HOWARD SATTLER: Yes, well if the opinion polls are correct, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott is doing something right. Is it the sort of language he speaks? The simple language about the emissions trading scheme and climate warming and all that sort of thing. Or is it his use of terminologies, old time terminologies like housewife, which appears to have won him points today on our talkback line. The overwhelming majority of people supported his use of that, against people who were complaining saying it's anachronistic and it's a blast from the past, an oldie worldy(*) stuff. Let's go to the Government side now. Lindsay Tanner joins us, Federal Finance Minister. G'day, Lindsay.
LINDSAY TANNER: G'day Howard. Good to be with you, thanks.
HOWARD SATTLER: Is that a term you would use to describe a woman who works at home?
LINDSAY TANNER: Possibly. I'm not that hung up about that stuff, Howard. I think it's not exactly a major issue for us to be debating about.
HOWARD SATTLER: Some of your backbenchers think it is. People like Lynn - Yvette D'ath who came on, and she was having a real slack - slash at Tony Abbott.
LINDSAY TANNER: Oh, well - look, I think it does suggest that he's a little out of touch with the diversity of modern Australia to be honest. Like, I do all my own ironing and have done for many years. Now, my staff of course will tell you that it shows, and that maybe I shouldn't, but I do all my own ironing and I do domestic stuff that my father and his generation wouldn't have dreamed of doing, you know? So, the world is a fair bit different.
HOWARD SATTLER: But there are a still lot of people out there, women, who are the people who are the linchpin of the family. And they're the ones at home doing things like ironing. How else would you describe them but as housewives?
LINDSAY TANNER: Oh, yeah. Look, I'm - like I say, Howard, I'm not objecting to that. I can understand why some people would, but I don't think it's the big issue of the day, but I think it is important that we all acknowledge that there's great diversity out - in families now in Australia and all kinds of different arrangements and we should treat all of the arrangements with respect in my view.
HOWARD SATTLER: Why do you think Tony Abbott's getting traction now in the opinion polls?
LINDSAY TANNER: Look, I think you need to be careful about interpreting opinion polls. I'm always cautious about casting judgement on them. They move around…
HOWARD SATTLER: The only one that matters is the one on the day, as they say.
LINDSAY TANNER: Precisely. And you never quite know. Like, you can attribute a shift up or a shift down to something, but you just don't really know. So, I'd be cautious about casting judgement on that. I think probably the main thing to keep in mind is that the Liberals were in a diabolical mess in November / December last year. Worse than I've ever seen any political party. So, that would have inevitably been weighing them down, and the mere fact that they've, sort of, moved on from that's probably made a bit of a contribution, but - Howard, we've just got to fight our corner, and do our best, and hope that the electoral judgement ends up favourable.
HOWARD SATTLER: Well, you were really travelling well early on when discussion around the place about emissions trading, but you seem to have lost a bit of ground there now. I mean, what's gone wrong?
LINDSAY TANNER: Inevitably we've moved into the tougher part of the process, Howard, and of course…
HOWARD SATTLER: Copenhagen was a disaster. That didn't help.
LINDSAY TANNER: Well, I think the fact that people had very high expectations that weren't met. We still took some very big steps forward there in terms of global agreement, it just didn't quite reach the level that people were hoping and expecting. So, yes, you're dead right. That's probably had an influence. But, the problem is, we're dealing here with one of the most complex and challenging problems of modern history. It's very difficult to deal with and I've likened it to giving up smoking. You know, it's - that some how or other, we've got to cut down on our use of carbon in our economy and there's a debate about how - what's the best way to do it. We've got a plan, and yes, it's complicated. It's unavoidably complicated. There's scope for debate about it. What Tony Abbott's put forward is really, frankly, phoney. It's just designed to make it look like…
HOWARD SATTLER: But it's simple.
LINDSAY TANNER: …he's doing something.
HOWARD SATTLER: But it sounds simple, what he says. Yours - there's a lot of verbiage in yours.
LINDSAY TANNER: Well, it's easy if you're putting up something that's totally phoney to make it sound simple. What he's doing is making the taxpayer foot the bill. So, it's ultimately ordinary Australians out there footing the bill, not putting the immediate cost on the people who are the polluters. Our calculations suggest it would only have about a third of the impact that he's claiming, so it really won't have much affect on the ultimate outcomes that we're trying to change. And he's setting up a giant slush fund, and we know from past history that the National Party will be really keen to get their hands on that money and hand it out to mates under the guise of tackling carbon pollution. So, we just don't believe it's going to have serious impact and that it's, frankly, a step backwards to look like they're doing something.
HOWARD SATTLER: But you're going to impose a tax too, and you're going to ask polluters - you're going to say to them, you can continue to pollute as long as you pay for it. That's what you're going to do.
LINDSAY TANNER: What it's designed to do, Howard, is…
HOWARD SATTLER: Isn't that right?
LINDSAY TANNER: No. It's designed to ensure that the level of pollution diminishes over time. So, it's all about reducing that and it's all about using the price mechanism to do that. It's not a tax, it's a fee to polluters for…
HOWARD SATTLER: Well, you can call it by any word you like, but they're going to have to pay the Government to - they're going to buy tax stamps, aren't they? Carbon…
LINDSAY TANNER: They will buy the right to emit a certain amount of carbon and that money then gets circulated back into the pockets of ordinary families who will have to pay the increase in the cost of living which is about 1.1 per cent impact. They get that money back in order to enable them to do that and of course the whole idea is to change the dynamics of electricity. So for example, the relative cost of things like solar power and wind power which is significantly higher then traditional means like coal power at the moment, the relative cost of those things will come down and what we're trying to do…
HOWARD SATTLER: [Interrupts] But you've cut back the solar subsidies. The subsidy level you had, you've cut back about $600 I think per unit.
LINDSAY TANNER: Well, no, that's not exactly true, Howard, in fact the total amount of money we've put into the solar industry is at record levels, we just had to clamp down on one particular program…
HOWARD SATTLER: Yeah that's right.
LINDSAY TANNER: …that was running out of control because…
HOWARD SATTLER: [Interrupts] Because a lot of people want to have solar power.
LINDSAY TANNER: Well, and because what was happening was that the level of the subsidy had got too high relative to the total cost. It was actually being delivered to people for free because of the…
HOWARD SATTLER: What's wrong with that? [Laughs].
LINDSAY TANNER: Because you and other taxpayers out there are paying for and because we want to get value for money. The whole idea is to spend as little as possible of taxpayers' dollars to get the maximum bang for your buck and the trouble is if you're actually just paying people the whole price then you're not using your taxpayers' dollars wisely. It's a complicated story Howard; I don't want to delay your listeners with this.
HOWARD SATTLER: I know it is complicated. But how damaging to your cause has been the visit to Australia of Lord Monckton who was in this studio yesterday and again seemed to resonate with a lot of the audience, they thought he was fantastic?
LINDSAY TANNER: Oh look I'm sure…
HOWARD SATTLER: They understood what he said.
LINDSAY TANNER: I'm sure there'll be some people who will take some notice of what he said but Howard this bloke…
HOWARD SATTLER: His audiences in Perth were packed out. They couldn't accommodate everyone.
LINDSAY TANNER: Yeah, well, but I suspect you'll find that the vast bulk of them were people who were already in that proportion of the population who think that it's all a scientific fraud and a communist conspiracy so you'd have the cheer squad of willing believers there already.
HOWARD SATTLER: Don't you think he has any credibility?
LINDSAY TANNER: I don't think he's got any credibility at all Howard.
HOWARD SATTLER: Really?
LINDSAY TANNER: He's suggesting that the Copenhagen conference was a conspiracy to establish a world government for communism or something. He's a guy who claims he's invented cures for diseases, now…
HOWARD SATTLER: Didn't say that.
LINDSAY TANNER: No, but this is on his track record so this is not a per…this is a person from the nutty fringe so…
HOWARD SATTLER: Nutty.
LINDSAY TANNER: …he might sound plausible but suggesting that the Copenhagen conference was a plot to create a world government is just ridiculous frankly.
HOWARD SATTLER: All right, so your side wasn't prepared to even meet him on that basis?
LINDSAY TANNER: Oh, of course not. We do not regard him as somebody credible. He's a conspiracy theorist; somebody who is just promoting completely wacky nonsense. So I don't see why we should meet somebody like that and I think it's to Tony Abbott's great discredit that he chose to meet him.
HOWARD SATTLER: Okay, but you also wouldn't even meet the Dalai Lama would you?
LINDSAY TANNER: Oh look we - a number of leading figures in the Government have met the Dalai Lama at various stages, but there are long establish protocols on both sides of politics about how those particular issues are dealt with.
HOWARD SATTLER: Can't upset the Chinese ay?
LINDSAY TANNER: Well it's in the int…it's not just the Chinese, Howard. We've got this issue that applies with Governments all around the world because unfortunately not all of them democratic and apply these kind of issues in the way Australia does. This challenge does present itself from time to time. There are other countries in our region where the same issues arises and there's long established protocols there that are basically about advancing Australia's interest.
HOWARD SATTLER: Okay just back to the emissions trading scheme; has your side sat down, including the Prime Minister, and recognised that you haven't probably explained the emissions trading scheme properly and that you're going to try and come back with a more simplistic type of discussion paper or if you like?
LINDSAY TANNER: Look I - broadly the answer to that question is yes Howard. I think there's a recognition in the Government that the bar's been lifted; that we have to improve our advocacy, improve our explanation of the issue.
HOWARD SATTLER: So Rudd-speak will be out will it?
LINDSAY TANNER: [Laughs] Keep in mind that we're dealing here with things that are inherently complicated and be weary of people who simplify complicated things because they're usually trying to con you. That's why we've called Tony Abbott's policy a con job. It's basically a bit of slight of hand. So it's hard, we've got to do better. I don't think anybody is debating that. We've got to improve our communication and win the argument.
HOWARD SATTLER: Well you've got Malcolm Turnbull on your side now.
LINDSAY TANNER: Well look, I'd give Malcolm some credit. I've been very critical of him obviously on many issues, I was critical of him, he's not a very good politician but he stuck to his guns and he belled the cat on one crucial issue yesterday in his speech and that is that the approach that Tony Abbott's taking is - will be a threat to the budget, it will cost taxpayers and it opens up all kinds of risks of dodgy deals with companies handing out money. Now this is why there's a big question mark about the Libs on all of this stuff. They historically have had a lot of people, a lot of ordinary decent Australians supporting them because they see them as the part of strong economic management and - rightly or wrongly, and that's been one of our party's failings in years gone by that was haven't been effective enough in that contest. But now you've got a guy leading them, unlike Malcolm Turnbull, who says he's bored with economics, you know, it's not really his go and he's appointed somebody but the outer fringes of the National Party to basically run his economic policy and he's not out there saying Australia might default on its debt. Well that's a slur on Australia. It is a threat to our economy and shows that they are really a risk to good economic management, so I think Malcolm Turnbull's really stood them up on this.
HOWARD SATTLER: All right. He's not going to join your party I take it?
LINDSAY TANNER: Oh look, frankly I'd be very surprised Howard. I know people have suggested it over the years. But I'd say to you Malcolm Turnbull represents a section of Liberal Party traditional thinking and that there are plenty of Liberal voters out there including in Perth and WA, plenty of Liberals out there who broadly are much more in line with Malcolm Turnbull's view of the world than they are with Tony Abbott's, so I don't think he's - Malcolm's at all out of step with the kind of Liberal Party that you and I know, it's just that there are different bits of it and the bit that he's out of step with is the bit of the conspiracy theorists and that haters and the anti-scientists and all these other kind of odd balls.
HOWARD SATTLER: I feel an election coming on, I don't know why.
LINDSAY TANNER: Well there is one due this year Howard, so [laughs].
HOWARD SATTLER: There is, all right, this year, thank you Lindsay.
LINDSAY TANNER: Good on you. Good to talk to you.
| Media Contact: | Website: |
|---|---|
| Nardia Dazkiw - 0418 144 690 | www.financeminister.gov.au |
