HOST: Prime Minister of Australia Julia Gillard's in the studio. Nothing to do with things you may have said in the past. That's my theme. PM: Well, Howard, as long as you're not going to ask me to sing, because I think that that would end badly. HOST: I'm not allowed to sing, and you're not allowed to sing. How are you going?
PM: No singing. I'm very well, thank you, and very pleased to be in Perth.
HOST: But even though in Perth, Western Australia, in the State of Western Australia, the voters don't like the Labor Government? They don't like Federal Labor Governments. You only won three seats out of 15 last time round. Why?
PM: Well, Howard, this is a great State and I'm here as Prime Minister and be out and about meeting people in Western Australia. The main thing, I think, for the Government, is to be here in Western Australia and to keep delivering the changes that people want to see in this State.
I was very pleased that earlier this year I was able to strike a healthcare agreement with Premier Barnett which means we'll be in a position to invest $1.8 billion extra in health in this State - more doctors, more resources, less waiting times in emergency departments, more local control of hospitals, less bureaucracy, so I'm just going to be determined to keep working with Premier Barnett, keep working in this State.
HOST: Do you think you'll finally win us over, do you?
PM: My aim is to provide good Government, to do the things that need to be done for this nation's future and this State's future.
HOST: But when you analyse that performance, which you must have done, you must think to yourself ‘well, what did we do wrong in Western Australia? Why don't they like us?' There must be a reason you've come up with. What is it?
PM: Day to day, as Prime Minister, I keep my eyes on building for the future and making sure this country's got a great future and this State's got a great future, a future of opportunity, of prosperity, of fairness, tackling the challenges of the future, like delivering the National Broadband Network, like tackling climate change. That's what drives me.
When I look in the past, Howard, which is what you're inviting me to do -
HOST: -Yeah, but I'm asking you to look to the future and work out from your side how you can win more seats next election. Have you got to ditch the mining tax, as an example?
PM: Well, I think ultimately people will judge on performance, not politics - performance in health, performance in education, performance in keeping the economy strong, performance in delivering the National Broadband Network, tackling climate change, big challenges for the future.
Howard, I understand the Minerals Resource Rent Tax-
HOST: -They hate it here.
PM: Well, if I can finish my sentence, I understand the Minerals Resource Rent Tax has been very controversial here in Western Australia. I absolutely understand that, and because I understood that we needed to settle this tax in the right form, I entered an agreement with our biggest miners.
Then we've had a policy transition group working under Don Argus' leadership, and we've accepted all of the recommendations of that group, and when you strip it all back, what the Minerals Resources Rent Tax means for this State is that we are in a position to fund more infrastructure, to fund more support for business, and to enable people to have more superannuation when they retire.
HOST: But talking about taxes now, we only get 68 cents in the dollar return from our GST, right. Why is that? Why do we only get 68 cents in Western Australia and other States get up to 90 cents in the dollar? Why are we being punished?
PM: I understand that's controversial, too. This is -
HOST: -Well, it allows the Premier to beat up on Canberra. Everybody goes ‘go for it, Colin.'
PM: Well, this is a formula struck by an independent - struck and administered independently through the Commonwealth Grants Commission. Now this has been system over a long period of time - sure, there have been some changes from time to time - but overall the system has been that stronger States help weaker States, and if we look at the last 50 years for Western Australia, in well more than 30 of them it was a net receiver of money from other States as the State built.
HOST: But not now.
PM: Now, of course, this is controversial. The Commonwealth Grants Commission, in the most recent iteration of the formula, actually increased the amount of GST that Western Australia gets to keep-
HOST: -Up to 68 cents?
PM: No, to 72 cents, increased to 72 cents - just trying to explain it. I don't do that. That's done through this formula. Now, I understand this continues to be controversial and it's an issue that I will need to keep strongly engaged with, but Howard, you asked me -
HOST: -Can you alter it? Can you do anything about it?
PM: You've asked me for an explanation, and that is the explanation. It's an explanation about how States, stronger States, are called upon to support States that are weaker than them.
HOST: OK, but can you do anything to change it? Can the Government do anything to change it?
PM: Well, Howard, the conversation has got to continue. I understand that this is very controversial in Western Australia.
HOST: OK, let's talk about the carbon tax, which is all anyone talks about these days, most of the time. Do you agree that power costs will rise if it's introduced?
PM: Well, power costs are rising anyway-
HOST: -Tell us about it.
PM: -particularly here in Western Australia.
HOST: It's outrageous.
PM: Well, the sad truth is electricity prices are going up. The choice we can make as a nation is whether we tackle climate change by pricing carbon pollution, and that's a price paid by the big polluters, so 1,000 businesses in this country that generate the most pollution would pay to emit that pollution, because at the moment -
HOST: - You said they pay to emit, so they pay up and they're allowed to keep emitting?
PM: Yes. At the moment, if you're a business, a big business -
HOST: - I'm a big emitter.
PM: If you're a big business and you're a big emitter, at the moment you can put any amount of carbon pollution into the atmosphere and pay absolutely zero.
We are going to price carbon pollution. You'll have to pay to emit carbon pollution-
HOST: -But you keep emitting.
PM: And if businesses have to pay, then they will innovate to reduce the amount of carbon pollution they emit -
HOST: - Or hike their prices.
PM: - because they won't want to pay that cost. They'll work out better ways of doing things.
HOST: Are you sure of this?
PM: Yes, I am - very sure. And we will move through to what is called a cap-and-trade system, which means we will cap the amount of carbon pollution in our economy, and there will be a market in permits, and the market will set the price.
Economists tell us -
HOST: -But all those things, sorry, permits, pay up, taxes, allows them to keep emitting if they pay for it?
PM: Yes, but let's just be very clear about this - businesses compete with each other. They compete on price. You and I go to the shops and we buy the things that are best priced. If you say to a business ‘something you used to do for free will now cost you to do', then they will innovate and change to reduce that cost, and the way that they will do that is they will look to cleaner energy sources, for example, and that will help price our economy being a clean energy economy for the future.
HOST: Solar?
PM: Well, certainly - solar, wind, tidal power, geothermal. We are a nation that is blessed with abundant sources of renewable, clean energy.
HOST: OK, but what percentage of Government, Federal Government, buildings are solar powered?
PM: Oh, I can't tell you that -
HOST: -Wouldn't it be good if they all were? Wouldn't it be good if you had a program that said we're going to solar power all our buildings? That'd be a way to go?
PM: Well, wouldn't it be good, Howard, if we had a system that drove us to being a clean energy economy in the most efficient way that can be done, and economists tell us the most efficient way to do it is to price carbon pollution, and if I can just explain my system versus the alternative, my system: big polluters pay, households are assisted, we will provide generous household assistance to deal with price impacts -
HOST: - Tax cuts?
PM: Well, tax cuts are a live option. The alternative from Mr Abbott is he puts an additional impost on taxpayers - $720 per year, takes that money and gives it to big polluters to subsidise what they're doing.
Now, total cost of his program if he's going to reach a target he's set himself of -5 per cent by 2020, if $30 billion. That is not an efficient way of cutting carbon pollution.
We're going to do it the most efficient way. That's making the big polluters pay whilst we generously assist households.
HOST: Well, as long as they, instead of paying, cut their amount of emissions.
PM: Well, Howard, we do know from around the world- we are not the first nation to do this. I know sometimes the community dialogue is as if we are going first. We're not going first-
HOST: -I know, Germany's tried. (inaudible) there.
PM: -and I don't believe that Australia should lead the world in this area, but I don't think we can afford to be left behind, either.
We have a high carbon pollution economy. We've got a journey to go through to get to a clean energy economy which will give us the prosperity and jobs we want in the future. Pricing carbon, asking big polluters to pay, is the most efficient way of doing that, and we will.
We're a Labor Government, we'll act fairly - we'll generously assist households on the way through.
So, that is the way the system will work. Other countries have emissions trading schemes. Other countries-
HOST: - You're really hot about this, aren't you?
PM: Well, no, I'm determined. I'm faced with a ferocious fear campaign, Howard, a ferocious fear -
HOST: - It might cost you Government.
PM: - a ferocious fear campaign which is not about the facts. Mr Abbott is trying to scare people, and I am going to take every opportunity to say to the Australian people there is nothing to be afraid of here. We are confident, creative people. We'll work on this. We'll get through.
HOST: You're going to go down swinging, are you?
PM: We'll create this clean energy economy for the future.
I believe Australians want us to tackle climate change. It's my job to keep explaining how, and Howard, I'm taking the opportunity to do just that.
HOST: Alright, it's hot in Perth. You've noticed that already?
PM: Yes, it is.
HOST: Kids are going to school, no air conditioning because they're not in the right zone. Can you believe that?
PM: Well, this is a State Government -
HOST: - On one side of the highway, you can't have air conditioning; the other side of the highway, you can, because you're in the zone.
PM: Well, this is a State Government policy, Howard. You're talking, obviously, about State Schools.
HOST: Yeah, but I'm talking about the new Building the Education Revolution. I would have thought every new building - every new home that's built these days has air conditioning - but every new school building built under the Building the Education Revolution doesn't have air conditioning because of some stupid warranty scam.
PM: Well, Howard, let me give you some good news in this area.
We, as a Government, invested $1.8 billion in school buildings in Western Australia. It was the right thing to do. Every school has benefitted in some way. We've built 500 new classrooms, 300 new libraries, 200 new multi-purpose halls, 188 early learning centres, and the list goes on and on.
When those new facilities were constructed, whether or not they were air conditioned in State schools depended on the State Government's policy - the zones that you talk about.
Now, there is actually more than $20 million left over -
HOST: - Unspent.
PM: - unspent, from doing this -
HOST: - Are you listening, Colin?
PM: - unspent from doing this construction in Western Australia. What I want to see done with that money is I want to see that money spent so it air conditions those Building the Education Revolution buildings which haven't been air conditioned because of the State Government -
HOST: - Can you believe they can't be air conditioned when they're built?
PM: Well, Howard, I can't answer for the State Government policy -
HOST: - No, but can you believe that when you build a new building these days, particularly in a state like this, you don't air condition it?
PM: Well, Howard, I understand your point precisely about kids, heat and concentration and all of that. I understand your point precisely.
We worked with the State Government to get these school buildings built. The State Government's got its policy. My point very clearly to you today is there is money left over, which I want to use to air condition those Building the Education Revolution buildings in State schools that aren't air conditioned.
Chris Evans, a Western Australian who is the Minister in this area, will be working to achieve that result with the State Government - good for kids, good for getting air conditioners into those buildings.
HOST: Sounds like a slogan.
PM: Cool kids.
HOST: Just before you go, I know time is tight, but is the East Timor detention centre solution a dead duck? Surely they don't want it up there. I've talked to several politicians up there on a regular basis. They don't want it. When are you going to kill it off?
PM: Well, Howard, we could field you as a foreign affairs adviser.
HOST: Well, I just ring ‘em and they say ‘we don't want it.' They say ‘we have enough problems up here trying to get our tiny nation together. The last thing we want is an asylum seeker detention centre.'
PM: Look, Howard, we're continuing that discussion with East Timor, but there is an important meeting happening basically as we speak.
HOST: In Bali.
PM: That's right, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Immigration are there.
That is a big meeting, a large number of nations coming together to work on people smuggling, and there we will be pressing that this is a regional problem that requires a Regional Protection Framework - a regional solution.
Now, bilateral discussions, a discussion between us and East Timor, will continue, but the important meeting this week is the meeting happening in Bali.
HOST: The solution is to stop the boats coming, isn't it? Really, that's the ideal solution. If it could all be sorted out in UN camps in Indonesia, the applications all handled there, then they say ‘OK, this person's a fair dinkum refugee, they can go, they can go to Australia' - wouldn't that be the best solution?
PM: Well, Howard, you are effectively advocating for the solution I've put forward with a Regional Protection Framework and a Regional Processing Centre.
HOST: So you would prefer that to happen, rather than any boats.
PM: Of course, Howard. No-one wants to see boats. I don't want to see boats. I don't want to see boats - people risk their lives on them. Women and kids lose their lives on them. We saw that at Christmas Island, you know, at the end of last year.
We want people to be safe. We want claims processed in an orderly way.
What I want to do is I want to undercut the people smuggling business model, so, you know, if you pay and get on a boat it doesn't get you anywhere, because through a Regional Protection Framework and Regional Processing Centre you end up back in the same place.
That's what I'm striving to achieve. I always said ‘no quick fix.' We're working through it, and the important way of working through the regional protection framework this week is at the Bali meeting.
HOST: You're minders are winding you up. Thanks for coming.
PM: Thanks, Howard.
HOST: And we'll see you again soon.
PM: Thank you.