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 24 2pm News -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) than considered responses. Let's get more on South Australia's energy plan now. We're joined from Parliament House by political editor Chris Uhlmann. How is the plan going down in Canberra? We're get to see a formal response from the Federal Government. Unfortunately what we have seen too often in Australian politics, one side comes up with a solution and the other side slaps it down because it's the solution from the other side of politics. I don't think that Jay Weatherill had any choice but to do what he did today. It's a very comprehensive plan. It's Labor trying to get as much gas into the system as he possibly can. Include g gets a state owned gas fired plant. There's other elements in it. All of them important. One of them is the local minister would have the power to direct the market, something that is done at the moment by the Australian Energy Market Operator. So that could give a bit more power to the South Australian government to have power over its own energy market. It's trying to get more gas into the market and one of the other ways it's doing that is to encourage the exploration for it, to offer land holders 10% of the royalties in joint ventures. So energy is everything that people are talking about in South Australia at the moment. And I'm joined by the most senior South Australian Labor minister, that is pen Penny Wong. First and foremost, isn't this an admission once you get up to 40% of wind power, you start to hit some road blocks that need to be fixed by having thermal generation in the mix?No, what this is a demonstratation of is leadership. What Jay Weatherill and that State Government are showing is the policy leadership that regrettably has been so lacking from Malcolm Turnbull and the Federal Government. This is leadership recognising that the National Electricity Market was built for a different time and more importantly, built for a very different pattern of electricity generation than we're seeing at the moment. It's a very responsible package. It's a package that recognises the need for South Australia to control, generate and source more of its electricity in South Australia.The reason it'sing that, it has 40% of its generation coming from wind, and it needs thermal generation in the mix in order to stabilise that. That's one of the reasons that's driving it?A mix of energy is needed. That's very clear. But I would be very reluctant to turn this again into an ideological argument against renewables.It's not an argument against renewables. They do create some issues that do need to be addressed.The other way of putting it to you, the problem is the market. The National Electricity Market, which is not designed to reflect the reality of increased renewables coming on stream in a far greater proportion than was originally envisaged. We can have a discussion about how to construe it. The question is what do you now do? What Jay and his colleagues have laid out is a comprehensive man, and I would encourage for once Malcolm Turnbull not to listen to the hard right of his party and to have a sensible spaurns that recognises there is a problem that needs to be fixed.There's a problem that needs to be fixed and the answer from South Australia would appear to be gas. The Greens are saying that you're missing a great opportunity, they don't want to see gas as a transitional fuel. What do you say to those people who do believe the bridge between coal fired generation, what we have, and renewables, has to go via gas? What I would say, you need a mix of energy. You need renewables, and you need other forms of energy, gas is obviously one of them. And we also, over time, need to ensure that the market reflects, the national market reflects the increasing operation of renewable energy generation in Australia. I mean, the Greens, I'm sure, will want to criticise, just as I have no doubt that some of the right of the Liberal Party want to criticise. But the response today from the Premier really sets out security of supply, the continued importance of renewables, but, you know, a focus on ensuring that many of the problems that we have experienced as a result of the current design of the market can be resolved. And certainly...I do think this is an opportunity. You said earlier, you were around in 2009, Chris...And you were. ..your point is exactly the right one. Which is, the last biepship we had -- bipartisanship we had was in 2009 before tab tore down -- Abbott tore down Turnbull. The private sector is calling out for leadership.And they're calling for a price on carbon. One of last thing. You would appreciate how badly scarred Malcolm Turnbull was on this. He did try to get a price on carbon and lost his job as a result.What is the point of being in the job if you can't do anything. He has an opportunity today to be sensible.Can you take you to your pofl, your shadow professional as foreign minister. We saw a quite blunt speech by Julie Bishop when she was talk being the regional architecture and saying the United States had to be part of it. She said that non-democracies such as China can thrive, and a central pillar of our preferred system is a democratic community. She is sending a strong message to China about the kind of community she should be.I would make this point - we all support democracy. Labor in government and in opposition has been an advocate for democracy and human rights everywhere. That's a given. The issue is what do we want for our region? And more critically, how do we want China to engage with the region and the world, and how do we want the US to engage in the region. In terms of China's engagement, we should continue to focus on and continue to engage on, with China, about the sort of engagement in the region that we would want to see from a country of their stature. Now, Julie also said in her speech she wants to see continued US engagement in the region. I would free with that. All of us would agree with that. It's would be useful to talk about what sort of constructive engagement that would be. To articulate to the new administration what that kind of engagement would look like.We have a white paper coming up. What do you believe that engagement should look like?In terms of the US, and these remarks would go to engagement with China as well. In terms of the United States, we want you to engage with the region, across the board. So not just allies, but other partners shell. We would like -- as well. We would like you to look to the next step in terms of trade arrangement, one of the first acts of the Trump presidency was to essentially veto the TPP. What does the next set of trading arrangements look like? How do we progress those? And how do we have a cooperative arrangement in this region that reflects the importance of the rules based order for all nation, including Australia. And really, we say similar things to China, that we recognise China is a great power, a rising power, and with that comes responsibility. And the responsibility in our view also includes corruption around the -- cooperation around the rules based order that served all the countries in the region so well.We found when the rules are breached in and around the Philippines, that China ignores the ruling of the international court.And I think on the South China Sea, there's a few steps that - a few things we need to understand. The first is that Australia doesn't take a view as to the particular territorial claims. What we do say is that we support the international rules based system and its associated enormous. We saw to all parties that we would urge deescalation. We would urge these issues are resolved diplomatically, are resolved peacefully. And that there is not escalation. Now, there are differences of views about some of the territorial claims. Our position is, we support the rules based order, we support Freedom of Navigation Operation, and we urge all parties to resolve these issues cooperatively.When we talk foreign