Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Capital Hill -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) This Program is Captioned

Live. THEME MUSIC Hello, and welcome to Capital

Hill, I'm Lyndal Curtis. The

reshuffle and there's fallout day after the ministerial

for the Prime Minister over her

decision to demote one decision to demote one minister

and shrink the portfolio and shrink the portfolio of another.

another. Both the Attorney-General Robert

McClelland, who remains in

Cabinet, but in a smaller role

and the former Industry

Minister Kim Carr, who's been

change in roles was not demoted from Cabinet, say the

change in roles was not of their own

their own choosing. The Prime

Minister's also facing some

criticism for increasing the

size of Cabinet instead of

taking what some say would be a tougher decision tougher decision to demote

another minister or two. On

the other side of politics John

Howard, once a proponent of an emissions trading scheme, has launched a book sceptical human-induced climate change. launched a book sceptical about

are Liberal Senator Scott Ryan Joining me to discuss the day

and Labor MP Ed Husic. and Labor MP Ed Husic. Welcome

to you both. Hi, how are

you? First to the reaction, and the Prime you? First to the reshuffle

that at least one minister - Mr

McClelland - didn't want to end his time as Attorney-General. No, he didn't want to leave being Attorney-General.

involved in these Attorney-General. Being

involved in these conversations

about change, obviously means

you have a set of you have a set of difficult

conversations. Robert would

have preferred to stay, but he

also identified to me a passion for the emergency also identified to me a great

management role and having

lived through the last summer

of natural disasters, I thought

it was very appropriate for

Robert to take that role and to represent it around the Cabinet

table. Ed, the former Industry

Minister Kim Carr's also Minister Kim Carr's

released a statement saying the

change of portfolio was not of

his choosing and saying the

recent reshuffle is not a reflection of efforts or

achievements. We worked hard achievements. We worked

and the Prime Minister tribute to that - if these

ministers did well, why did or get demoted from they have to

Minister's perogative to be Cabinet? It's the Prime

able to assess how she wants to

have the make-up of the team.

She's looked around and

obviously as a result of Nick

Sherry's resignation we've a reshuffle, opportunity to Sherry's resignation we've had

change positions of various ministers and as the Prime

Minister indicated in the Minister indicated in the clip

you ran a few moments ago,

these are never easy

conversations to have. But,

you know, just like it happens

out in the real world, will change positions as a out in the real world, people

result of organisational change

and it's a similar sort of

thing that's happening here.

You have to make these

decisions and as for some of

the other ministers that are expressing their view, the

media can't always want candour

and open comment from ministers and politicians and politicians and when they

have it try to beat it up. You

too. So you've had ministers can't have your cake and eat it

express their view that they

wouldn't have necessarily preferred to have the position

that was taken, but as I said before,

before, these decisions are

taken and they're getting on

with the job just as Kim Carr

said today it's an honour for him to take his new position,

and that's what he'll do. But Ed, does the Prime has the Prime Minister risked

creating a few disgruntled

people as a result of the reshuffle? I don't think so,

because people are big enough

and professional enough to get on with

on with the job that's required

of them and there will be people and, for example, in

terms of Kim Carr's he still maintains a position terms of Kim Carr's position,

that he can keep a focus on

something he's been passionate

Australian manufacturing and about for years in terms of

he'll keep doing that and I think people will get

on. Scott, on your side of politics, Tony Abbott has said

he plans to take the ministry he's got now to the election, is that likely to he's got now to the next

have a number of people on the cause a few disgruntled

backbench described often as

the young Turks who may want a

crack at a frontbench

here. On the Coalition side spot. There's a real contrast spot. There's a real

you've got more than a dozen

people with ministerial

we saw yesterday with the Prime experience and stability. What

Minister's reshuffle, which says is somehow due Minister's reshuffle, which Ed

Sherry's resignation, which says is somehow due to Nick

wasn't the case at all. What

this was was a reshuffle to

promote the people who helped

make her Prime Minister,

otherwise start because she's scared they'll

otherwise start looking

elsewhere. She's promoted other people too, it's not just promoting Bill Shorten into Cabinet and giving Mark Arbib

other responsibilities. She promoted Tanya Plibersek and Mark Butler into Cabinet, as

well. Mark Arbib has four or

five jobs, assistant Treasurer,

Minister for Sport, because

Laura tingle said he wanted to go to the Olympics.

that he's manager of that he's manager of Government

in the Senate, chief factional

head kicker. His own experience with small business

was turning the NSW ALP into a very small business very small business and he's

there because Julia Gillard

wants to keep him on side.

That's why Bill Shorten That's why Bill Shorten and Mark Arbib have been promoted. What about those in

your own oranks who may be chaffing at the bit to get a

chance on the frontbench. Shuffles are not a new

thing? Not at all. On Coalition side you've got thing? Not at all. On the

stability and experience,

people with a proven track

record in record, and a

government that looks better every day this government every day this government is in office. On the Labor side, you

have a Prime Minister rewarding

the faceless men and the

factional head kickers that made her Prime Minister. It's a real contrast. The Prime

Minister is saying she's not

rewarding those pro who promoted her. There's about

Scott said that I'd have a

completely different view on

and he's out of line absolutely. Mark Arbib's

appointment in terms of

retaining sport, I deal with a few sporting organisations and

certainly within those circles

they were they were delighted that Mark Arbib retained his position as Minister for Sport. Minister for Sport. The continuity that's been secured through that and the support

that Mark has provided from the Australian Sports Commission

through to other organisations

has been critical and I think it's fantastic that he's

retained that portfolio. Tanya

Plibersek, great performer in

human services. Articulate, considered, intelligent now going

going into other health portfolio, replacing a person

who was a great friend of

western Sydney health and

boosting infrastructure in my

neck of the woods, Nicola

Roxon, who's following her

passion and going into the

Attorney-General's spot. Mark

Butler elevated into the nerve centre of government, ensuring that area retains a focus. I think there've been great decisions on there. On

the other side of politics,

the other side of politics, the suggestion that all is rosy is

a joke. Frankly, the position

that the Opposition has got

themselves is they're now the butt

butt of ridicule and parody.

Antony Albanese Antony Albanese has described the Coalition as the

no-alition. You can throw in

whatever other whatever other descriptions

that you want, chairman no and

the no-botts. They've now the no-botts. They've now put

themselves in a position where

they are now mimicked for their

negativity, a one-trick pony that

that can't deliver and for them

to suggest that everything is

rosy on their camp when at the

tail end of the last parliamentary sittings it was

evident that people on their

side were sick and tired of the negativity and forcing Tony

Abbott to put out a list Abbott to put out a list of

things that he's agreed to, defend himself against a charge of negativity shows they've got problems on their problems on their sides of the fence and they're going to have

to fix it. Scott, you wanted to respond? Ed's living in a fantasy land. The Coalition

has a stable team with ministerial experience. The

Labor Party has had constant

leadership match nations every

day over the last two You've got super portfolios being created and portfolios cobbled together. Look at Mark Arbib's job, small business

there Ed. We think small business is enough to have a

minister in Cabinet. The minister in Cabinet. The fact there've been 300,000 small business jobs lost since Labor

came to office, you've given it

to a man with three other jobs

plus his factional head kicking

role. That's not taking small

business seriously. We'll leave

that issue there and move on. Former Prime Minister John

Howard has launched a book by

Professor Ian pliemer which

poses questions for students poses questions for students to challenge their teachers on climate change. He says

there's a persistent attempt to silent dissent. stance some might think from

2007. Good morning. 2007. Good morning. Australian action to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions since 1990 led by my

government will prevent about

87 million tonnes 87 million tonnes of climate change in carbon change in carbon a year

entering the atmosphere entering the atmosphere by

2010. That's a massive

reduction and a tangible example of the Coalition's commitment to the climate

change challenge. The epitome

of the corruption of the language in this debate is the use of the word denier, use of the word denier, and we

all know that when you use the word denier in the context of any generation represented in this room, you are this room, you are talking about people who denied the

deaths of 6 million Jews in the

Nazi extermination camps. Nazi extermination camps. We all know

word comes from. It comes from people who deny the people who deny the holocaust and it is the ultimate I suppose it

suppose it is the ultimate

putdown dam nation to say that

somebody who doesn't agree with it is a denier. Scott, do you

think this shows that John

Howard has changed his view from 2007 when he was willing

to put forward an Emissions

Trading Scheme to as he said, tackle the climate

challenge? Oh look, you'll have to ask John Howard about his

views. The Coalition policy

was to act in concert with the

rest of the world. The rest of

the world is not the world is not acting.

Labor's insisted on breaking

its promise about there being

no carbon tax and is having the biggest largest carbon tax of

anyone in the world. As to Ian Plim er's book, I have a Plim er's book, I have a copy

and I don't think anyone that

has an interest in debate has

an interest in shutting down debate. Ed,

asking questions about a

scientific view? Absolutely

not. I think we do need to

have a debate that's based have a debate that's based on fact and we do need to be able

to rely on evidence as a way of

being able to progress public

policy. I have no disagreement

with that. In actual fact, I

agree with some of the

sentiments expressed by Scott a

few moments ago. I think you

can have the different

viewpoints put forward and have those arguments advanced, but ultimately it's got to come

down to fact and that's why we've had the Climate Commission talk about, for

example, in the release of example, in the release of its report the critical decade.

What the impacts What the impacts of global warming and climate change would have on Australia and

what is required to move on it. Now John Howard as Prime

Minister briefed by people who

take, will study fact and

evidence, put forward policy.

He was briefed by people that

said Australia needed to act.

He understood the need to act and that's why position as you've played earlier where John Howard back

in 2007 understood the need to act. I don't know if he's been

drinking from a dodgy tea cup,

but if he wants to argue now

that people - and I have to

say, I take great... I just

think it's bad form in terms of

the arguments that he advanced a few moments ago in terms of the claims about linking in

deniers to the holocaust. deniers to the holocaust. I think that is a terrible period

in human history that while it's important to be remembered

shouldn't be linked into shouldn't be linked into other

debate. I think it's

distasteful to what's gone on

previously. If he's got an issue with people being criticised for having a

different view, by all means

air it, but wandering down that path is not helpful path is not helpful whatsoever and it should be

Minister to do so. Ed to be fair, I think the former Prime

Minister was criticising the

use of the term denier, he

wasn't criticising those who

had a different opinion. He was specifically criticising

the language being used by some

of the proponents of a particular view that used the term term denier and I personally think the use of that term is

appalling and I agree with what

the former Prime Minister said

in that regard. I was going to

make the point in response to

Scott, I get where you're coming from Scott, but from coming from Scott, but from my point of view, I think people

are obviously reaching for a

handle in terms of describing

those who are opposed to the

notion that the climate's

changing and I think that yeah

sure we should always be

mindful of words, but I don't think, I don't agree think, I don't agree with what the former Prime Minister

Howard said back then and I

understand you have a different view. That's where Husic and Scott Ryan thank you very very much for your time.thank you for joining Capital Hill.

Please join us at the same time

tomorrow. Closed Captions by CSI