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) here. If any.

The Rudd Government will meet

the Opposition today to discuss

amendments to the renewable

energy target legislation. The

Opposition's spokesman on

energy and resources is Ian

Macfarlane joins now from

Canberra. Ian Aubrey, good

morning, thank you for joining

us? Good morning. What are the

particular issues that you want

to look at in relation to

putting to the Government some

amendments to this particular

part of the legislation? Well

we still haven't seen a proper

from the decoupling of this legislation

from the CPRS and on that

basis, thousands and thousands

of jobs in industries right

across regional Australia

jeopardy so we want to have

another talk to Penny Wong

about that. We're also

concerned about the impact that

her proposalied has on

industries like the aluminium

industry and the food

processing industry,. Which

proposal are you referring to

there yesterday? Well,

yesterday she announced an interim compensation

arrangement, not a proper

delinking of the bill but that

interim compensation scheme

doesn't put in place adequate

exception for the aluminium industry, completelying

nowheres the food processing

industry, commotly ignores the

alumina, plastics, chemicals a

whole range of industries that

will face huge costs from

will face huge costs from this

renewable energy target and

under her proposal would have

received compensation. There

will jobs at risk here because

Penny Wong is continues to play

politics and continuing to try

and take short cuts on a piece

of legislation that if shesies

down and talkings with Greg

Hunt and I do with a determined

mind to get the legislation

through, we can both get the

legislation through but protect

those thousands of jobs those thousands of jobs that

would be lost if she proceeds

on the basis se now has in

front of industry industry your

leader is peeking in much more

modelfying terms about the

separation of these two part of

the legislation and a willingness by the Government

to constructively engage with

the Opposition. You're not

persuaded? Well, we're very

keen to engage with the

Government and we welcome very

much the agreement yesterday by

Penny Wong to move towards

separating these bills but

unfortunately she hasn't quite

gone far enough and certainly I

join with Malcolm Turnbull in

welcoming what she did

yesterday by from are still

jobs at Rick, there is a way to

introduce this scheme quickly,

the Government has had plenty

of time to introduce this

legislation. They've had the

whole 12 months. Now they're

trying to rush it at the end

and it's people's jobs in towns like gadstone in like gadstone in the vlt, down

in Victoria at the port land

smelter, those jobs are now

jeopardy and those jobs will be

what the Coalition will be

fightings for when we have our

first discussions today? Is it

realistic to hope that you can

get the same amount of

compensation for those

industries given that the

entire compensation package as

envisaged by the Government was

always with these two parts of

the legislation twogt, if the

Government's going to separate Government's going to separate

hem, then naturally falls

according to the Government the compensation element will

reduce, isn't it unrealistic to

be aiming for much more? No

there is no logic in saying

that has the thoop. You can

simply copy over the exception

categories and allow the RET to

pass through parliament this

week. There is no complication

in that. Penny Wong has had

industry discussion on that basis ch it was everyone's basis ch it was everyone's

understanding until yesterday

that that would be what would

happen with a few minor amendments from the Coalition

and the Greens, we're getting

to see the legislation go

through. What we're now seeing

from Penny Wong is a

continuation of the Kevin Rudd

politics where you say one

thing but you do another What

we want to do is protect jobs

in industry in this process as

well as have a greener outcome.

We are committed to a greener outcome. We are committed to

the 20% target but not at the

cost of thousands of jobs. Is it your belief and

understanding that it will in

some form or another pass this

week? Certainly, our desire,

our very strong goal is to have

this out of the House of

Representatives by tomorrow.

And into the Senate and

providing there is a realistic

approach from both sides and I

conguarantee that from the

Coalition, then this

legislation will be through the

week. Moving Senate by late this

week. Moving on, we've been

hearing news this morning about

Cubbie Station being up for

sale and expressions of

interest sought either locally

or from overseas. Ian

Macfarlane, durl that Federal

Governments in Australia should

be in the business of

purchasing such large enit

theies as say Cubbie

Station? Well, it's a whole new

kettle of fish because you when

you buy that station you buy it

lock, stock and barrel. You get

the land as well? That's the land as well? That's right.

Of course, if you then take the

water away or you decommission

the station, and no cotton is

grown, you basically destroy

destroy the local economy

around the area. Jobs get lost. There has been to be water

bought back but in a way that

doesn't destroy jobs and the

economy. It seems almost like a

perfectly insoluble conundrum

because as you say no enit the because as you say no enit the

y is going to be interested in

wanting to go on running there

as a dotton station if you've

done back some of the water

rights? Well, it goes back to

low value value grazing country

and on that basis, the dwloobser with associated with

the cotton industry, not just

on Cubbie Station but in the

machinery dealerships a n the

town will be lost. There is a

place for water trading and

there is a place for Government buyback but nah has to buyback but nah has to be done

in a managed way and picking

out spectacular examples has

we've seen this Government

already doing, isn't the right

way to go about it. It needs to

be a staged approach and there

needs to be done fully

cognisant of what impact it

will have on the local

economy No matter who ownsis or

what sort of reconfished

business it might be, should Cubbie Station twoing

oproducing cotton, is that an

important part of Australia's economy

economy too? Well it is an

important part Australia's

economy and it needs to do so

in a sustainable way and Cubbie

Station and its attitude

towards water harvesting has

changed in the last decade,

certainly since I visited there

back in my days as the

President of the grain growers,

they've now moved to a more

sustainable approach and there

is President Obama for everyone

but it has to be on a balance and getting that balance and getting that balance right

and ensuring that both cotton

can be grown but at the same

time water is put back into the

Murray-Darling system a

difficult but achievable

goal. Good to talk to you this morning, Macfarlane far, thank

you so much. My pleasure,

Virginia. Interesting to hear

that the very positive view

there abit will be, it will be

through the Senate this week,

so clearly there's a huging

areness on both sides to get

that one day. But also a