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.
ABC News Breakfast -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) that we love. Barack Obama

speaking at the UN in New

York. The Federal Government

has given the Coalition next

month to propose amendments,

the deadline putting pressure

on the Coalition that's divided

on the issue. Adding to the

turmoil is a suggestion that

the Nationals should be dropped

from the Coalition Senate from the Coalition

ballot paper, for more Senator ballot paper, for

Barnaby Joyce joins us, thank

you for joining us. You are

welcome. How are you. I'm

well. On the emissions trading

scheme, in your view, is there

any way that the Government's

bill can be amended to then be

in a form suiting and dealing

with the Nationals

concerns? Well, not in a form

this they are prepared to do.

It's obvious the nine

propositions put it them

before, they categorically

ruled out. In fact, Minister

Wong gent into a diatribe about

diatribe about how wrong they how wrong - went into a

with the emissions trading were. We have a massive tax were. We have a massive

scheme, with a moral guilt

trip. It won't change the

climate or the globe, it will

be a solo crusade where Kevin

Rudd tells the Australian

people god like he can change

the build, he can't. If we pass

the emissions trading scheme,

endorsing Mr Rudd's god-like

status , he'll be a hard person

to move from office, God is

hard to take the credentials of

office away from. This is

not... It's a lot of hypervally

first thing on Friday morning.

Putting the rhetoric aside. I

accept what you say, clearly

there's been really tough minor

talking on both sides, you know

the situation well, you have a

Government that is speaking in

a different tone and different

way to the Coalition, and

amendments there's going to be

a meeting in the middle. My

question needs to be answer.

Putting that rhetoric to one

side, can you see a way some

areas, where there's

amendments, put together by the

Coalition then having the bill

in an acceptable form, is that

possible of We'll look at the

amendments, if we can mollify

the ridiculous scheme put

forward, mitigating the extent

It's an emissions trading we'll support the amendments.

scheme, which is a massive tax

that won't change the

climate. Is it a bit more help

for the heavy emitters, for the

industry exposed trades? Well,

if you say to the coal industry if you say to the coal

we are going to remove you from

the scheme, if you want your 5%

target. Agriculture will be

blown out of the water. It will

be blown out of the water. If

this goes through you won't

have a cattle or sheep industry, they are

industry, they are finished, I

don't know how you'll buy a

steak, mince or sausages, maybe

we'll import them, I don't know

how it works. What we look at

is the price of the goods, what

they'll be in the shopping basket of the Australian

working family, it will go

through the roof, putting under

threat working family's jobs,

and put under duress the Australian agricultural

industry, I can't see how they

can vaguely change it to fix

that. They can go about a range

of ways mechanisms to reduce

carbon emissions without going

down an emission trading

scheme. The big push are the

banks, brokers, people that

will make the vast amounts of

commission as they punch the

product through the

marketplace. For the - those

that have to pay, working

families, the farmers,

coalminers, steelworkers, we

are putting them out in the street. When Malcolm Turnbull

says that he's sure he can get

agreement from his party and

then following that from the

Coalition, for the amendments

that he comes up with is he wrong. Malcolm Turnbull

believes in the - trying to do

something about global warming,

I give him credit, that is good

for Malcolm, and he genuinely

believes that. We, in the believes that. We,

National Party, we believe that

this is an extremely bad

outcome, economic outcome, a

massive tax delivered to you

from every Power point in your

house, I don't see how the house, I don't see how

Labor Party considering their

previous rhetoric which is, "We

are going to put a gun to your

head and pull the trigger", how

they'll change it. The Labor Party don't want Party don't want an emissions

trading scheme, they want a

double dissolution to get to an

election before Budget time

because the books are going to

blow the show out of the water.

They want to run away. Sure, I

hear that. I have heard that

before. The real important news

is where Malcolm Turnbull sits

with you, because he's out

there this week saying, "No, we

are putting amendments together

and we reckon we can get agreement", he won't get agreement from you, is

he? Well, we have to see he? Well, we have to see - I

have to see what Malcolm's

amendments are. No, you said it

doesn't matter, this scope is

not a good idea for Australia, you won't sign anything, it

sounds like. I have said that

if there are amendments there

that mollify the scheme, we'll support them. We'll certainly

look at the amendments, if we

can work out a way to make the

ridiculous scheme less

ridiculous we'll do that. I

can't see we'll end up with

something we'd support, but the something we'd support, but

stipt would have to change, it

wouldn't be an emissions wouldn't be

trading scheme, but something

else. I wonder what you make of else. I wonder what you make

Malcolm Turnbull's criticism of

Ken Henry, saying he's not

independent enough to be taken

serious when he says stimulus

payments have to continue and

they've been good for the

country, is that accurate and

fair of criticism of Ken

Henry. It's an active and fair

description of the stimulus

payments. In is Ken Henry. You

can't duck out of this that

easily. This is borrowed money,

we have to pay it back. It's

owed to somebody else, China

and the Middle East and other

countries, all this money has

to be paid back to them. How

will we do that. What is the

plan that the Labor Party laid

out about how to pay the dough

back to the people that own it.

There's no plan, so when Ken

Henry says, "You know,

everything will be fine and

dandy and roses", he doesn't

tell us - Ken, tell us how to

pay the dough back. Moving

pay the dough back. Moving on

to another subject. I wonder

what you make of the

observations by the director of the Foreign Investment Review

Board, saying that when it

comes to investments by

state-owned companies in mining

interests in Australia, they

should be restricted to 15%, do

you agree with that Well, in

my dissenting report I said the state-owned enterprises

shouldn't be involved at all. State-opened enterprises are the Government of another

nation, how much ownership do

you want of a Government of

another nation within our

nation, they don't work on

market principles but long-term

strategic interest, they buy

for the long term for the better. Of their people as they

represent them as a Government.

When the commooupist People's

Republic of China buy mines in

Australia, they buy them for

the long-term interest of the

people of China, it's great to

do if you live in china, not

for us. We have to - we - once

you involvement yourself with

the Government of another country commercial issues

become diplomatic issue, if you

want a good example, Stern Hu,

still banged up in jail without

a trial. Can you get buy on

your salary Senator Barnaby

Joyce, or should Senators get

an increase. You say $1 million

for the Prime Minister. This is

the - I'm stating the

commercial reality, we must

make sure the highest office

holder - Kevin Rudd is on the

other side of the political

fence, he should be within

sight of the money in the

marketplace for running a

comparable size policy, if you

pay nothing you fill the

parliament up, but with the people not representing what

you want. If you want to make

sure you have comparable

capacity inside the capacity inside the parliament,

you must make sure you offer

the wage getting the capable

people out of their carpentry

business or bricklaying

business or accountancy

business or solicitor's

business and willing the take

the risk for three years,

that's all you can offer, to

come into the political

marketplace. What I suggest is

even if you package the deal,

all the money that you pay me,

my sally, four staff, airfares,

put it in a package, allow me

to pay myself 20% of it, or to pay myself 20% of it, or 25%

of it, let me manage the of it, let me manage the rest

of it. Whatever I save you the

taxpayer I'll hand it back. I

bet you I do a better job and

you save the taxpayer money, at

the same time use that as a

mechanism to entice people

businesslike into the political

marketplace. Good to talk marketplace. Good to talk to