS, obviously you havent got the detail yet, but doyou envisage something alongthe lines trading in cheaper, you know,international permits fromdeveloping countries until ifor when, you know, as has been proposedin recent weeks by Ross Garnautand the AI Group and peoplelike that?
SHORTEN: Phil it's early days forus to be announcing ourelection policies, but on Monday Ioutlined the principles thatLabor will apply in terms ofdeveloping an emissions tradingscheme. We know that waterlevels are rising. We know that13 of the last 14 years havebeen the hottest on record. Weknow that greenhouse, heat-trappinggreenhouse gases are going tocause and are causing a problemfor our environment, so we knowthat we need to be part ofinternational best practice.
JOURNALIST: Will youcampaign on it or is it tooelectorally damaging, the whole issue?
SHORTEN: I believeAustralians are up for sensible arguments. See TonyAbbotts got a very narrow world view. I think we'veseen that in the 10 months since hesbecome Prime Minister. We've seen a sort of, noteven an ideology coming out of them in many cases, theyre just, they just react to with a verynarrow view of the world.Climate change is real. Manyother jurisdictions are workingtowards having a price on carbon andyet we've got Tony Abbott - thewhole world is going in onedirection and Tony Abbott is soout of step hes taking usbackwards, so we are preparedto stand by our principles loudand clear. We will not be TonyAbbott weathervane politics.We are the only major party inAustralian politics whos hada consistent view about theimportance of an ETS.
JOURNALIST: But what do you do differently to make sureit's not voted down again in thefuture? How do you sell it better?
SHORTEN: Well, I think thatAustralians are aware ofclimate change more than ever.I believe that Labor does needto communicate in a straightfashion with the Australianpeople. We have to say what wemean and mean what we say. Anemissions trading scheme is thepolicy which Labor will take tothe next election.
JOURNALIST: Now that the Climate ChangeAuthority will come out withrecommendations presumably itstays now, so it will come outwith recommendations over thenext few years on what ouremissions cuts should be. Now,your ETS, will it be in linewith the Climate ChangeAuthority'srecommendations?
SHORTEN: Well, we willwork our policies in detail andannounce them close to theelection. We are pleased thatLabor has had the win, to preserve some of the hard workwhich has happened to createthe architecture for an ETS, and sowe are pleased that the ClimateChange Authority will bestaying, and well bewatching very carefully to makesure that Tony Abbott's LiberalParty don't try and damage thatby the back door. But what Ill say about our policy is that wewill reveal it in good timebefore the next election.Again, I just remind you, andthrough you, all Australians,Labor very clearly recognisesthat what we want is this Parliament to be a place ofinspiration. We want to makesure that all Australians have a Parliament which is dealingwith the issues of the futureand an ETS dealing with climate change is the right wayforward, and no serious persondisputes that.
JOURNALIST: Doesn't Mr Abbott have amandate for his Direct Actionapproach to climate change?
SHORTEN: Direct Action isa Clayton's climate policydesigned for the audience of internet trolls and shock jockradio announcers and climatesceptics. Its a mandate from the flat earth society to givea lot of money to bigpolluters.
JOURNALIST: Is aClayton's policy, though,better than no policy atall?
SHORTEN: Well, Labor has learnt thehard way that if youcompromise on what youthink is the fundamentally bestpractice, people mark you down.So I recognise that a lot of hardwork has gone in under previousLabor administrations. Thebaton has been passed to me andthe team I lead in theParliament to win the argumentabout climate change.Australians want to understand the policies but they knowthat we've got to take action onclimate change, as are manyother nations in theworld.
JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten,just on the $550, now that's basedon the Treasury modelling thatwas done for the Clean EnergyFuture package that, you know, the lastGovernment did and we heard fortwo years Labor using thatmodelling to refutehundred-dollar lamb allegationsfrom the other side.So why isit not acceptable for theGovernment to use those figuresto, you know, to calculate theexpected saving? And if thosefigures are right, if thesaving is not $550, doesn'tthat just show that marginswere squeezed in the economy aspeople absorbed the carbonprice?
SHORTEN: Well, there is a fairbit in that question Sid, let me goto a couple of the basicassumptions. Tony Abbott liedhis way into office. He said that hewouldn't cut schools andhospitals; well we know he isdoing that. He said there wouldbe no change to pensions; hes clearly announced his plansto do that. He said there wouldbe no new or increased taxes, hesclearly lied about that.And hescared a lot of people about the massive impact of the carbon price in terms of rememberWhyalla wasn't going to exist?Remember the $100 leg of lamb? Remember how he said that there would bea tough cop on the beat? Andwe've even seen him and Clive Palmer in this sort of patchwork theatre, thisPunch and Judy show whichpasses for this government inAustralia, and what they'vesaid is, you know, theyll make sure -it was $10 a week to theaverage shopping bill, that was going togo on. Is that going to comeoff? Do Australians reallybelieve that they're going tosee back all the money whichTony Abbott alleged the carbonprice cost them?
Tony Abbottscaught in a trap of his ownmaking. He said the carbonprice was so deadly and so badthat Australians should be,according to him now, with itsrepeal, be seeing a river ofcash coming back into the costof living. We know the realproblem for cost of living inAustralia, Sid, is TonyAbbott's unfair Budget. Thepetrol price, you know, Tony Abbott says one thing in Australia, he says another thing overseas. Let's not forgetthat when hes withPresident Obama, he calls his petrol tax a carbon tax, here hes trying to pretend theres no increase in petrol and its not a carbon tax.
JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten, when you developed your last carbon policy there was consultation but the business community claimedit wasn't serious, that they weren't listened to. Will youengage more meaningfully with groups like the BCA, AI Group and so forth when you develop
SHORTEN: Well I don't accept thatprevious consultation wasn'tmeaningful, but we will engage inmeaningful consultation. I will tellyou something else Phil, wewon't use this currentGovernment's template forbusiness consultation. Businesses consultation of the Future of Financial Advice laws is, ClivePalmer steams down andconfronts Mathias Cormann and Greg Hunt and, you know, Senator Abetz,and he says to them, "This iswhat I want." 15 minutes later the guys sort of have a collectivepanic attack, they run aroundthen they come back and say, "Clive, whatever you want." I bet you nota single business was rung when they made those changes to theFuture of Financial Advice.This is a government who as soon as Clive Palmer, SS Palmer, you know, the steamship Palmer comesinto sight, they run up the white flag. They don't consultbusiness. Well do a lotbetter than the Liberals at consultingbusiness.
JOURNALIST: John Howard argued foran ETS and lost his job.Kevin Rudd argued foran ETS and lost his job.Malcolm Turnbull argued for anETS, he lost his job. JuliaGillard argued for an ETS, she lost her job.Kevin Rudd came back, arguedfor an ETS and lost his job.What makes you think that you canargue for an ETS and win anelection?
SHORTEN: Well, withoutnecessarily deconstructing the reasons why each person lost anelection I don't think JohnHoward just lost it because of this issue to be fair. Butwhat I do know, and your point really is that, are the Australian people are upfor real and genuine action onclimate change? Yes, they are. Australians aren't silly. Itsa matter of making sure thatwhat we do is anchored ininternational best practice.What we need to do is be fairdinkum on climate change, beconsistent. Australians getthat climate change is real. They get that sea levels arerising, they get there are moreextreme weather events thanever before. They get that ifwe put more greenhouse gasesinto the environment that willtrap more heat which will haveconsequences for our weather,and the way this planet is organised. So I do believe that anETS, argued through, learningthe lessons of the past, communicating with Australians,with business, people are upfor that.
JOURNALIST: Just backon your policy development,have you given up any notion ofevery trying to engage with theGreens again on this?
SHORTEN: Laborwill form its policies. We willwin our arguments by the basisof having the best ideas and bytalking directly with theAustralian people. One morequestion.
JOURNALIST: Are theGreens more flexible on anETS?
SHORTEN: Well, I think historyshows that Labor didn't see thefar right of Abbott muggingTurnbull, and we assumed thatTurnbull was there. I think history also shows that weassumed that the Greens wouldrecognise the value of an ETSand they didn't, they had somesort of more, you know,Green definition of thefuture. And the real lessonhere is Parliament should be aplace of the best ideas, it should be aplace where we measure up,where we deal with the politicsof climate change but not in apartisan fashion. That's my aimfor the next election, that wehave an ETS which does dealwith climate change. Thank you very much.
ENDS
MEDIA CONTACT: LEADERS OFFICE MEDIA UNIT 02 6277 4053