JIM CHALMERS MP
SHADOW TREASURER
MEMBER FOR RANKIN
E&OE TRANSCRIPT
RADIO INTERVIEW
4BC DRIVE
MONDAY, 18 OCTOBER 2021
SUBJECTS: The cost of the Coalition’s eight wasted years on energy and climate policy; Scott Morrison putting the National Party before the national interest; Queensland’s re-opening roadmap.
SCOTT EMERSON, HOST: Jim Chalmers, he's the Shadow Treasurer and obviously the Member for Rankin here in Brisbane. Jim Chalmers, thanks for being on the show.
JIM CHALMERS, SHADOW TREASURER: I'm pleased I could be here Scott, after we played the world's longest game of phone tag of all time.
(LAUGHTER)
EMERSON: We have been, but it's good to have you on the show. I think it's the first time we've had you on the show, so welcome to 4BC Drive.
CHALMERS: Thanks very much.
EMERSON: The big discussion over the weekend, and still continues to be, is zero net emissions by 2050. The Prime Minister says he is going to Glasgow next month, but obviously still trying to convince the Nationals to agree to the policy. But I guess the question for me is, what is Labor's view on this? Zero net emissions, yes you want to do that, but how would you make it happen?
CHALMERS:Well you're right that our policy is to have net-zero emissions by 2050, but not just us - the peak groups, the farmers, the miners, the Business Council of Australia, the biggest employers, all the states and territories, all of the countries with which we compare ourselves. So net-zero by 2050 is pretty much the minimum that we need to see, because if we get that cleaner and cheaper energy it means more jobs and more opportunities. So yes, that's our policy.
The Prime Minister wants it to be his policy too but unfortunately we're being treated to this pretty unedifying spectacle of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of this country waiting for a little permission slip from the National Party, or the fringe elements of the National Party, to see whether they're allowed to go down that path. And the cost of Australia of all that, is that we've had these years of inaction, we still don't know what their policy is even though the Prime Minister is off to Glasgow in a couple of weeks’ time. So the first port of call is we need to get a Government policy. Our view on net-zero by 2050 is clear, we've already released some of the ways that we would get there, and we'll have more to say once we see what happens in Glasgow and where the Government lands.
EMERSON: You say you've outlined some of the ways you'll get there. Just give me a couple of examples. Will it include, for instance, a carbon tax?
CHALMERS: No, there won't be a carbon tax, we've made that really clear. The policies that we've announced so far are around how do we make our transmission network more efficient so that we can get these new sources of renewable energy transmitted to where they're needed. We've got a policy around community batteries. We've got a policy around electric vehicles. But as we've really said for much of the last two years, we'll have a comprehensive suite of policies for the election, well before then, and people can weigh up our approach versus the Government's approach. I guess the point that I'm making today, is after eight years the other mob doesn't even have a policy and that's because they're waiting for Barnaby Joyce and co to tell them what it can be.
EMERSON: One of the arguments coming from the Nationals in terms of their reluctance to agree to this - and this has obviously been part of their discussions within their party room over the weekend and today - their argument is that the farming sector, the mining sector, have had to do all the heavy lifting potentially in the past and could potentially have to do it in the future. Do you understand the concerns for those communities in those areas that rely say on mining, rely on farming, that yeah it's easy for you to say zero net emissions, but they're the ones who may have to pay the price.
CHALMERS: I think there's a number of important points to remember there, Scott. Obviously, farming and mining are absolutely crucial industries in our economy. Very important that they succeed and they prosper in the future. So that is not contested. The peak groups - the miners, the farmers - they signed up to net-zero because they understand that this is where the country needs to head. My view as a Queenslander - and I know I'm speaking to another Queenslander - is that it is not beyond us to build new sources of cheaper and cleaner energy, and grab those jobs and opportunities, without abandoning our traditional strengths in some of these communities, and certainly without abandoning the workers of those communities.
The Palaszczuk Government announced, the weekend before last, a massive new investment in hydrogen, for example, which is an incredibly important newer source of fuel. And that's in Gladstone. And what that shows is, we don't have to choose between Glasgow and Gladstone. We can have these new sources of energy, we can create jobs and create opportunities.
The final point is this: the Business Council did some very comprehensive modelling of what the economic impact of getting to net-zero by mid-century would be, and what they actually showed was amongst the hundreds of thousands of jobs created, and the hundreds of billions of dollars in new economic activity generated, the biggest winners out of all this would be the regions. So it's not beyond us to grab those opportunities without abandoning traditional strengths, without abandoning mining and farming communities. This is something that the Nationals don't understand, but I think farmers and miners understand.
EMERSON: I'm talking to Jim Chalmers, the federal Shadow Treasurer. Jim, in terms of this net-zero emissions by 2050. Look, from what we understand, the majority of those in the National party room do support it. There'll be obviously a bit of pork barrelling out there in terms of what the trade-offs are. You suspect that the Prime Minister will go to Glasgow with an agreement to zero net emissions. But let's talk about 2030 because Labor is arguing that the Coalition should have more ambitious targets for 2030 in terms of emissions. Just to be very clear, what's Labor's policy in terms of 2030?
CHALMERS: The reality is Scott, there's only one mob that can take to Glasgow updated Australian interim targets, and that's the Government. I think it's entirely reasonable for us to say, given we don't know what targets that we would inherit from the Government, that we should be able to say what our targets will be once we see what Government's are and what the developments are in Glasgow. I think most people think that's entirely reasonable.
Now the reason we say that they should be more ambitious than the current targets for 26% to 28% the Government currently has, is remember those were Tony Abbott's targets - the guy that said that climate change was “absolute crap”, and I'm quoting directly. And so our view is Australia can do better than that. The BCA has called for 45% to 50% by 2030. That's not our policy necessarily, but it shows that the big employers think that it's possible to set an interim target in a way that is good for the economy and good for jobs.
EMERSON: But you can see where the Government's argument will be about Labor. You're not setting a target there at this stage. They'll say, look, here is the concern. If you vote for Labor at the next federal election, whether at the end of this year or early next year, Labor's got an incredibly high target in terms of cutting emissions by 2030. That's going to cause these communities problems. That's going to cause you votes. That is where the Coalition will attack Labor on.
CHALMERS: First of all, our position, our policy, will be abundantly clear by that time. But yeah of course the Government will conduct all kinds of scare campaigns, and that's because they're hoping that nobody will notice they've had eight years to do something about the jobs and opportunities we get from cleaner and cheaper energy. They’ve run interference. They've done nothing. And that's been very costly to our economy and to our country. And so of course they'll talk about us, and they were doing it in Question Time again today.
There probably hasn't been a Government in our lifetime that has focused more on their opponent, and that's because they don't want people to understand just how costly it has been that they've spent eight years peddling lies about climate change, peddling lies about emissions, and all the rest of it, when the BCA and others - big employers - have pointed out with some rigour, that it actually costs more to do nothing on climate change. That means the last eight years have been very costly and the Government doesn't want to talk about that.
EMERSON: Now, Jim Chalmers, just on a different point. Today, obviously, we heard the big news coming out of Queensland, that the Premier has announced a roadmap in terms of opening up our borders to interstate and overseas travellers, particularly on that date there, that December 17 date we've been hearing. At 80% we will see those borders start to open, particularly and for travellers coming in from interstate, not having to quarantine. Good news, I assume?
CHALMERS: I think it's good news but I think even better news than that, and it should really encourage us, is that that December 17 date could come forward if we hit the 80% earlier. And one of the things that's really worried me for some time now in Queensland - first of all a supply issue, but now an issue with getting enough people through the vaccination sites - is that we are a bit behind where we would like to be when it comes to vaccines.
And what this roadmap, which the Premier and her colleagues have put forward today, and I think it's a good thing that they have - what it shows, if we can get to 80% sooner than December 17, then some of these benefits, some of this opening up, can happen before then. So I'm hoping that some of your listeners Scott, who are maybe on the fence about whether or not to get vaccinated, I hope they take up the opportunity to get vaccinated. We should do it for each other so that we can open the place up safely, and responsibly, and confidently.
EMERSON: Alright Jim Chalmers, glad we finally got you on the program and hopefully we'll get you on again soon.
CHALMERS: That'd be great Scott, thanks for the chat.
ENDS
