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.
Interview with Adam Bandt MP - Carbon Tax. -

View in ParlViewView other Segments

(generated from captions) will be a good first step in will be a good first step in

forcing Australia to confront forcing Australia to confront

some of the issues. Much of some of the issues. Much of

what the government does from what the government does from

here on in will have at least a here on in will have at least a

tinge of green. The Greens are tinge of green. The Greens are

a serious political and a serious political and

possibly economic force. The possibly economic force. The member for Melbourne Adam Bandt member for Melbourne Adam Bandt

is the Greens spokesman on is the Greens spokesman on

industry, banks and some parts industry, banks and some parts

of business. He joins me now of business. He joins me now

from Canberra. Adam Bandt, from Canberra. Adam Bandt, welcome to the welcome to the for having me, Philip. for having me, Philip. Firstly, on today's discussion, Firstly, on today's discussion,

what do you think of a $23 what do you think of a $23 tonne carbon price, because tonne carbon price, because

that's the word? I think on that's the word? I think on

Sunday the full package will be Sunday the full package will be

revealed and one thing we have revealed and one thing we have

always said is the Greens is always said is the Greens is

that it is just as important as that it is just as important as

the price and the rate at which the price and the rate at which

it rises is what measures will it rises is what measures will

be taken to accelerate the be taken to accelerate the industry in Australia. industry in Australia. industry in Australia. The industry in Australia. The

point that were made in the point that were made in the

package just then are spot on, package just then are spot on,

and the foxer member of and the foxer member of Melbourne, former Finance Melbourne, former Finance Minister, Lindsay Tanner, said Minister, Lindsay Tanner, said

a key question for the country a key question for the country is what will Australia sell the is what will Australia sell the

rest of the world in 15 years rest of the world in 15 years

time. On current policy time. On current policy

settings, from Labor and the settings, from Labor and the

Coalition, the answer is Coalition, the answer is

probably coal, and we are on probably coal, and we are on

track to overtake Saudi Arabia track to overtake Saudi Arabia

as the world's largest exporter as the world's largest exporter of of of fossil fuels. It's a loser's game and our comparative of fossil fuels. It's a loser's game and our comparative advantages are in science, advantages are in science,

technology and innovation, and technology and innovation, and

it is exactly that that we should be boosting, so it is exactly that that we should be boosting, so should be boosting, so that we are leading the world in should be boosting, so that we are leading the world in renewable energy technologies, renewable energy technologies,

and that to me is as important and that to me is as important

as what the dollar figure of a as what the dollar figure of a

price per tonne of carbon is. price per tonne of carbon is.

Of course, the other issue with Of course, the other issue with

this is that the carbon tax this is that the carbon tax

will be imposed on a smaller group of companies, it will be imposed on a smaller group of companies, it group of companies, it is group of companies, it is

hardly going to hardly going to act as a hardly going to hardly going to act as a disincentive for a much larger disincentive for a much larger

group of companies, obviously, group of companies, obviously,

and that seems like a bit of a and that seems like a bit of a

cop-out for the Greens to be cop-out for the Greens to be accepting this. It's accepting this. It's

small tax base, isn't it? small tax base, isn't it?

There are a number of questions There are a number of questions

there. One is the coverage of there. One is the coverage of

the scheme, and again that will the scheme, and again that will

be revealed on Sunday. It has be revealed on Sunday. It has

been announced that petrol is been announced that petrol is

out, that's not our preference out, that's not our preference

as the Greens, but this as the Greens, but this

exercise involved trying land two political parties and exercise involved trying land two political parties and

two independents on the same two independents on the same

page for one of the biggest page for one of the biggest

economic and environmental economic and environmental

reforms that this country has reforms that this country has

seen and if in the course seen and if in the course

that there has to be give and that there has to be give and

take, so be it. What is take, so be it. What is critical critical

critical about the design of critical about the design of

the scheme is that it provides the scheme is that it provides

a platform for upward a platform for upward flexibility. When flexibility. When superannuation was introduced superannuation was introduced

it might not have been at the it might not have been at the

level some people wanted, but level some people wanted, but

it is there in a way that it is there in a way that

enables us to ratchet it up as enables us to ratchet it up as it becomes more affordable. In this instance, as long as there it becomes more affordable. In this instance, as long as there

is capacity for upward is capacity for upward

flexibility as technologies flexibility as technologies

become cheaper around the rest become cheaper around the rest

of the world moves, that's of the world moves, that's critical element of the critical element of the

design. Everybody is talking design. Everybody is talking

about the complexity of the about the complexity of the

regime, because even the regime, because even the

government is having a few government is having a few

problems in explaining how it problems in explaining how it will affect different will affect different businesses, small and large. businesses, small and large.

That looks like it is shaping That looks like it is shaping

up as an administrative up as an administrative nightmare nor nightmare nor nightmare nor business, doesn't nightmare nor business, doesn't

it? On the contrary, I think it? On the contrary, I think

it is widely recognised that it it is widely recognised that it

is one of the most simple and is one of the most simple and efficient ways of going efficient ways of going the problem of tackling climate the problem of tackling climate

change. From our perspective it is necessary but not sufficient change. From our perspective it is necessary but not sufficient

to put a price on to put a price on to put a price on pollution, it to put a price on pollution, it

will help us start the will help us start the

transition and help Australia transition and help Australia

join that clean energy race join that clean energy race

that the others were speaking that the others were speaking

about before. At heart it is a about before. At heart it is a

very simple proposition: That very simple proposition: That

polluters who up to now have polluters who up to now have been putting pollution into the been putting pollution into the atmosphere that we presumed was atmosphere that we presumed was

free, but we know now comes at free, but we know now comes at

an enormous cost, will have to an enormous cost, will have to

pay some of that cost and revenue raised will go to pay some of that cost and revenue raised will go to

assist other sections of assist other sections of

industry to transition and to industry to transition and to assist households horls. assist households horls.

Economist say it is one of the Economist say it is one of the

simplest schemes you could simplest schemes you could

implement. The Greens also implement. The Greens also

support the Senate inquiry into support the Senate inquiry into foreign purchases of foreign purchases of agricultural land and agricultural land and Australian agribusinesses. I Australian agribusinesses. I

presume you want to see a ban presume you want to see a ban on foreign ownership in that on foreign ownership in that

sector? We need to have the sector? We need to have the

discussion about it. Similarly discussion about it. Similarly

with the foreign ownership of with the foreign ownership of

mining, a sector that is 83% mining, a sector that is 83%

foreign owned, I think that foreign owned, I think that

when we have resources like when we have resources like

land and minerals, that belong land and minerals, that belong

to the Australian people, and to the Australian people, and

in some instances, for example in some instances, for example

with minerals, we only get to with minerals, we only get to

dig them up and sell them once, dig them up and sell them once,

a than we know on a than we know on assessment with iron ore there assessment with iron ore there

is 25 years worth left, in is 25 years worth left, in

terms of what we know about terms of what we know about

current deposits. We need to current deposits. We need to have the discussion about how have the discussion about how

much of it should be able to be much of it should be able to be

owned within Australia and how owned within Australia and how much not and what the much not and what the appropriate taxation regime is appropriate taxation regime is

for it, because these are for it, because these are things that in some instances, things that in some instances,

we only get to sell them once we only get to sell them once

and we need to get a proper and we need to get a proper

return from revenue and need to return from revenue and need to have have

have proper security, have proper security,

especially in an especially in an

legitimate to have that legitimate to have that debate. Wouldn't that invite debate. Wouldn't that invite retaliation, doesn't that retaliation, doesn't that invite criticism invite criticism invite criticism from our invite criticism from our trading partners and foreign trading partners and foreign

investors? I think we can investors? I think we can

have the discussion sensibly. have the discussion sensibly.

We have so-called free trade We have so-called free trade agreements with trading agreements with trading partners like the United partners like the United States, and in the United States, and in the United

States they continue to heavily subsidise States they continue to heavily subsidise

subsidise and protect their subsidise and protect their

local industries, and local industries, and

up to these agreements that in up to these agreements that in

many instances leave us many instances leave us

powerless. I do not think that powerless. I do not think that

simply wanting to control simply wanting to control than have a meaningful say over than have a meaningful say over

the resources we have is the resources we have is

necessarily going to invite necessarily going to invite retaliation. As far retaliation. As far as retaliation. As far retaliation. As far as

competition is concerned, any competition is concerned, any monopolies you see and monopolies you see and oligopolies abusing their oligopolies abusing their

power, as you say, you would power, as you say, you would

want to see them dismantled, is want to see them dismantled, is

that right? There that right? There

important role for the ACCC to important role for the ACCC to play if it had some teeth. For play if it had some teeth. For

example, I would like to see it example, I would like to see it

be given divestiture powers and also looking at milk, for be given divestiture powers and also looking at milk, for

example, recently there has example, recently there has been a real pressing need to been a real pressing need to reintroduce the anti-price reintroduce the anti-price discrimination prices and to discrimination prices and to

give the ACCC some real teeth. give the ACCC some real teeth.

In other sectors, for example In other sectors, for example

in banking, I think that, in banking, I think that,

think we can get, Labor and the think we can get, Labor and the

Coalition can sometimes get a Coalition can sometimes get a

bit hung up on the competition bit hung up on the competition mantra and sometimes mantra and sometimes their own hype. In the banking their own hype. In the banking

sector, for example, we should sector, for example, we should

call a spade a spade and accept call a spade a spade and accept

that we have a de facto too big that we have a de facto too big

to fail policy for the big four to fail policy for the big four banks, we should acknowledge banks, we should acknowledge

that and should ask them to pay that and should ask them to pay

an appropriate levy for the an appropriate levy for the

amount of support we give amount of support we give

them. Adam Bandt, thank you them. Adam Bandt, thank you

for your time, we will have to for your time, we will have to leave it there. Thanks very leave it there. Thanks very