E&OE…
DAVID LIPSON
With me this morning is the Assistant Cabinet Secretary, Scott Ryan, and the Shadow Employment Minister, Brendan O’Connor. Thank you for your time this morning. Scott Ryan first to you, is this a vindication for your Party’s move to roll Tony Abbott?
SCOTT RYAN
David, I have had the privilege of sitting in this chair with you and Kieran and being asked lots of questions about polls over the years. Politicians do not do things because of polls, and that is something for people like yourself and Phil to commentate on.
LIPSON
But isn’t that exactly what Malcolm Turnbull said was one of the key reasons that he was challenging Tony Abbott, because of the thirty Newspolls he had been behind in?
RYAN
Without recounting the events of the last couple of months, what I have detected in the community is that people are interested in hearing from the Prime Minister and the Government on solutions to the problems they face. They are sick of partisan bickering and they are sick of hearing an Opposition that literally just runs to its base, protects its interests and isn’t interested in having a serious debate about solutions to our national challenges.
LISPON
But you must be pleased?
RYAN
David, the truth is that these things come and go. I have been here seven years and I have now seen a complete range from when we had very difficult days, to somewhat more successful days. Every day in politics is a challenge, this doesn’t predict anything about the future, it is simply an indicator of the expectations on the Government and the opportunity we have to deliver the policies and the solutions that people expect.
LIPSON
Brendan O’Connor, Bill Shorten’s numbers are woeful really; when you look at better prime minister, 17 per cent, whereas just a few weeks ago he was doing pretty well. How do you explain this?
BRENDAN O’CONNOR
We have explained it. Since the assassination of Tony Abbott, as a honeymoon period for Malcolm Turnbull, and of course we will continue to focus on policies. We announced another one today, and we will have further announcements to make as we present our case to the Australian people as to why we are a better alternative to the Australia Government.
LIPSON
But doesn’t it indicate that there must be a change in style, if not substance by the Opposition Leader now that there is a new man in town, Malcolm Turnbull, who is very popular at this point with the electorate?
O’CONNOR
Well he is a new man, that is because he is so different from the old Malcolm Turnbull. The old Malcolm Turnbull supported marriage equality and he wanted something done about it, the old Malcolm Turnbull wanted to see a market based approach to cutting carbon emissions; the old Malcolm Turnbull is not what we see before us. What we see before us is of course a prime minister who surrendered his principles for leadership, and therefore has refused to move on those issues that he told the Australian people he would when he was the pretender for the job.
LIPSON
Okay, let’s move on. Looking as you can see at the bottom of your screen, the Prime Minister will in this half-hour announce Dr Alan Finkel as the new chief scientist, although this has been around in the press for the last couple of days. He is someone, Scott Ryan, who very much fits into Malcolm Turnbull’s innovation strategy; he is a keen believer in renewables but also nuclear power. Can we read anything into that?
RYAN
Let’s let the Prime Minister make an announcement this morning. I had the privilege of meeting Alan Finkel in his previous role at Monash University, in my previous portfolio. He is someone who has been at the cutting-edge of what is a real challenge for this country, it is a long-standing challenge which is how to turn our high quality research, that is what we call ‘basic research’, into applied research and then into products. The best example of that in recent years in Australia is the work that Ian Frazer did that led to a cervical cancer vaccine that will probably save the lives of millions of people around the world. In health we do that a lot better, but there is some fantastic work that is underway in our universities and in our research centres and has been going on for decades and Alan Finkel is one of the people who will play a key role in asking: how do we pull that out, how do we get that into businesses, how do we have our students at universities do start-up and entrepreneurship courses that utilise the work they are doing in science, medicine and other faculties?
LIPSON
And the nuclear question? It was read into in media reports that that may be a factor. Is the Government considering re-visiting, at least a debate on, nuclear power?
RYAN
The Government that is re-visiting a debate on this in Australia is the South Australian Labor Government; the long-standing view going back to, I think, John Howard as Prime Minister was to undertake investment over the decades that would require a nuclear investment would actually need genuine bi-partisanship for a regulatory regime. Now, the federal Labor Party is still stuck in its particular policy that this won’t be considered. I noticed that Jay Weatherill in South Australia has been putting pressure on the federal Labor Party because of South Australia’s profile in the nuclear industry, but absent that, there is no plan by the Federal Government in this space despite what Alan Finkel, the Chief Scientist has said in the past. And quite frankly that is what I want a Chief Scientist to do, to be able to talk freely on these issues.
LIPSON
Brendan O’Connor, Labor’s position is pretty clear here against nuclear power. Is it time to reconsider that opposition and perhaps look at the German model of putting in place nuclear power so that cheap electricity can fund investment in renewables and move forward that way?
O’CONNOR
It is good to see that Scott is deferring to Labor to lead on these matters. We haven’t changed our position in relation to nuclear energy, but we have said that we would look at the findings of the Royal Commission established by Premier Weatherill. As always, it is incumbent upon the advocates of change to make a compelling case and to date that hasn’t been made.
LIPSON
What about the sixty prominent Australians, Brendan O’Connor I will ask you first, who are today calling for a moratorium on further coal mines in Australia? They include Bernie Fraser and the Wallabies captain too. Is that something we should consider as a nation? The point being that they are making is that it is all very well to have our targets for reducing emissions, but if we are digging up coal and exporting it to the countries that burn it then it doesn’t help the world.
O’CONNOR
I think firstly that of course we are reliant on base-load power and fossil fuels as we move towards a cleaner future. We would be a better place of course if the current Turnbull-Abbott Government hadn’t been so dismissive and injurious towards renewable energy and the RET. And if you look at the way in which investment has gone in that area, there is a total loss of confidence in that sector because of the leadership, well lack of leadership, by the Federal Government. Insofar as coal, we have been supportive of that sector but we do look to other energy sources; I think that is entirely proper. I do note that the Minister for minerals and industry has talked about the moral requirements, the moral cause. I am very sceptical when any politician starts invoking morals in the argument, I have to say, I like to look at the case. But of course countries around the world, developing nations, need to use energy to feed their people. I understand that, but as a developed nation, the second highest emitter of carbon per capita in the world, we also have a responsibility in leading the world towards a cleaner future and we need to do that in a way that is going to lead the way, but also influence the decision making of others. And that is why it is so interesting that the Prime Minister…
(Interrupted)
LIPSON
But you’re not talking about a moratorium? You are not talking about stopping any further coal mines are you?
O’CONNOR
No, I have just recently seen that submission. My point is that we have been reliant on fossil fuels including coal, and we still have a reliance on that. I think it is important that we focus on other energy sources. But I have not, I don’t support that submission made by what are, of course, eminent people at this point. But I also…
(Interrupted)
LIPSON
Scott Ryan, Bernie Fraser did talk about this idea of a moral argument that was put by Josh Frydenberg just recently. He says: yeah sure coal is meant to help give people in developing countries electricity and help them in that way, but they are the very same people who are going to be worse affected by climate change and therefore that moral argument is nonsense.
RYAN
I will stand with Josh here. Let’s put on what will happen if this action was to be undertaken. Unilateral action by Australia will have no bearing whatsoever because the coal we export will just be replaced by another supplier. If it is not replaced by an international supplier people will get access to it domestically. That will often be dirtier coal, it will often be mined more dangerously and it will often not have the health and safety protections that mines in Australia have. It may even be done in much closer proximity to people. Secondly, I think these signatories need to consider whether they should go to Rocky and they should go to Mackay, and explain to all of the people who will not have jobs because of unilateral action by Australia, or even if we were a part of some other action, because those jobs are not going to be replaced. This is a significant and massive export industry and provides thousands of jobs for people, not just directly at the mine but also all of the little suppliers to that mine and everything to the cafes, to the bookstores to the home builders in those towns. This is not a serious suggestion, because there is not going to be a global moratorium on expansion on coal mines because it is too important a power source, not just for those countries who have been historically reliant on it like Australia but also to ensure that those who suffer from energy poverty at the moment actually get a chance to get some of the basic sanitation; some of the basic energy, things like hot water that we take for granted in our daily lives.
LIPSON
Okay Scott Ryan, Brendan O’Connor, stay right with us we will take a quick break and will be back shortly.
(Advertisements)
LIPSON
You are watching AM Agenda. We are standing by for a news conference with the Prime Minister and the new Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel. We will bring that to you from the Blue Room here at Parliament House as soon as Malcolm Turnbull steps through that door. In the meantime we will get on with our panel, Scott Ryan and Brendan O’Connor are still with me. Let’s turn to superannuation; we saw Scott Morrison talking about additional assistance for working mums to pump more money in their superannuation nest eggs once they return to work. Scott Ryan, Labor says that if you want to help working mums then you should reinstate the low income super contribution and reverse the freeze on compulsory employer contributions.
RYAN
A couple of things here, what Scott was doing was highlighting one of the challenges he wanted to address. He did not propose a specific policy. He said that broken work patterns are something that the superannuation system doesn’t cope with well. I think everyone can agree with that; it is primarily women who take time out of the workforce, but there are also men, whether they be single parents or caring for a relative even if it is temporary, but it is primarily women. That is a slightly different problem to the issue of people who are unable to save enough through lower incomes, and the difference with the low income tax offset was that it is actually a payment, it was a payment that was added to the budget deficit because it was not a tax concession. It was not a reduced tax rate. It was a payment into people’s superannuation funds that was partly meant to be attributed to the mining tax that, as we know, collected virtually no money. When it comes to the scale of what the superannuation guarantee is, we have frozen it at 9.5 per cent because to see it increase adds billions to the budget deficit because of the lower tax rates applied to superannuation. What the Treasurer has said, I think quite responsibly is that we need to identify the problems we want to fix rather than just coming out with unilateral announcements without talking to people and seeking agreement on what those problems are. That is what Labor did with patchwork caps on superannuation contributions here, higher taxes there, a payment to certain people there. There was no overarching support for the system.
LIPSON
Brendan O’Connor, a response to that and I suppose the claim that it is a slightly different problem what Scott Morrison was talking about specifically working mums and carers going back into the workforce.
O’CONNOR
The Government, they are a fraud on this issue. Firstly they had a gold-plated parental leave scheme which they abolished, then they abolished or prohibited people accessing current schemes that are in the market place if they were to actually apply and use the current Commonwealth scheme. In relation to superannuation, they of course repealed the co-contribution for three and a half million workers, most of whom are women. They only defend those at the highest superannuation levels for very, very significant tax concessions, and of course they also reneged on their election promise to increase the superannuation guarantee. Wherever you look when it comes to superannuation, particularly for women, the Liberal Government – the Turnbull-Abbott Government – have always turned their back away from women in the workplace and particularly in relation to superannuation policy. There has not been one occasion in our history that the Liberal Party has ever supported an increase to superannuation in the Parliament, ever.
LIPSON
I want to turn to a couple of the policies that Labor is looking at today, one of them is this redress scheme for compensation for victims of child sexual abuse, sixty thousand of them. Can you tell us a bit more about this policy, Brendan O’Connor?
O’CONNOR
This is of course in response to the findings of the Royal Commission. This was a very important Royal Commission established by the former Labor government into the institutional response to child sex abuse. I think what everyone has seen through that process is some very difficult revelations and it has been personally difficult to those who have suffered such awful injury as a result of that abuse. But it has provided them an opportunity to tell their story, to have their story heard. I think we are now at the next stage where we need to find redress and that includes counselling and psychological services, it also includes the opportunity for victims to hear a direct response from their abusers and of course, finally, monetary compensation. So today, Bill Shorten and Jenny Macklin were announcing an agency that would be established, for approximately 20 million dollars, that would provide the mechanisms by which this can happen. I think this is a timely thing and a necessary announcement in order to provide some comfort and closure for sixty thousand Australians who experienced things that they should never have had to experience.
LIPSON
Just very briefly Scott Ryan, it seems like a pretty positive plan that Labor is putting forward?
RYAN
I haven’t seen the detail of Labor’s announcement. Firstly, I think every Australian has been shocked, even those who thought they might have known about some of these events from the newspaper coverage over recent years, at what we have seen come out of this Royal Commission. A lot of Australians will know someone who has been directly impacted, I do, and it is quite shocking. If I recall correctly the interim report talked about how the compensation should primarily come from the perpetrators and there should be activity by governments to fill in where there is a vacancy or a void. I am not as familiar with those details, but the Attorney General has made it clear that when the final report comes out that the Government will take it very seriously and its recommendations. I do not think this is an issue of substantial partisan difference.
O’CONNOR
I will just make the point David that Scott is right, that predominantly the compensation must come from the abusers the perpetrators.
LIPSON
Just very briefly, we are right out of time, but I did want to ask you about the preselection win for Trent Zimmerman last night in Joe Hockey’s old seat of North Sydney. He is still the acting Director of the New South Wales Liberal Party isn’t he? Does he need to resign from that?
RYAN
As you know the Liberal Party is a very state based organisation and I am a Victorian, I don’t know the exact rules of the New South Wales division. I believe he is acting President rather than acting Director, so the President is an unpaid voluntary position elected by the members whereas the Director is the full-time official that manages the Party. I understand there was a preselection held last night and that Trent won, he has been a Vice-President of the party and is known to many people in the building.
LIPSON
Brendan O’Connor briefly, will Labor run? It doesn’t sound like it.
O’CONNOR
This decision is…
(Interrupted)
LIPSON
Actually we have to go to the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull.
(ENDS)