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) and Beijing it insist it is

won't keep the Dalai Lama at

arm's length.

Returning now to our top

story on climate change - Tony

Abbott has unveiled his rival

to the emissions trading scheme, but the Federal

Government says the plan won't

work and will force taxpayers

to carry the load for heavy

polluters. For more Greens

senator Bob Brown joins us now

from Canberra. Good

morning. Tony Abbott has come

up with this alternative, it's

simpler than Kevin Rudd's. How

effective will it be in

effective will it be in cutting

emissions? It won't be. If you

look at the threat of climate

change, he has joined Kevin

Rudd in having a target of 5%

reduction of greenhouse gas when we need a target of 40% of

emissions over 19 90 levels by

2020. Both the big parties have

been coerced by the coal

industry and the big polluters

into aiming way below where

Australia needs to go if we're

going to give security to our

economy coming down the line. I

might mention that a major

government study released by

the government two days ago on

our ageing population pointed

out again that climate change

will take 8% off gross national product that means it will have

a massive impact on the economy

by mid century if we don't deal

with it. Putting aside the size

of the target, what about

getting to 5% alone

getting to 5% alone

anyway? Well, they're not going

to do it. Except at great

expense to the rest of

Australia. I hear Barnaby Joyce

says, well, they'll cut the insulation program which the government has going. So

they're going to cut a program

which is going to keep homes or

schools warmer in winter and

cooler in summer and lower

pollution to give money to the

pollution to give money to the big polluters to keep pollution

at current levels. And there's

up to 10 billion out of

taxpayers' pockets or they're

going to cut fund ing to

schools or hospitals or cut

jobs for public servants to

fund this. And the opposition

hasn't done its homework. It's

not being open about how it's

going to fund it, and the

average Australian voter won't

buy that. You will would have

to be at least happy with the

move to plant 20 million trees

by 2020? That's in urban areas

but I see what's happening

there. The 20 million seedlings

in urban areas close to voters

while the Abbott opposition

goes forward with Howard's plan

to log the biggest forests in

the Southern Hemisphere in

Tasmania, Victoria, southern

New South Wales and Western Australia. So we're knocking

and down the biggest carbon banks

and releasing all that

greenhouse gas into the

atmosphere. That's 20% of Australia's emissions while

they plant seedlings. It's just

reckless, it's illogical, and

it's very expensive for the taxpayers. Penny Wong

mentioned earlier this week she

was holding talks with the

Greens. Is there any chance the

Greens could end up supporting

the ETS legislation which was reintroduced into Federal

Parliament last

night? Absolutely. If the

government does the right thing

and aims like Europe and

there's 27 of the 30 countries

which have emissions trading

schemes, at a target which is

much higher. 25% or 40% by 2020

in terms of emissions

reductions A scheme which has

real teeth and which is really

going to have an impact on

climate change. The Greens have

always been open to negotiation

but meantime we've put forward

a very sensible proposal to put

a $20 a tonne levy on carbon

which raises billions to be

able to fund government

programs to help householders

right athis country for

example. I see Tony Abbott's

scheme says by 2020 they'll

have a million homes left in

Australia with solar panels.

Australia with solar panels.

The groons would have renewable energy on every household in

Australia, lowering power bills

by hundreds of dollars, instead

of putting prices up. It

doesn't sound like there is any

supporting this legislation chance the Greens will end up

because the government hasn't

given any indication that it

will increase those targets significantly? The government

needs to if it's going to be

responsible. What does that

leave? It leaves the Greens

going to this election as the

responsible champions of proper

climate change action with both

the big parties failing. But

without any prospect of getting

anything done practically? No,

we are talking about the

government about a proposal

which opens the way in the

future to a much better carbon

trading scheme or even a carbon

tax if future governments

wanted to do that direction but

the Greens are aiming at being

at the forefront of world's

at the forefront of world's

best practice stimulating the

renewable energy industries and energy efficiency industries

and a transformation of the

logging industry in Australia

creating thousands of jobs and

lowering power bills to the average householder while

having the polluters pay as

they must do. Under the

proposals we have, the coal

industry, 75% owned outside

Australia, gets billions of

dollars from both the

for a target government and the opposition

for a target which is not going

to properly tackle climate

change. And just finally - do

you believe there is any

likelihood coalition senators

could cross the floor on the

ETS legislation? They did last

time so we have to wait and

see. But meantime the Greens

are responsibly engaged in

negotiations and will with both

parties to try to lift them

target of from their failed projected

target of 5% up to the 25% to

40% that the world's scientists

tell us we must achieve if

we're going to offset the

oncoming impact on the economy,

the lifestyle and the security

of Australia's future. Bob