FRAN KELLY: Penny Wong is a Labor frontbencher and a strong campaigner for the legalisation of same-sex marriage. Penny Wong welcome to RN Breakfast.
SENATOR PENNY WONG, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE: Good to be with you Fran.
KELLY: So the Governments policy is no free vote in this term. That kills the issue now for this term of Parliament, doesnt it? How disappointed are you in that?
WONG: Look, like many Australians across this country who want to see an end to discrimination I am disappointed, but lets remember what we saw yesterday. We saw that Tony Abbott is a man who will fight tooth and nail to be yesterdays man. We saw that he is prepared to use every tactic in order to block progress. And we saw that he is prepared to tear his own party apart in order to get his own way.
It was a day characterised by disunity, duplicity and division. And the duplicity and division were at the hands of the Prime Minister who played every student politics tactic in the book refusing to go to his own Cabinet, pulling the Nationals into the room in a move his Leader in the House described as branch stacking in order to get his own way.
KELLY: It ended in six hours of free debate in the party room, which the Prime Minister said he was very proud of his party in the way they managed this, so the people Ive spoken to said it was a largely respectful debate in the party room and they seem very happy with their process. It ended with the Prime Minister now saying that after an election Liberal Party members, or Coalition members, will either have a free vote on the issue of same-sex marriage, or it would be put to the people and as the PM just said on AM what could be wrong with that?
WONG: This will go to the people, Fran, at the next election. The next election will be the peoples vote on marriage equality, because its clear from yesterday the only way to get marriage equality is to change the government. And we will, as the Labor Party, be very clear about our position and Bill Shorten has been very clear, Prime Minister Shorten would introduce a marriage equality bill within 100 days and that would be government policy.
But I do want to take on this issue of a plebiscite, and Id say the first point is this: I think anybody who wonders about the motivation of that needs only to look at how Tony Abbott behaved yesterday, where he played every tactic, refusing to go to his Cabinet, stacking in the Nats in a branch stacking move according to Christopher Pyne, was willing to tear his own party apart to prevent a free vote.
Well, a plebiscite is motivated by the same views and the same prejudices, which is he will do anything to block progress and anything to be yesterdays man.
KELLY: But we heard the Prime Minister arguing that this is an important subject, this is what he said on AM, a very personal subject, people have deep feelings, people are passionate about-
WONG: -His party room does, dont they? So do many Australians.
KELLY: He also said its something that very recently come into our cultural and social parameters, so why not give people more time to think about it and more people to vote on it? Do you think people, if thats the Coalitions position at the next election, the Australian people might like and welcome the idea, to have a vote on it themselves at a plebiscite?
WONG: Id say the vote is the election. I think the motivation of those arguing a plebiscite is clear, because they are the same people who have done everything in their power, played every trick in the book, to avoid a free vote in this Parliament. They dont want progress on this front, they want to continue discrimination, they dont want to grant Australians in this country the right to marry whom they choose, they want to maintain our discriminatory laws. So that is what is motivating them to suggest plebiscites or referendums.
You say hes asking for a referendum, the press conference last night appeared to have so many positions about what the Liberal Partys position would be after the election, its like a buffet.
KELLY: It was quite clear in that grab we just heard this morning.
WONG: Well, thank you, in what - 12 hours? - hes changed his position again? We had a buffet, it might be a constitutional referendum, it might be a plebiscite, we might have a party room free vote. Well, I think Australians understand this bloke and those who support him are vehemently opposed to moving on, they remain stuck in the past and the only way to get progress on this front is to change the government.
KELLY: You will go to the next election though with a position against a plebiscite, against the people having a say and you might look like youre frightened of putting it to the people.
WONG: No, I think this is a job for the Parliament. The High Court has said this is a job for the Parliament. And we all know-
KELLY:-How has it said that? Tell me more about that.
WONG: Because in the previous High Court litigation in relation to, I think it was the ACT bill, the High Court said very clearly this is the preserve of the Commonwealth Parliament, this is a matter for the Commonwealth Parliament. So a plebiscite is simply the Parliament refusing to do its job. I think a plebiscite is potentially polarising, we have seen how ugly this debate at times has been in the public, how some of the things which are said, which are extremely hurtful to gay and lesbian Australians everywhere, and to their children. And it is simply put up by people who dont want the Parliament to do its job, as we saw yesterday, dont want a free vote and want to do everything they can to oppose it.
What Id say to you is this: there will be a vote on this, its the next election and people can decide if theyre going to vote for a government who is prepared to go forward, or one who will fight tooth and nail, including at the expense of dividing its own Cabinet, to stay in the past.
KELLY: Can I just ask you finally on this, Warren Entsch, one of the co-sponsors of the bill says it now cant pass the Parliament. Would you want this bill to be debated anyway? It will be introduced, would you like the Government to bring it on for a vote to allow people to have their say in the Parliament and some Coalition MPs to cross the floor potentially?
WONG: I dont think Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party and the Nationals should think that yesterday means that theyre not going to have to make decisions in this Parliament. I think there will be moves, because so many people in this Parliament do think its time. And I think the majority of Australians think its time. So I think the Entsch bill, the Liberals are going to have to decide what they do on that and I suspect the Senate will be the location where some Liberals are going to have to decide whether they show the courage of their convictions.
What we saw yesterday was an exercise in raw power by a man who is prepared to do anything, including dividing his own Cabinet and his own party room, to get his own way.
KELLY: Were speaking with Opposition Leader in the Senate Penny Wong and in a moment well be joined by the Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey, who actually moved the idea, put forward the idea of taking this to a plebiscite after the next election. Hell be joining us shortly.
Penny Wong, can I just ask you briefly on another key issue, that was a bit swamped yesterday by the end of the day. The Government revealed its new carbon emissions reduction target, 26 per cent to 28 per cent on 2005 emission levels by 2030. Youre a former Climate Change Minister, Im sure you remember this, this is in your veins Im sure. Do you agree-
WONG: -And my grey hair-
KELLY: -That this is economically responsible and environmentally responsible, as the Prime Minister says?
WONG: Its neither. Its not a credible target and theres no credible plan to get there. The target is only consistent with a catastrophic outcome of 3-4 degrees warming for the globe, which is a catastrophic outcome and the plan to get there will cost billions. Weve seen even Australian industry, the AIG, talking about how much taxpayers money would be required to fund this. Now, this is a plan that lacks credibility, that is really from a Prime Minister who is not serious on this issue and certainly theres no economic certainty in his plan for business, which is why you see members of business organisations expressing such concern as to how expensive this plan will be for the economy.
KELLY: Given your experience at Copenhagen, which Im sure you havent forgotten that either, and that might be the reason for your grey hair, as you say. What do you think the prospects of global agreement at Paris are in December?
WONG: Look, I hope that nations of the world do the right thing by our citizens and by future generations. I think a very big step is being made by the way the US and China appear to be working together on this issue, that wasnt present at Copenhagen and its really the critical piece in putting together a global agreement. And certainly progress is being made much more than in it was developing countries in terms of policies to reduce emissions, policies to ensure there is a way of increasing economic prosperity without simply increasing pollution.
Both the United States and China, the two largest economies in the world, have essentially said we agree that we can go down a path of increasing prosperity without increasing emissions. And really Tony Abbott has demonstrated yet again hes yesterdays man.
KELLY: Penny Wong, thank you very much for joining us.
WONG: Good to speak with you.