CASSIDY: The Prime Minister joins us from our Adelaide studios. Good morning, and welcome.
PM: Good morning Barrie.
CASSIDY: Now that you have stripped Peter Garrett of his responsibilities for energy efficiency, does that make him a second class Minister?
PM: What it means is that when it comes to the key task of environment protection, which is the core responsibility of the Department of the Environment, that's where he now focuses his energies. I think it's quite plain as day that the way in which functions have been added on to the Environment Department over quite a number of years, that it's actually taken it away from its core responsibilities- the implementation of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act, key decisions like Traveston Dam in Queensland, key decisions like what's necessary for the pulp mill in Tasmania, and other major projects like that.
That's its core business, and I think the decision we took on Friday was to separate that out from grants-based programs with compliance regimes attached to them, which have now been placed under the control of Greg Combet.
CASSIDY: But if he was a first class Minister as you insisted all week, you wouldn't have had to do that.
PM: Well look, let's just call a spade a spade Barrie. I mean, there've been real problems with the implementation of this program. There've been real problems with compliance. And the Minister has had those responsibilities removed from him. That's just a fact. As far as the other responsibilities are concerned, which is those of environment protection, which are important for the nation, where Peter has been active for a long period of time, taking tough and hard decisions on Traveston Dam, on the pulp mill in Tasmania and other significant projects in Western Australia and elsewhere, these are areas where his impartiality has never been questioned. His diligence has never been in question. And his effectiveness has never been questioned. That is the separation that I've produced in the new arrangements announced on Friday.
CASSIDY: Yeah, and you ultimately accepted responsibility for the dismantling of the program and setting up a new one. But now you've given that job to Greg Combet. So who will be responsible if things continue to go wrong?
PM: Well as I said in my remarks in Canberra during the course of the week, I head the Government, I'm ultimately responsible. You see, you can have people go out there and say 'shoot this public servant, shoot that Minister or that politician', that's fine, but actually, the hard thing to do, the hard thing to do is to accept responsibility and get on with the business of fixing the problems. That's the job that I've given Greg Combet to do.
As you know, you've known him for many, many years, he's a highly experienced and competent individual, and I have confidence that he'll now get on with the job. That's what we've got to do. Accepting responsibility is not a word. Accepting responsibility means going out there and doing it. I run the Government. I'm the Prime Minister. I'm ultimately responsible for it.
CASSIDY: And you couldn't go out in any case and 'shoot a public servant' as you put it, because surely one of the lessons of this is that the Federal Government should not be running programs like this, that perhaps it would've been better to fund it, but give it to Local Government to administer?
PM: Well, we have commissioned of course Allan Hawke, a serious and experienced bureaucrat who has worked for Governments of both political traditions to examine these compliance challenges for the future. Let's also be aware of the fact that the Federal Government has administered a whole range of grants-based programs over many, many years. And Governments of both persuasions at various times have gotten into difficulties with them. The regional partnerships arrangements for example, administered directly by the previous Government. So let's look at what lessons are to be learned from this, and make sure we reflect that on how we run things in the future.
Remember, also, just add this Barrie- what we were wrestling with throughout 2009 was a global economic disaster, and therefore, the imperative of acting in the context of a collapsing economy. That is not an excuse for what has happened in relation to the home insulation program, I don't pretend that it is. I simply say to you that's the context in which it occurred.
CASSIDY: Yes, you said you should be looking at how you run things into the future. A couple of State Premiers, one of them from your own side, said this week that if you can't run- it's effectively what they said- if you can't run an insulation program, you certainly should not be thinking about running the hospitals. Do you agree with that?
PM: Well Barrie, can I say when it comes to the future of health and hospital reform, our challenge for the future is to make sure the system is properly funded, and properly planned. But it has always been my view that hospitals are best run locally. That has always been my view. I've had some experience of this over the years, working at various levels of Government, and that is still my view. The key question, however-
CASSIDY: Therefore you would very, very reluctantly pull the trigger, the threat that you've suggested that you might take over public hospitals, that would be something that you would do very reluctantly?
PM: Well, can I say Barrie, what we have been discussing for a long, long time is the national Government's responsibility for the funding and the planning of our national hospital system. The core problem here we've got is, frankly, not enough money in the system, and secondly, total waste and inefficiency with the way in which it's currently structured between Canberra and the States. You've got to pull out all that waste and inefficiency, because of the cost-shift, blame-shift, which has plagued the health and hospital system for decades- challenge number one. Challenge number two is to fund it properly in the future, and that means, what's the future responsibility of the national Government.
The actual operation of the health system, the actual operation of the hospital system, in my experience, is best done by local hospitals themselves. I've said this before. I will say it again, and I'll say it into the future. So the key challenge is to get the funding responsibility right. And that, precisely, is what I put to- the proposal to the States quite some time ago.
CASSIDY: So there's not much prospect of the Federal Government ever taking over the running of the hospitals?
PM: Well, the commitment that I made to the Australian people, Barrie, was this- that we'll put a reform plan, in due course, to the States on the future of the health and hospital system. Secondly, if they accept it cooperatively, fine, that's good. If not, we would then go to the people and seek a mandate to take over full funding responsibility for the system. That's exactly what I said, and I will not budge from that one bit.
CASSIDY: Well you said more than that, you set a deadline of July last year. Was that a ridiculous deadline to set, in retrospect?
PM: Look, I think it is quite plain that one of the problems that we have had as a Government, for which I accept responsibility, is that we didn't anticipate how hard it was going to be to deliver things. Particularly given the burdens imposed on us by the global financial crisis last year. But that's no excuse. The public expect you to honour the things that you have said. We're now about nine months late from implementing that commitment. I accept that.
But I'm determined, Barrie, to get it right, absolutely right, and I don't walk away from that. And when you're talking about a system which comprises 763 hospitals across Australia, some 115 million visits each year to GPs, 49 million hospital services delivered to the Australian people, you actually want to get it right. So, we need to lift our game, I need to lift my game in terms of delivering on these undertakings, that's fair criticism. The reason that we've had problems with this is we didn't properly, I think, estimate the complexity of what we are embarking on.
CASSIDY: And why was that? Why did you underestimate it? Was it political naïveté? Was it inexperience? What led to that lack of judgment?
PM: Well can I just say Barrie, a lot of things will happen in precisely the timetable that you specify, and sometimes there'll be a delay. If you walk away from your commitment altogether, that's a different thing. I accept that. For us, that's been a-
CASSIDY: But is part of the problem- I think it's your own estimate- you said you put 600 election promises out there. Is that just simply too many?
PM: Well, you'll find that the vast bulk of those have either been honoured or are in the process of being implemented. We of course have made changes in a number of other areas and that goes to the question that you raise about delivering on our commitments. You know, you were talking in your program earlier today about opinion polls. We are taking a whacking in the polls now. I'm sure we'll take an even bigger whacking in the period ahead. And the bottom line is, I think we deserve it, both not just in terms of recent events, but more broadly.
The key thing is for us to get on with the business of delivering to the Australian community, in critical areas of need, in health, in education, in real action on climate change as well. This is critical for the future, and we're taking a pounding because we haven't been up to the mark so far. We're proud of what we've done on the economy last year in the face of everything happening around the world, but we're now facing, I think, a different benchmark now, and we've got to lift our game to meet it.
CASSIDY: So you'll take a pounding in the polls for reasons that go way beyond the insulation program?
PM: Oh, I believe so. I think that's been happening for a period of time, Barrie. One is the problems in the program that we've just been discussing. And the other is, I think, people becoming disappointed at the pace of the delivery of the commitments that we have made. And you and I have just been talking over one, health and hospitals reform. Let me tell you something though, Barrie, we ain't walking away from it one bit. There's been a delay. I've been blamed for that, criticised for that, fair cop. I said July last year. I'm not going to walk away from that. But let me tell you, I intend to get on and do it.
CASSIDY: And by what you say, it sounds as though you don't intend to use the global financial crisis as political cover for failing to deliver on some of those promises.
PM: No, I mean, that's just a context, that's what's happened. We're proud of the fact that we kept Australia out of recession last year, 2009. The only advanced economy in the world, really, to do so. And as a result, hundreds of thousands of Australians were kept in jobs. You go to Europe today, you go to the United States, you've got unemployment numbers double that in Australia. Go back to previous recessions around the world, you'll find that the Australian unemployment rate was usually much higher than the unemployment rate in previous international recessions.
We're proud of what we've done on the economy. We've stepped up to the plate. We've keep the wheels of the economy going. Where we have to improve and lift our game, where I need to lift my game, is in delivering in the key outstanding areas of reform in health and hospitals, in education, and getting on with the business of action on climate change as well.
CASSIDY: And you've also said you need to improve your communication skills, and particularly, you talked about failing to properly or adequately explain the emissions trading scheme. Are you still just as committed to an ETS as you were before Copenhagen?
PM: You know something Barrie? All the advice we've received, and Mr Howard's Government received, it is the most effective, least costly way of dealing with climate change. I mean, if there was some, you know, magic bullet out there which was cost-free and pain-free to act on bringing down global greenhouse gas emissions, I'm sure John Howard and Kevin Rudd would've found it a long time ago.
Tony Abbott seems to say that he's found it. I just think that's absolute nonsense. And it's the product of someone who says that he is a climate change sceptic in effect, when he says that he thinks that climate change is absolute crap- his words, not mine. So on the ETS, the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, that, we believe, is the most effective, most efficient, least costly way of handling the challenge of climate change, and our views on that haven't changed.
CASSIDY: So, no matter what happens, an ETS must remain the centrepiece of your response to climate change?
PM: There is no way, Barrie, that when you're dealing with big challenges in the future of really bringing down greenhouse gas emissions that you can walk away from emissions trading. If you look at Mr Abbott's so-called direct action, his climate change con job, I mean, you do the numbers on it, maybe at best it would produce, you know, a 1% impact, maybe. In fact the analysis that's been done suggests that, once it's implemented, the overall increase- the overall impact on greenhouse gas emissions would see greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase.
But you see, that's just not being fair dinkum. We believe that to be fair dinkum you've got to produce real action that adds up, that works, and if you're talking about significant reductions in the future, there is no way you can do that absent an emissions trading scheme.
CASSIDY: And if the only way that you can get to an emissions trading scheme is through a joint sitting of the Parliament, you would then prepared to go to a double dissolution election on this issue?
PM: Well Barrie, let me just restate what I've always said. I believe Governments are elected to serve their full term. John Howard and I are on a unity ticket on that, if not many other things, and that is that the Australian voters usually look pretty dimly on racing off to elections early. That's the first point. The second is-
CASSIDY: But that's not necessarily an early election, you can have a double dissolution as late as October, and that would not be regarded as early.
PM: Well I'll let you sort that one out with the constitutional lawyers, I constantly get conflicting advice on that one, mate. It goes round and round and round. Secondly, can I just say that-
CASSIDY: What advice are you getting?
PM: Well, more complex than you have just suggested. The second point I'd make, though, is this. This Bill of ours for the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is in the Senate now. Penny Wong and others are working with the Greens to see what can be done. This is not over yet. And we will see what action emerges from the Senate.
To go back to your core question about serious action on climate change in the future, emissions trading has to be core, front and centre to that, because if you're going to bring about large-scale greenhouse gas emissions- that's why we took that view, John Howard took that view, Peter Costello took that view, Malcolm Turnbull took that view- 35 other Western countries around the world have taken that view, only Tony Abbott it seems has found the magical solution which says all that is frankly just nonsense.
CASSIDY: But I'd just make the point though, if that is your view on that and you regard this as the greatest moral threat facing the world, if it fails again in the Senate, surely you'd be duty-bound to take the only course available to you, and that is a double dissolution election so that you bring about a joint sitting?
PM: Barrie, we just take all these things one step at a time. It's in the Senate, and we'll make our judgments once the Senate has reached its conclusion on it. On the question of climate change, we are absolutely upfront about the fact that this is a profound economic and moral challenge for the country's future. And that, by the way, was my original statement- the greatest economic and moral challenge for the future. When our kids look back in 20 years time and ask the question of this generation, 'were they fair dinkum or did they walk away from it?', I'd rather say that I threw everything at it, threw absolutely everything at it, to try and make it work, and to try and deliver an outcome at home and abroad.
If we don't, 20 years time, those who succeed us on your program and in my position Barrie, will say 'what the hell did they do?' And there'll be a trillion dollars, a real trillion, not a Barnaby Joyce trillion, thrown out there to get a scientist to come up with a quick fix in twenty four hours, because by then it may be too late. We think we've got to act, and act appropriately. That's why we don't walk away from this one bit.
CASSIDY: Prime Minister, there was a curious piece in the Sydney Morning Herald recently. A young researcher from Sydney wrote that she had a conversation with you after a function, and when you were told that she was doing a PhD, you said this- this is the quote: "that is an excuse that all young women are using nowadays to avoid starting a family". Did you say that?
PM: Barrie, I have absolutely no recollection of saying anything like that, and you know something, they are not my views. If you were at an Australia Day reception with hundreds of people around- as I think that was the case as far as that discussion was concerned- there's, you know, conversations going on every way. I would never say anything like that. It's not my view. I have exactly the reverse views. I mean, I have been passionate about the role of women in the economy, in business, in society, pursuing their own individual careers. I think whoever this person is has simply got the wrong end of the stick, and-
CASSIDY: So is she setting you up? Because she went on to say that you used a terse voice, and you were not looking in any sense ironic.
PM: Well Barrie, I'm sure that on any given day the assessment of your capacity for irony and mine may vary depending on who's listening to you and who's watching you, and watching your facial expressions. All I'm saying to you is that is not my view of the world. I can't understand how someone could've taken that as being my view given that everything I've stood for in public life is exactly the reverse. Now, I've been criticised for my communications style. Take all that criticism-
CASSIDY: I think you've criticised yourself this week, Prime Minister, it was-
PM: Oh you think that's been unique Barrie, and no one else has ever raised that flag over the last 12-24 months? I think you might have kicked it off originally mate. Can I just say, look, fair cop. I mean, I accept that, that's right. As someone said to me the other day, when it comes to brevity, I make up for it in complexity. Well, okay, I'll do better. But you know something, whether it's climate change, or getting on with the business of making a difference for women in the workplace, I'm about making real things happen, real changes which are sustainable into the future.
The language may not be pretty from time to time. I may not be the King of the sound bite, accept that. I may be misunderstood. We all need to improve on that score. I intend to get on with the job.
CASSIDY: Well, we appreciate you communicating with us this morning.
PM: Appreciate it Barrie.