HOST: Prime Minister, good morning and welcome.
PM: Thank you very much, Greg. Good to be with you.
HOST: Yeah, and a busy day ahead, an important day ahead. You would have seen footage of the community forum on the insurance and other matters held in Ipswich yesterday - profoundly emotional and you can understand how the residents were feeling, no doubt, and your Government's calling for clearer definitions of flood and what flood is from insurers in the future. I'm wondering, though, Prime Minister, how does it help people who were there yesterday and all the others who weren't there yesterday? What is your Government going to do now to help those people now?
PM: I understand that people are in difficult circumstances now. Yesterday I was out in Toowoomba and Dalby meeting with people who'd been hit by the floods, including people from the Lockyer Valley, who have lost so much and whose family members have lost their lives, so I do understand how much pressure people are facing.
I did have the opportunity to see the Deputy Prime Minister, Wayne Swan, and the Assistant Treasurer, Bill Shorten, yesterday at a meeting they had following the Ipswich meeting, a meeting of major businesses around the country to keep mobilising support for Queensland.
We do want to fix insurance for the future. I want people to be able to look at their policy and understand what it means and I do understand now many people are feeling ripped off by insurance companies, so we will maintain pressure on insurance companies to do the right thing and to consider claims sympathetically and we're going to keep pressure on insurance companies to do what they should have done yesterday and to go and front that meeting in Ipswich and hear directly from the people of Queensland.
At the same, we'll continue to work with the people of Queensland on rebuilding. We will be investing over $5 billion here in Queensland as part of our recovery efforts, and around $1 billion of that is going directly to individuals to help them through.
HOST: A lot of that money was donated locally to the Premier's Relief Fund - $255 million of, which only $55 million of that has gone out so far. Do you really think that's satisfactory?
PM: The Premier's Relief Fund is a separate source of funding from what I'm talking about. So, that $5 billion that I'm talking about is Federal Government investment and the $1 billion of it going to individuals is Federal Government payments in the form of disaster relief.
On the amount of money that's been raised by the Premier's Disaster Relief Fund, I've got two messages: I'm continuing to urge businesses to do more and that's part of why I met with business leaders from around the country in Queensland yesterday; and I know that the Premier is working with a committee of people drawn from Queensland on how to use those funds.
HOST: The Premier, Prime Minister, is erring - in her own words, and Mr Hamill's words - on the side of caution in not giving money to those they believe don't deserve it. Hasn't the time really come when you've got to err on the side of giving it to people who desperately need the money and if they're are fraudulent claims we can take care of that later on?
PM: I presume that an approach is being taken about making sure that this money in the Premier's Disaster Relief Fund does the maximum good that it can, so you wouldn't want to look back and say ‘Gee, we could have done better with the money that people have generously donated', so I'm sure that's the approach that's been taken.
On the direct relief that comes from the Federal Government, as you would know, the payments to assist people, the emergency money, got out on the ground very quickly indeed and now we are continuing to work with communities to rebuild and rebuild infrastructure that has been hit by flood waters and also hit by the cyclone.
HOST: You see, I'm just not quite sure that we - and I know you tried to answer that first question, it's a very difficult and complex one - but essentially everybody is now focussing on insurance companies, some of which clearly did the right thing, some of which clearly did the wrong thing, but the responsibility clearly goes much wider than that and again, in addressing what can be done for the future, what directly can be done for those people's lives who have been wrecked at moment?
PM: Well, first and foremost Government's got to play its proper role of supporting individuals, families, communities and rebuilding infrastructure. We are doing that and we will do that. I've said loud and publicly that we won't let go. We will be working with the people of Queensland during this difficult period of rebuilding and recovery.
For the insurance policy, we can't go back in time and rewrite people's insurance policies, but we can put pressure on insurance companies to sympathetically and quickly deal with claims and we can name and shame, Greg, when insurance companies do the wrong thing and I am more than prepared to do that and we can fix this for the future, so Queenslanders, Australians right around the nation, can pick up their policy and understand it, know what they're going to get if they get into times of difficulty, and that there is a clear definition of the word ‘flood'.
HOST: See, this becomes one of the complexities, though. You're going to name and shame them and you say a lot of them have been irresponsible in what they've done. They're not here, of course, to defend themselves in that and obviously some did the wrong thing. Some will argue, however, that people were allowed to build in flood plains knowing they were flood plains and without having insurance. How is that possible to do?
PM: My point about the insurance companies is they should be out there. They should be out there taking people's questions at meetings like the Ipswich meeting yesterday, and if people have got something to say, the insurance company may agree with it or disagree with it, but they should be prepared to front it out and take people's questions and complaints. I think it's cowardly that insurance company representatives didn't go to that meeting yesterday.
HOST: Again, it doesn't resolve the issue though, does it? I mean people are passionate, they're emotional and we're trying to help a lot of those people, so we understand that. Meantime, Senator Joe Ludwig says he just asks for patience. As we could see last night and we can understand, people are way beyond having patience.
PM: I met with people directly yesterday. I wasn't at the same meeting that the Treasurer and Deputy Prime Minister Wayne Swan and Bill Shorten were at, but I was out and about talking to people who had been hit by flood waters and people who had lost a lot, including people who had lost family members, and I understand from those conversations that people want to rebuild their lives, that there is a sense of absolute urgency in doing that, that people do feel ripped off, and we will be working alongside them as they do that.
I understand it's a hard thing to be patient about when you're out of home and you want your home rebuilt, but we do have to work alongside people in this journey of recovery. Not everything is going to be put back the same way that it was instantaneously. That's just the truth. We do have to work with people, it is taking time, it is difficult to ask for patience, but I suppose we do have to ask people to understand that it takes some time to rebuild communities, rebuild homes, to rebuild lives, but there are resources available to help - more than $5 billion coming from the Federal Government flowing into this State, as it properly should.
HOST: OK, just needs to get out there faster, doesn't it? All that help and relief money has to get out there faster.
PM: We'll, we've got the emergency payments out there very, very fast. I mean they were done literally within days of -
HOST: -But we've got people living in tents, Prime Minister. Living in tents, their kids who are breaking down, social workers who saying people talking about suicide is rising every single day, so it's clearly not getting to those who desperately need the help.
PM: I think we've just got to, in terms of how this has unfolded and working with people, there was the immediate emergency situation, people out of their homes, in evacuation centres, some of them in desperate circumstances, and the emergency money to assist them got out very, very quickly - very, very quickly - to help people.
Now there's the need to help people as they rebuild and I understand people want to do that as quickly as possible. I talked to people yesterday who are living with relatives, living in difficult circumstances, anxious to rebuild their homes and rebuild their lives, so I definitely understand that and we will be working with those families and those communities as they rebuild.
HOST: OK, our Prime Minister with us - not for much longer, I know you've got a busy morning. George Negus, a very worrying story last night on his program: an Army cadet at the national elite military academy is facing serious charges and the sack after he filmed himself having sex with a female Air Force cadet - she came forward last night - and broadcast it to his mates. I suppose in asking you how you feel about that story, why does it matter if they've committed a crime - and they may well have - should they simply sack those that made the footage and those who watched the footage?
PM: As I understand it, there is an Australian Federal Police investigation here and the Defence Force is investigation it too, so that's got to happen and I don't want to say anything that would prejudice those investigations, but if I can make a point more broadly, obviously any conduct that treats a woman in a way that her dignity is pushed aside, that engages in misusing trust, breaching trust, going out of their way to embarrass people, strip them of dignity and a sense of self worth is disgusting conduct and we would all repudiate it. It's not what we want to see in this country.
HOST: Absolutely.
You've spoken a lot and had to respond to a lot of questions related to Kevin Rudd's appearance on Q&A the other night, Maybe I can come at it from a different way - honesty test. As Mr Rudd was saying what he did about the Cabinet decision to dump the ETS on Q&A Monday night, as you watched it, and you watched the program, what did you say or think?
PM: I didn't watch the program, I'm sorry!
HOST: Shattered that.
PM: Look, I'm busy as Prime Minister and I -
HOST: -You know what he said, though?
PM: Look, I've obviously seen reported what he said, but I didn't watch the program. I wasn't in a position to do that.
HOST: OK, when you first saw or read what he said, then, what did you say or think?
PM: I understand that Kevin will be asked about his period as Prime Minister and answer questions about that period, so that will happen, and obviously did happen on Q&A on Monday night, but I also understand that on Q&A Kevin was asked a lot of questions about our substantive policy to tackle climate change and to price carbon, and they didn't get as much reporting, but obviously what he was doing was supporting Government drive to tackle this big challenge for the nation's future and to get a price on carbon.
HOST: Prime Minister, isn't that part of the dilemma, though, because it's quite clear that he was talking about you and others, which gets to the point you just raise - how can you tell us a carbon tax is so important now when you wanted to dump it for political reasons seemingly just a year ago?
PM: I'm not going to talk about confidential discussions between Cabinet colleagues. I've said that before. There's nothing new in that-
HOST: -But you did say it, didn't you? You did say it?
PM: What I can say to you is I've always believed this nation needed to tackle climate change. I've always believed the best most efficient way of doing that was through an emissions trading scheme and through what I am advocating now this nation will have an emissions trading scheme.
I'm all about making sure that this nation is as prosperous as it can be in the future and we do the right thing by the environment and to do that we need to price carbon, and that's what I'm focused on now.
Yesterday, as well as meeting people hit by the Queensland floods, I went to the Darling Downs power station, sat in a lunch room and talked to a group of power workers about pricing carbon and how we need to do that for the nation's future.
So, every day I'll be out advocating this big change -
HOST: -We know that. I know you're out and about working very hard and I know also you need to get away.
Just one final point on that, though, because I just think it's really important at a time when there's a lot of concern, and you're running against it in the polls, you must know there's a lot of negative reaction to the carbon tax, although we're in the early days of the debate.
The leaked minutes of the special meeting of the Labor Party, June 24 2010, as carried in The Australian, quote Kevin Rudd as saying ‘I changed our position on the emissions trading scheme. I wish to place on record here that Lindsay Tanner and Penny Wong strongly argued to me against taking that position. Equally strong was the advice from Wayne - meaning Swan - and Julia - meaning you - that the emissions trading scheme had to be abandoned.' So I guess politically and for all us trying to get our head around this, how could you be so strong against it then and so strong for it now?
PM: I'm going to leave picking over all of this to the historians, but if you're asking me what my views are now and what they were last year and the year before and the year before, my views have been absolutely the same - we have to get on with tackling climate change.
That means we have to cut carbon pollution. The best way of doing that is to get the biggest polluters in this country to pay a price for the carbon pollution then generate, use that money to assist households, protect jobs and tackle climate change.
That's exactly what I'm advocating for and I want to deliver for this country, starting on the 1st of July 2012.
HOST: Final question, and fully understand your sincerity in that, why has your attitude changed between last year and this year?
PM: My attitude is the same. I believe in tackling climate change. I believe the best way of doing that is an emissions trading scheme. That's always been my view.
HOST: But you didn't want to support Kevin Rudd with it?
PM: Look, I'm not going to pick over events in the past. I'll leave that to the historians and people ask questions about this, I understand it, but -
HOST: -You can understand why it's important, though. You can't-
PM: -I think what's important is people will say to themselves, they'll be at home with their families, they'll be in their workplace, they'll look at their family members, they'll look at their work colleagues, they'll think ‘gee, I do want to do the right thing by the environment, but what's it mean for me, what's it mean for my family, what's it mean for my workplace?'
That's what people care about and that's what I will be explaining every day.
Of course, I am passionate about doing this, passionate about doing it and that's what's driving me to make sure I'm around the country explaining it to Australians.
HOST: You've got a busy day ahead. It's a very important day talking to a lot of people who want to see their Prime Minister, so we'll let you at it and good luck.
PM: Thank you very much.