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) The Independent MP Tony

Windsor has lashed out at

government plans to spend $12 million on a carbon price

advertising campaign. And for

more Tony Windsor joins us now

from our Canberra studio. Good

morning. Thanks for joining

us. Pleasure. What is your

objection to this advertising

campaign? I think there is a

certain presumption there is going to be a carbon tax that

will need promotion. That is

not necessarily correct. I

think I am part of a process and more than happy to be part

of that process, but that proes

pro- cess hasn't ended yet.

We're coming down to the pointy

end. I didn't think it was

possibly the best strategy for

the Government to adopt to

suddenly announce they're going

to be promoting something that

doesn't exist. So they're

being presumptuous? I think so. There's a presumption that

members of the committee will

come to a conclusion that a

carbon tax of some form will be

available in a few weeks time

and will need promoting. In my

case that is definitely not the

case. We haven't decided on a

firm structure yet and I would have thought it might have been

a little bit more strategic to have left the promotion,

particularly the taxpayers'

money, until after some decision was made, if in fact

one is. So could this actually

then turn the other way? Could

the presumtiveness behind in chase away vote such as yours

from supporting a carbon

tax? No. No. I think this is -

this issue is a bit bigger than

that. Excuse me, this is a very

substantive issue and needs to

be treated as such. So the two

things aren't related. They

won't affect the way I will

attack my deliberations today

and next week. But it must be

then an indicator of a couple

of things that we have seen now

playing out publicly where some

members of the multiparty

committee - you're getting irritated at certain

information that's been

released publicly or announced

in some way before you guys get

to deliberate on it. Is that

the heart of this

problem Well, I think it's

one of the things that is

negotiation in good Tate when happening. It's not

that happens, is it? Oh well

that's for other - I will keep

my conclusions to myself I, I

think. Coming to the pointy end

of these things, if people play

their political strategies -

strategist and that is what is

happening. Obviously the

Government wants to get its

logic out there and position.

The Greens are doing similar

things. I haven't been leaking

anything, so I haven't been

doing much in that regard.

People are getting their positioning out in the public

arena so that they can promote

their positions. There's

multiparty climate change obviously - this is a

different afternoons that committee. So people have

they're interested in. -

avenues they they're interested. In I am interested

in the fuel and agricultural

sides that my constituency

would be interested. The Greens

are interested if other issues. The Government has revenue

issue it has to deal with as

well that obviously it's on

constituencies. So all of those

things don't necessarily meet at the one point. I think

there's a little bit of

scribbling going on at the

edges. But I think in the room

we will get down to the

substantive issue and try to

work something through. The

committee meets again this

morning and you have that first

of July carbon plan deadline.

Are you going to make that

deadline? I don't flow the

answer to. That I don't have a deadline. The Government may

have. Others may have. I am

interested in trying to get

something that will actually

work and that something will do

something. If it takes longer,

that is not going to worry me.

It may worry others. But you're

prepared as a member of this

committee to keep discuss ing

on this committee as long as it

takes to get a good outcome and the Government's deadline is

not looming large in your

mind? No, it is not. And I am,

as I said, happy to be part of

this process. But if the

process won't work, so be

it. So what would make the

process not work? If people

couldn't agree. That doesn't

necessarily mean that the

Government couldn't go ahead and introduce legislation. Kit

do that. In the lower House, it

would probably need one or two

Liberals who felt strongly

about this particular issue to

cross the floor or abstain on a

vote. So there's a whole range

- the whole thing doesn't just

attach itself to whether

everybody in the multiparty

climate change committee

agrees, this issue could go ol

on without that. How far apart are you in that

committee? Well, there's

confidentiality of the

committee and I will have to -

I think I am the only one but I

think I will concur with that

confidentiality! The meetings

go well. There's ban lot of

information in this. There's

been a lot of complexity. I

congratulate Greg Combet. It is

not an easy thing for a

Minister to try to deal. With

people coming from different

directions in a minority

situation and enormous issue of

global significance, normally a

government in this situation

would run away and I

congratulate Greg for way in

which he is trying to work

through th through and

hopefully he. Can if he can't,

as I said earlier, it is not

the end of the world. That may

happen in a few hundred years but if we can't make a

decision, we will see what the

rest of the Parliament

does. You're on the record as

saying this is an issue you've

accepted as important and the Productivity Commission Productivity Commission report

laid fears in your mind that

Australia might be seen as

going it alone in some way. But

is there a bottom line for you

when it comes to cost, to the

imposition either on the

industrial sector or even as

those costs flow on to general

consumers where your support

for a carbon tax stops? Well,

that may or may not happen. Hopefully happen. Hopefully it

doesn't. But do you have that

upper level in your mind as it

were? No, I don't. And I think

we have to try to keep the real

target in mind here to try and

substantive global issue. If get something done about a

that is not possible, well so

be it. But that is my

intention. I am not interested

in some sort of ambit claim

process. Obviously I have concerned about food production

and what that would mean if it

was included. I don't think it

will be included until we see

the final structure we can't actually make those comments. There is no

legislation to actually work

our way through yet. So let's

hope the committee can do that. Just finally this

morning, we're noting of course

the three votes that the

Government lost on yesterday in Government lost on yesterday in

the House. Is how fragile is

from time to time with this Government relies on you

legislation - can I hold

together, in your view? A lot

of people said it wouldn't for

the first few months. Obviously

it is. It's a minority

Government. I've been in one

before, the Government wins

some, it loses some. That is

the day-to-day dramatisation of the building. But there the building. But there are

substantive issues here, one of

we've bef just been talk about the - the National Broadband

Network, the Murray-Darling

issue. If any one of those had

been in a majority Parliament

and had come to a successful

conclusion, the people would

have looked back and said that

was a pretty workable

Parliament. So these things

will happen. I think some

within the Government are still

struggling with the fact that they're in a

they're in a minor ity position

and other people have different

views on different

circumstances. I don't get too

excited about it at all. T

vr It's the Parliament that -

it's the part that the people

put in place and I am more than