CONNELL: Im joined in the studio by Labors Shadow Trade Minister and Leader in the Senate Penny Wong. Thanks for your time today.
WONG: Very good to be with you.
CONNELL: Just following on from the figures that were hearing today, we know what China has said is they will have their emissions peak by at the very latest 2030, but they havent actually given a figure for what that peak is going to be and until then there is going to be further increasing. Is it right to be sceptical about how significant this deal is?
WONG: I dont think people should be countenancing this Governments attempt to try and minimise this deal. Obviously Tony Abbott is much more interested in reviving his scare campaign on climate than on talking about whats good for the globe and whats good for our economy. What we have here is the worlds largest economies showing leadership and saying we will together, work to ensure we actually do something real about climate change. What China is saying is we recognise we have got to develop but we will commit to peaking and then having our emissions decline. This is an historic agreement and no amount of the naysayers from the Government really detract from the important political message here which is the world is acting and Tony Abbott wants to take Australia backwards.
CONNELL: Does it show how slow the worlds going to act as well? Because lets give China as an example of a developing country. Theyre saying well sure the US can ease their emissions earlier. Everybody still wants China to grow as well which is the flip side. Does it show that all of the developing nations that are going to sign on are going to delay cutting their emissions and the urgency some people talk about reducing the emissions sooner than that might not be
WONG: What it shows is that action on climate change requires a big effort. It requires a big effort from all economies, and particularly major economies around the globe. And it also shows though that China is saying we want to get on a low emissions development trajectory and thats a really big shift for the Chinese and really shows yet again how Tony Abbott is out of touch with where the rest of the world is going here. He wants to take Australia backwards and the rest of the world is moving.
CONNELL: What about the US? Theyve got to give a bit more of a concrete commitment. By 2025 theyll cut their emissions equivalent to our 2000 goal by about thirty percent. Now if Australia wanted to match that, if we wanted to say well cut our emissions on 2000 levels by 2025 by thirty percent, what sort of price do you think youd need on carbon?
WONG: Well I tell you what, youre not going to get there through, pardon me, a taxpayer funded
CONNELL: Cough for effect there?
WONG: No, no. You cant get there through this taxpayer funded bureaucratic model that the Government wants to put in place. I mean, the Government is using your money to pay polluters. Lets just be clear about what Direct Action is. And theyre never going to get to a reasonable target doing that and any reduction they do make is at great cost to the economy and at great cost to taxpayers.
CONNELL: Under your plan there would be that price on carbon. Do you know did you do any of this sort of modelling in Government, presumably what sort of price youd need to send that signal to cut down by 30%?
WONG: Everything we did on carbon I think was very much on the public record. When I was Climate Change Minister, when Greg Combet was, there was a lot of modelling produced. We were very transparent with Australians, much more than this Government is being. They simply want to take taxpayers money and shovel it out the door and pay polluters and hope that somebody might reduce an emission one day. Its a pretty bad example of policy and as Malcolm Turnbull said an exercise in fiscal recklessness.
CONNELL: Just finally on this, is there a reluctance to put a figure on it because as soon as someone says well, youll need $80 a tonne theres another campaign against that, and is that something that Labors a bit reluctant to put a figure on?
WONG: We know that acting on climate change is tough but we also know that using the market is the cheapest way to do it. I mean theres a reason why no economist has signed up to Tony Abbotts model: its because its a very expensive way to do nothing.
CONNELL: Okay. Just on this free trade agreement as well, we had Craig Emerson on here, of course the former Labor Trade Minister telling Sky News that in 2012 he was working towards a good enough deal. Thats my paraphrasing, but a deal perhaps that is not perfect with China. He talked about making it a living agreement: get some concessions, some lower tariffs and then keep working on it. So if that was Labors strategy, are you happy the Government appears to be adopting a similar one?
WONG: What Im worried about is that the Government might be adopting a strategy which is to do a bad deal. So the one message we have to the Prime Minister is dont do a bad deal. We need to do a good deal. We need to do a deal thats in the national interest, that maximises the access for our industries, that gives us the sort of access New Zealand got for their agricultural industries, that does the right thing when it comes to people movement, that doesnt simply sell out Australian jobs, that maximises the growth in Australian jobs. Thats what we have to do and thats my message.
CONNELL: Are you trying to say that a bad deal is essentially not one at the highest end of all the concessions youd want to get? The old saying
WONG: No, weve set out a range of benchmarks but I do want to make this point: I notice the Government is talking a lot about renegotiating and you know I think its part of the softening up for a bad deal. The reality is trade agreements are not often renegotiated. I mean weve had a trade agreement with the US for nearly ten years. It hasnt been renegotiated. The Government should sign up to a China FTA thats a good deal for Australia, that gives us more jobs and more economic growth.
CONNELL: How long can you negotiate for though? Because this one has been nearly ten years in the making.
WONG: It has been a long period, as you know. It was started under the Howard Government. But I dont think the Prime Minister has helped matters by simply setting a political deadline and I dont think hes helped matters by selectively leaking some aspects of it. I think Australians, for something as big as the China Free Trade Agreement, I think Australians are entitled to a bit more transparency, a bit more clarity about what the objectives are and what the Government is prepared to trade away.
CONNELL: Your objectives of course are on www.pennywong.com.au Im sure youll enjoy that plug. You talk about wanting the New Zealand plus deal on agriculture in particular. Now a couple of Government sources have indicated that that is what they believe they can get on many areas, perhaps sugar and rice might be a bit tricky as it was for New Zealand. So if they can get that is that tick off, job well done?
WONG: That is one of I think six or seven benchmarks we put down. I want to make one point about agriculture: havent the National Party gone quiet. I mean its fascinating isnt it? You get Barnaby Joyce who always likes to go out in the bush and tell them how tough he is and how much hell stand up for them. This Governments given apparently we only know through the media being backgrounded have given away sugar as an export market for China in terms of the free trade agreement. Not a peep out of the National Party. I think some of their constituency might question that.
There are a number of other issues I would press in terms of the free trade agreement. One of them is labour movement and I think its very important that we have a sensible and balanced approach to how many employees under the free trade agreement can come to Australia. We do need to strike the right balance between local employment and employers getting the skills they need.
CONNELL: Just on that measure Andrew Robb has ruled out so-called cheap Chinese labour
WONG: But thats not the point. Of course, of course no one would be suggesting that we would bring workers in and have them below award wages. The question is, do you require Australian employers, if they want to bring in workers under the free trade agreement, to make sure that they test the labour market to see if theres an Australian who can do the job first? Do you have any safeguards in the agreement?
These are the important policy questions. New Zealand did deal with this in their agreement and what Id say is this: Im a supporter of free trade and Im a supporter of stronger engagement with China. But we have to maximise the benefit out of trade agreements and that includes maximising local jobs growth. The Government needs to make sure this agreement does that.
CONNELL: Well I suppose well see the details but very quickly just to that point. New Zealand plus on agriculture, if they get a few of the things youve listed here are you ready to come and say well, it was ten years in the making, its not perfect, its not bad, Ill give it a tick?
WONG: We believe trade liberalisation is good for jobs and good for the economy. We will support deals which are in the national interest and we are saying to the Government: dont do a bad deal. Thats what were saying.
CONNELL: Penny Wong, thanks for your time today on Lunchtime Agenda.
WONG: Good to be with you.
ENDS