Subject(s): Asylum seekers; PNG asylum seeker policy; Carbon tax; Climate change; Budget surplus
HOST: Prime Minister, thank you for coming on the show.
PM: Thanks for having me, Andrew.
HOST: Prime Minister, in 2008 you scrapped our tough border laws.
Now, an Australian Federal Police report compiled around September in that same year warned that people smugglers, and I'm quoting, “will market recent changes to Australia's immigration policy to entice potential illegal immigrants.”
Now, that report was sent to your department in March. Why did you not follow that advice and heed that warning?
PM: Well, the first thing, Andrew, and you would accept this as a conservative, is that there is a thing called a democracy.
We went to the 2007 election with a set of policies, including the abolition of the then Pacific Solution. We obtained a majority. People knew exactly what we were proposing to do, and we did it.
Secondly, having formed the Government, we received in the subsequent years multitudes of advice from all sorts of different government agencies.
I'm not familiar with the one you just referred to, nor would you logically expect me to be familiar with, if it went to my department. But the bottom line is we observed a change in circumstances over the subsequent years.
As I’ve said elsewhere, probably around the 2009-10 point is where we should have adjusted policy earlier.
HOST: I'm saying though that that warning was sent to your department in March of 2009, only months later.
Again in 2008, the year you did this, the International Organisation of Migration in Indonesia warned, “people smugglers have clearly noted there has been a change in policy and they're testing the envelope.”
Wasn't scrapping the border laws your most catastrophic mistake?
PM: As I just said before, we operated on the base of the mandate we received from the Australian people in the 2007 election. And had we not done so, you and others would have criticised us for not honouring our word to the Australian people.
Secondly, circumstances then changed.
HOST: Well, they did change.
PM: And I quite readily admitted that we should have adjusted probably in the period of 2009-10, or begun to adjust, and I've gotta say 20-20 hindsight is easy.
And whatever the reports…
HOST: That's not hindsight. These are warnings.
PM: One of the reports that you referred to, or both of them, in fact, would have been part of a multitude of reports coming to the Government with differing analyses of what was transpiring at the time.
And you know as well as I do if you run a Government, you head a Government, you don't see all the reports which come in. They are assessed by your agencies, and there would have been many of them.
HOST: Well you're saying that you were doing merely what the voters had asked you to do in 2007.
PM: It's called the democratic mandate.
HOST: Well, before the 2007 election, you said, “Labor's policy is that if people are intercepted on the high seas, then these vessels should be turned around.”
Maybe the voters expected you to honour that promise?
PM: Well, what we discovered subsequent to the election period, and after long consultation with officials, is - and this is the reality which Mr Abbott faces today - is the instruction given to people smugglers out there on the high seas is that if you are about to be turned around by an Australian vessel, go out and sink the boat.
That's precisely the modus operandi which many of them have adopted, and therefore it proves to be an impractical policy.
HOST: Can I talk to you about your PNG deal? Now you promise that you will send every boat person to Papua New Guinea.
Now, since you have made that threat, boat people have kept arriving at more than 100 a day. There's been no drop.
Doesn't that suggest to you your plan has failed already?
PM: Well, Andrew, as you know from the statement I made only a little over a week ago, at the time of announcing the regional resettlement arrangement I said very openly on day one, number one, don't expect an immediate reduction of boats.
Number two…
HOST: When can we expect- reduction?
PM: Number two - number two is what I said - people smugglers will then seek to test the Government's resolve.
HOST: They’re testing it. So when will we see this work?
PM: Will then test the people’s - will then seek to test the Government's resolve. And we are not for turning.
Our policy is very clear. If you're a people smuggler and you seek to bring people to Australia by boat to Christmas Island, then know this - you will not be settled in Australia.
That is the core response to the business model which people smugglers have used around the world for quite a long time in dealing with Australia.
HOST: When will we see your policy start to work? Before the election? Will we see fewer boats?
PM: What I said when I launched the policy with the other Ministers, the Attorney-General and the Immigration Minister, Tony Burke, a week or so ago, was that we would need to see the implementation of this policy over a period of time and its effect over many months.
HOST: So, what you're saying, then, is that this may not work before the election? Trust you, it will after?
PM: Well, last time I looked, Andrew, I have been Prime Minister of this country for the last four weeks.
What I have sought to do is address this within the first couple of weeks.
HOST: I’m just after a performance mandate.
People will - you're asking people, taking trust that you will do what you say. Your plan will work. I'm asking you - will we see it work before the election?
PM: And what I'm saying to you in response is the appropriate decision by the Government is to go to the heart of the business model of people smugglers, which is for them to say to their customers, “If you bring folk to - if you come to Australia with us, then you'll end up being settled in Australia.” And what I'm saying in response is that's not going to happen.
And you know as well as I do, it is the implementation of that policy direction over time, resolutely, which will yield results. In the interim, people smugglers will test resolve.
HOST: I just asked you a fairly simple question, which is…
PM: And I have given you a very direct answer.
HOST: No, you haven’t.
PM: An absolutely direct and a responsible answer.
HOST: Will we see fewer boats before the election?
PM: I have given you a responsible answer. I don’t intend to…
HOST: You don't know?
PM: I am giving you a responsible answer, which says the clarity of the Government's decision, going to the heart of the people smuggling model, is the right response.
Number two, it is the product of the implementation of that over time.
HOST: Prime Minister, you promised to terminate the carbon tax, switching it a year earlier from the price set in Europe's emissions trading system.
Now, you say this will cut power bills, because Europe’s price today is $6. But Labor's last budget, and that's two months ago only, projects that Europe's price will actually rise over the next six years to $38. Not $6 - $38.
Can you guarantee that we will never pay a carbon price higher than what we pay today?
PM: If you have a floating price, Andrew, and you will understand that, the price changes over time. That’s why you have it - it’s called a market solution.
HOST: So you can’t guarantee that we won’t one day be paying $38 instead of, today, $24.
PM: Andrew, as a good market person yourself, being the strong conservative that you are, markets function according to supply and demand.
And therefore, what will happen with a floating price for carbon is that we will adjust accordingly over time.
HOST: About climate change - well, let’s go into it. What I want to know is…
PM: I accept the science. It’s happening. Therefore we’re going to do something about it.
HOST: I am going to quote the science, and see whether you accept the science.
An IPCC author, Professor Roger Jones - we’re talking science - says your carbon policies will at best cut the world’s temperature by 4 thousandths of 1 degree, by the end of the century - 4 thousandths.
Do you seriously think it’s worth us spending all this money, these taxes, these programs, to do essentially nothing about the temperature?
PM: The International Panel of Climate Change scientists that you just referred to contains within it 4,000 scientists. You’ve just chosen to quote one.
Number two is this…
HOST: That is the best - that is the most generous figure…
PM: That is…
HOST: Will you dispute?
PM: That is - that is one.
HOST: Will you tell me how much your programs will cut the temperatures?
PM: I am just putting into context, there are 4,000 scientists on that panel, you’ve just chosen to quote one.
HOST: No, that is the science. That is the science.
PM: Here is the second point - no, no, that’s your…
HOST: Are you denying that figure?
PM: Ah, Andrew, you’ve chosen to select the quote which suits your argument. That’s the first point.
HOST: Well you tell me your figure, then. Alright?
If my figure is wrong, you tell me your figure.
PM: My second point - no. You’ve said, here is one selection from a panel of 4,000 scientists.
Of course it happens to accord with the Andrew Bolt view of the world.
HOST: No. No, this is…
PM: It’s true. It’s absolutely true. The second point…
HOST: Prime Minister. You are misinformed. That is what your programs will do.
If you think your programs will drop the temperature by more than 4 thousandths of a degree, tell me now.
PM: Um, when you…
HOST: Tell me now.
PM: When you pronounce that the science says this, you’re saying Andrew Bolt’s selection of the science says that.
HOST: Well, tell me what Kevin Rudd’s selection...
PM: The second point is this…
HOST: Tell me Kevin Rudd’s…
PM: I’m about to answer, if you’d allow me the opportunity.
HOST: Alright, let’s hear the figure then.
PM: The opportunity that I would take is simply this - when you implement an action on carbon pricing as a nation, like Australia, then you represent less than 2% of global emissions, and you make an undertaking to reduce your carbon emissions over time, the way in which it works globally is to work in partnership with countries and economies around the world.
HOST: Another IPCC scientist, Hans von Storch - I’m sure you’ve heard of him, very prominent - has said that there’s been no - essentially no warming for 15 years.
In another five years, if there is no more warming, he will have to reconsider the global warming theory.
Will you reconsider your adherence to the global warming theory if there is no more warming for another five years?
PM: There are two sources of authority that we should listen to, because we pay them for their best and considered advice.
One is the International Panel of Climate Change scientists - not just…
HOST: I’ve just quoted one.
PM: Yeah, you’ve just quoted one of 4,000…
HOST: A very prominent one.
PM: A very selected quote.
HOST: I’m asking you, do you accept…
PM: And the second point is this. The second source of authority…
HOST: What will make you change your mind?
PM: The second source of authority, as the Prime Minister of Australia, is the CSIRO.
And the CSIRO, which is a body which has existed in this country since the 1930s, analyses climate change science.
Their conclusion is that not only does it exist, but the consequences for Australia, of us and the world not acting, is that you will see an increase in extreme weather events, and you will see an increase in drought events across south-eastern and south-western Australia.
HOST: They’re snowing you, Prime Minister.
To finish off, in 2007, Labor under you promised to turn back the boats. It promised to stop reckless spending.
In 2010 Julia Gillard promised no carbon tax, and a budget surplus. This year all of those promises and a lot more were broken.
What are you going to do to make people trust your promises now?
PM: The first thing I would say is that climate change, building on where we’ve just been in this discussion, is real. It requires action, putting a price on carbon.
What I put forward was a floating price way back when - rejected by an ungodly cabal of the Liberals and the Greens. And subsequently, Julia Gillard at the beginning of the last parliamentary term - or this parliamentary term…
HOST: No, I'm not asking you to justify…
PM: No, no.
HOST: So I'm asking you about how you go about rebuilding trust?
PM: Because, if you are engaged in a discussion about trust, understanding is important, in terms of where - how we arrived at where we’ve arrived at.
Number two, on the question of asylum seekers that you raised, we have had to adjust our policy over time. And I make absolutely no apology whatsoever for our current policy settings, because the world around us has changed.
And number three, you spoke about expenditure disciplines.
I would simply go back to the point, Andrew, that within nine months of having been elected, the global financial crisis erupts, the largest economic crisis the world has seen since the Great Depression, from which many economies in the world have yet to recover.
We actually invested, we borrowed to do that, and the result was not only do we have new modern facilities in schools around Australia, that we didn't go into recession, we don't have mass unemployment.
And we have among the lowest debt and deficit levels in the world, with an AAA credit rating. Despite what Mr Abbott may say on your program.
HOST: Prime Minister, thank you so much for joining me. I hope you didn’t regret it.
PM: No, no. I'm happy to come back.