Interview with Patricia Karvelas, ABC RN Breakfast

PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: Chris Bowen is the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and our guest this morning. Minister, welcome. 

CHRIS BOWEN: Thank you, Patricia. Good morning. 

PATRICIA KARVELAS: How will baselines for new and existing facilities be set? And how will you determine rates for baseline reductions?

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, these are some of the issues that we address in this discussion paper today. It is a very substantial paper that we're putting out, because this is a big and important reform. Patricia, as you know, 28% of Australia's emissions are covered by safeguard facilities. And as I said, we're not going to reduce emissions as a country unless we've reduced from our biggest emitters, and our policy is very clear that we took to the election about putting the safeguard guard facilities on a real trajectory to net zero. But there are a lot of complexities within that. And we want to very carefully work those through with the industry with climate groups. I'm looking forward to lots of feedback. Some of the questions the one you pose, for example, do we set the baseline in relation to a facilities existing emissions or the average across the industry? There will be views about that. There are valid views on both sides about that. So I'm very much looking forward to getting some feedback from industry and climate groups about some of the finer details. But this is really important. We need to reduce emissions very substantially by these big facilities.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: There are two options for how to calculate emissions reductions. One would be reductions in absolute terms, the other takes into account economic growth. What are the practical differences? And do you have a preference?

CHRIS BOWEN: No, this is a very genuine consultation process. The main difference is Patricia this; if a facility has a set baseline of emissions, and they start making more things, whether it be aluminium or whatever their production is, should they be-- Should they be counted as a total baseline absolute terms? Or should we take into account the increase in production and apply it on an average as a result of the increase in production? Again, Patricia, I expect there to be submissions on both sides of that argument, valid issues. I've heard both sides of the argument from some of the big producers already in my consultations and discussions. And I want to, if you like, let the sunlight in let everybody see this debate and let the submissions come in. And the Government, I will recommend to the Cabinet, a detailed design and take it forward 

PATRICIA KARVELAS: All right, because it is only a discussion paper just to get your thoughts on what we're seeing play out. Under the existing system around 70% of facilities whose baselines have been disclosed by the Clean Energy Regulator could raise their emissions by 10% or more. Now, some have headroom of more than 80%. How do you plan to tighten the system to eliminate this?

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, again Patricia the discussion paper does go into that and points out that this headroom exists, the baselines are set in many instances above existing emissions. And that's why the system so far, the safeguards policy has failed emissions have gone up from facilities covered by the safeguard mechanism since it was introduced by the last Government in 2016. So we're keeping the architecture because the architecture is quite elegant. But the actual way it was implemented was very, very poor. And the paper does point out that this headroom already exists and it needs to be dealt with otherwise you won't get emissions reductions. And again, there's a couple of options there about how to do it. But the principle that we're going to reduce or eliminate that headroom and start seeing with emissions reduction is very, very clear.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay, and only some emitters will be allowed to offset their emissions by purchasing international carbon credits under a very specific set of conditions. How will that work?

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, what I've said consistently, and there's been a lot of questions about will we allow access to international codes, not only under the safeguards mechanism just more broadly. And my answer to that is only if the Government was 100% guaranteed and satisfied about the integrity of those emissions reductions. Many, many carbon credit schemes around the world, some might be quite credible and verifiable and others will not be and we won't be allowing any opening up until and unless we're 100% satisfied. The paper does sort of flag that that might be an option at some point. They've been a lot of people asking whether that might be an option. But it's pretty clear. And I'm very clear that only if we were satisfied that these were real emissions reductions. As you know, we have a separate process underway Patricia to ensure our own scheme is delivering real emissions reductions because I've appointed Professor Ian Chubb to conduct a review with a panel of very eminent Australians to make sure that our system has integrity and is credible and verifiable.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay, will multinational energy giants be excluded from using international carbon credits? Have you made that decision?

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, as I said, they currently can't. And I would not allow it unless the Government, unless I had advice and was very satisfied that emissions reductions under international credits were real, verifiable and sustainable.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Do you think that that can be established? 

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, I don't currently have that view. But if I was to be convinced,

PATRICIA KARVELAS: How can you be convinced Minister?

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, by the evidence, Patricia, by expert advice, and looking at the evidence, and that's how we do business in the Albanese Government, we look at the evidence and weigh up the verifiable evidence. But you know, I've been clear about this all along. Do I rule out international credits as a matter of principle or ideology? No, because I want to see emissions reduction, and I want to sit around the world. So that's, that's my starting approach. However, obviously, we will be handing over some verifiable control of emissions reduction if we're allowing access to international credits, by definition, therefore, I need to be satisfied. And I need to be able to tell my Cabinet colleagues that this would be real emissions reduction. And we're not there yet.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Minister, I just want to turn to another issue before I say goodbye to you. What did you make of the former Prime Minister's explanation yesterday for why he had himself sworn in to five key ministries, he said he needed emergency powers. He also said that he didn't want it to be misconstrued and misunderstood. What did you make of it?

CHRIS BOWEN: Patricia, I mean, I think first grade teachers have heard better excuses from six year olds about why their homework wasn't done. I mean, it was pretty pathetic, embarrassing and cringe worthy to be honest. I mean, this is a major trashing of conventions of decency, of honesty, and not to tell your colleagues let alone the Australian people, and to pretend that it was somehow related to the crisis. But maybe people might accept that in relation to health portfolio at the height of the crisis. I don't think even that would have been justified in not making it public. But the other portfolios, it just makes no sense. And frankly, it was a reminder of the fundamental dishonesty of the previous Government. And this is less than 100 days ago, Patricia, that the Liberal Party was telling us it was vital for Australia's future that this guy continue on as prime minister. I mean, what is the what is today's Liberal Party think about this, they've been struck dumb. This is a man they put before the Australian people as their candidate as Prime Minister, less than 100 days ago. It is now very clear he was fundamentally dishonest with the Australian people and with his colleagues, we already knew that, but it's just another reminder. 

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Do you believe the Governor General still has questions to answer here? He says it's not his job. And yet the convention has always been Chris Bowen, that that Government House gazettes these appointments, it didn't happen this time. 

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, Patricia, I think the Governor General, to be fair was in a difficult position, he has to accept the advice of the Government of the da, of the Prime Minister of the day. I do not know whether he advised or warned the Prime Minister of the day as his constitutional right is.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: You don't do you expect? Do you think that the proper thing would have been that he would have wanted the Prime Minister?

CHRIS BOWEN: I don't wish to politicize the office of Governor General Patricia because it is very important we don't do that. The person responsible to be very clear is Scott Morrison. He advised the Governor General, the Governor General was obliged…

PATRICIA KARVELAS: We are a Constitution, we’re constitutional.

CHRIS BOWEN: The Governor General powers extend only as far as advising and warning his constitutional advisor. And those advices or warnings normally happen confidentially. I do not know. 

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Do you expect that that would have been the right thing for Governor General to do?

CHRIS BOWEN: Patricia, I am not going to politicize or criticize the office of Governor General, I will politicize and criticize the office of the former Prime Minister, because he is the one responsible for this imbroglio.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Let me just get some clarity from you, though. You're somebody who understands Government pretty well. You've been around for a while Chris Bowen say this politely. So given that, is it the standard convention that it is actually Government House that actually gazettes these appointments?

CHRIS BOWEN: But well, there's nothing standard about what happened here, Patricia, nothing standard. The standard convention is if there's a Minister, a Minister gets sworn in, it's pretty public. And then the Prime Minister by convention gets up in Parliament and tables, a list of the revised Ministers, as you said, I've been around a while I've seen it happen from John Howard through Anthony Albanese, they’re the Prime Ministers I have served in Parliament with I've seen them all do it. I saw Scott Morrison do it too. Trouble is it wasn't an accurate list, he effectively misled the parliament. I mean, that's the problem here. That's why I bring it back. Patricia. I will not criticize.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: You don't think the Governor General has any more questions to answer?

CHRIS BOWEN: I think the Governor General was in a very difficult position because he is obliged to accept the advice of his first Minister, and he accepted that advice. That is his constitutional obligation. And as a Labor Member of Parliament, I would not like to say that convention that the Governor General accepts the advice of the elected Government in any way endangered. It was endangered once before about 50 years ago, and I wouldn't like to see it happened again

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay fair enough. Chris Bowen thank you so much for joining us this morning

CHRIS BOWEN: Good on your Patricia

ENDS