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.
Sky News On The Hour 4pm -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) be introduced without a

mandate. That is why it

should not be introduced in

this term of parliament.

Tony Abbott's position on

this issue has not been

consistent all along either

though and a little later we

will look at one of his past positions on a carbon tax

which is a little bit at odds

with what he is arguing

today. First to why the Government wants to put a

price on car been and how it

broken commitment that it gets around what clearly is a

would not have a carbon tax.

I spoke earlier to the stormer climate change

minister, now Finance

Minister, Penny Wong. Thank

you for your time. Why did

Julia Gillard say during the election campaign that she

would not introduce a carbon

said that? tax, why do you think she

Remember during the election

campaign and before, I think

Labor made it very clear we

did believe that action on

thing to do. climate change was the right

I remember that and she

talked about putting a price

on carbon.

The need to price carbon

Why then did she say, "I

won't have a carbon tax"

Remember the sort of context

we were in and the same sort

office information that we

see today we saw then but the

eat is this is a bigger

debate -- but the reality is

this is a bigger debate than that. Australians did vote at

the election for action on

climate change. We have a

multiparty committee

representing a wide range of

views in the parliament

do that. working through how we best

I don't dispute that Labor

went to the election saying

you supported the idea of a

price on carbon, a market mechanism all of that, was it

a stuff up for thepm to say,

"We won't have a carbon tax."

Why rule that out?

I think the election

campaign was a pretty tough

campaign and there was a lot

of fighting about this issue.

I think people now are focused on the future.

It creates a headache now

you have to deal with this.

I think Australians voted

for action on climate change.

We, as the Labor Party,

always said, "We believe we

need to take action on

climate change." We believed

a price on carbon was the

best way of doing it. What we see this week is the first

step of putting that policy

package tonight in --

together in consultation with

the Australian people. It is

the right thing to do.

The whole point of a price

on carbon is to create an

incentive for people to

change their behaviour. Who needs that incentive the

industry? most, is it households or

That is an incentive you

need throughout your economy.

We have an economy at the

moment that is based very

much on energy which is

highly polluting, which is

based very much on emissions growing. We have to change

that. Now we can deal with

this in two ways - we can

say, "We are too scared

adon't want to move with it,

the rest of the world is moving but we don't want to move with it,

, "Or do what Australians

are good at and say, "This is

how we can do this. Let's

work out how we can do this

and best change and move to a

cleaner Australia."

You are saying that industry

and households need to share

this burden and all need to

be hit with this incentive, this higher price? We are a Labor Government

and any approach to a price

on carbon will demonstrate

Labor values. The Prime

Minister has made that clear and our record made that

clear and the policy that did

not succeed because of what

happened in the Senate, we

were very clear about the

priority being Australian

households. I'm sure that is

the way we will approach this

but, as I said, there is a

long way to go. We announced

the mechanism as Greg Combet

said, there is a lot of work

to be done in consultation with the Australian people.

What about some of the other

schemes that are still in

place. You have the renewable

energy star get and there are

still some other fairly

expensive feel-good climate

schemes, some of which you

introduced as climate change

minister and some of which

you repealed as Finance

Minister to help pay for the

Queensland flood recovery.

Will more go if you get a

price on carbon. Will you

clean up the shop here and

get rid of some of the things

like the renewable energy target?

When you go through a budget

process you look at how you

best prioritise Commonwealth

expenditure. It is an

important thing to do and is

particularly important given

the fiscal circumstances the

Commonwealth is in but can I

say on the renewable energy

target, I did introduce the

amendments to that to go to a

20% target, that is about bringing forward investment

in the renewable energy

sector and I think that is a

very important part of our

climate change policy in the

absence of being able to get

Senate. a carbon price through the

When we do have a carbon

price you wouldn't need this target?

We made it clear to industry

and Greg made it clear as climate change minister we

need that certainty. We will

not be undermining that

certainty. All of this is

about getting the right

signal for business

investment because we know if

we don't give that signal, we

don't give that certainty we

will not move to cleaner

forms of energy and less

things. polluting ways of doing

Do you think the

Government's chances of getting this through

parliament this time are better than they were in the

first parliament?

I do. I this the debate is

in a better place. Reform in

this country sometimes does

require us to - you win some you loose some and then maybe

you win again next time. I

think the debate is in a

different place. I think

Australians made clear at the

last election what they want.

I think the Greens political

party is in a different place

and there is a genuine will

inside the parliament to try

to find a way through this.

That is not shared by Mr

Abbott who, despite

previously supporting

emissions trading, will

continue to run the slogan

sort of campaign we have seen.

When you say that the Greens

are in a different place,

does that mean they are more

amenable than last time?

As Bob Brown said yesterday,

people went to the elections

with different views on this but they are willing to be

part of the multiparty committee, just as Mr

Oakeshott and Mr Windsor are.

That is a good thing. The

debate is in a different place.

You will face the ferocious

attack from Mr Abbott.

He won't take a backward space.

He won't. Essentially that

the household bills will go

up, your petrol price will go

up and some businesses will

struggle to say? -- stay in

Australia. All of that you can't deny?

There are two points he does

not talk about. The first is whatever assistance the

Government will ensure that

households get. That is

something we will work through. Some households.

The key point is this; do we

think climate change is real

- yes. Do we want to act on

it? If you want the act on it

the consensus is you need to

price what is currently free,

which is carbon pollution. As

long as polluting continues

to be free in the way that it

is we will not reduce it.

That is the fundamental point

of the Liberal Party and the

National party won't address.

This is not the only way to

deal with the problem of

climate change. Human

activity is causing climate

change look at what the

unites is doing - not this.

Look at what China is doing -

not this.

All the evidence that

putting a price on carbon is

the most efficient mechanism.

That was then, this is now.

That was when they listened

to good policy and now they

listen to what they think...

The int that sh natural

climate on this has changed a

lot since then? The international climate -

no pun intended - countries

are doing a lot and one of

the advances since - through the Copenhagen and then

Cancun processes is we have

seen more being pledged by

individual nations. Do you

really think by 2020 the

world won't have moved more.

I don't think there will be

an international agreement.

Do you think countries will

not have acted on climate

change? Of course they will.

If you make that judgment and

if you make the judgment for future generations we need to

do this then the question is

how do we do it. The way we

should do it is the most

efficient and the lowest cost

to the Australian economy.

Do you think China and the

United States will have a

price on car been by 2020.

They already have a shadow

carbon price . That is the

cost of regulation, and how

are we prices carbon by

preventing it. China is

invests in clean energy as is

the United States. It is

wrong to think.

That is more in line with

what Tony Abbott is talking

about - direct action,

investing in more efficient

ways of producing...

Tony Abbott is a whole new

thing of Abbott economics

where you get taxpayers' to pay polluters to become

cleaner. It is probably the least efficient way of trying

to deal with this issue. Isn't that exactly what

other countries are doing in

I am pointing out regulation

is always a way of imposing

carbon prices. Nations in the

world have put in praise a carbon price and if you sit

here and say, "Where do we

want to be in 10 or 20 years

time." Do we want an old

faces economy that has not

moved to cleaner energy or

moved to low polluting ways

of doing things or do we want

to be a country that says,

"We changed and we did it