Interview with Patricia Karvelas, ABC RN Breakfast

PATRICIA KAREVLAS, HOST: A landmark deal to make rich nations pay for vulnerable countries impacted by climate change has been heralded as a win. But there are serious questions about how the plan will work in practice. One of the instrumental players behind the deal was Australia's Energy and Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen, who joins you now. He's just returned home from Sharm el Sheikh in Egypt. Welcome back to the country and RN Breakfast Minister.

CHRIS BOWEN: That's very kind of you, PK. Good morning.

KARVELAS: There's a lack of detail on who will pay, how much will be paid, when it will be paid. When will those details be finalized? Will it be at the next COP summit?

BOWEN: They'll certainly be progress, further progress of the next COP, next year in the UAE. So basically, Patricia to just step this through for a moment. As we know, there's been two pillars to action on climate change, mitigation i.e reducing emissions and adaptation, dealing with the warming that has already occurred. And what the Conference of the Parties what all the delegates agreed to do over the last week is add a third pillar, which is how we deal with the loss and damage for developing countries and less developed countries. Now, we know that natural disasters in particular, will happen in every country. But we also know that those less developed countries will have increasing difficulty in dealing with those. I mean, just look at the terrible events in Pakistan in recent weeks around US $30 billion worth of damage, or closer to home in Fiji, for example, it's estimated that they lose about 5% of their GDP a year because in a smaller economy, a natural disaster is going to have a bigger impact.
 
And also, those slower moving disasters like rising sea levels have an impact. Now, this is about coming together as the world and dealing with this issue together. Now COP agreed to establish a fund but also importantly, we agreed to other funding mechanisms, we were particularly strong in this point of view that the multilateral development banks need to step up and lift their game, I was very grateful to receive strong support from other countries for that point that the World Bank in particular has not been doing enough. And that's reflected in the decisions. So this has been talked about for 30 years. Did we solve all the problems last week in Sharm el Sheikh? Of course, we did not, Do we take a significant step forward? And did the Australia play a constructive role in doing so? Yes.

KARVELAS: So how much is Australia going to contribute to the fund given you're a big backer of it?

BOWEN: Patricia, there's many many steps to go yet. The fund hasn't even been established yet. No country has determined how much they will put in, not a country in the world has determined that. The design of the fund, we were again, strong in this point that we've got to make sure this works is that other funds, which haven't worked around the world or haven't worked as effectively as they should. We've made the point that we want to a wide range of people contributing including a diverse source of funds, including potentially options for multilateral development banks in the private sector.
 
Also, a number of countries made the point that the donor base, which was established in 1992, is not necessarily fit for purpose. And it's countries that weren't included in that base in 1992 that, that that conversation should be continued. We made that point, as did many other countries. So this is this a long way to go yet. But this was a material step forward. And look, I know, this is, you know, the opposition has decided to make some cheap political points about this. I think I just underlines that they don't get it. Acting on loss and damage is important, of course, for developing countries, especially in our region. And I was grateful for the thanks the Pacific nations gave our delegation both publicly and privately for the role we played. It's also in Australia's strategic interest in a complicated geopolitical world, for Australia to be actively engaged and constructively engaged in this conversation.

KARVELAS: So you won't say the amount you're going to commit. But I just want to clarify…

BOWEN: This conversation is too early.

KARVELAS: I get it. Yes, I get this. But I've got a question. Here it is: Are you committed to putting money in that fund, though? I'm not asking for the ultimate amount now, because you're saying it's too early, but putting it into that fund rather than insisting it goes somewhere else?

BOWEN: Well, Patricia, I think we've shown our constructive nature and we are good faith actors here. By playing a role in coordinating between the Pacific nations and developed countries how this would look, there's a long, long way to go. Just as we've played a constructive role this far, we'll continue to engage constructively. But to be fair, no fund currently exists. We need to see the structure, the rules, the donor base, we need to be

KARVELAS: So if the rules are not satisfactory, you won't commit to it?

BOWEN: Well, Patricia, I mean, with respect, you're asking me to say how we will respond to a fund, which we've played a role in helping to develop but does not yet exist. The Cabinet will in due course once the fund is up and running whenever that is, look at all the rules and all the structure and like we do with everything else, consider how we engage. But I'd make this point; just as we increased our foreign aid Pacific in the budget by $900 million, just as we are implementing the election commitment to develop a Pacific Green Climate Infrastructure Fund. We are engaging in these issues. And that's what I responsible leading stakeholder internationally does and that's what Australia under our new management does.

KARVELAS: What I'm trying to get to the bottom of, though, is that you do have money, for instance, you've already committed to the Pacific to deal with climate change. Will you be arguing at these international forums that you've already committed, and that that should be counted? That's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of. Can you give me your conclusion on how you'll deal with that, or whether you will put in to a pool of funding?

BOWEN: Well, Patricia we’ll continue to make, of course we’ll continue to underline what we're already doing. I mean, the $900 million increase in the budget and the development of the Pacific infrastructure fund are no small things. So of course, I'll refer to that. And of course, the government will continue to work on that. But of course, we'll continue to engage in these conversations around the world, with other countries about what more can and should be done. And I was delighted to be asked by the COP President to chair the negotiations, I wasn't expecting that. When I got the call from the COP President, when I arrived in Egypt to do that, it was a surprise. But I was happy to play that role, because I think it shows that Australia is regarded now under the Albanese government as a very constructive player, not only domestically, but internationally.

KARVELAS: At the summit, you said if we're not trying to keep to 1.5 degrees, then what are we here for? Does Australia's 43% target stick to that 1.5 degree limit, though?

BOWEN: So Patricia, I mean, I do have to report to you that there was a big push towards watering down the commitment to 1.5 degrees, I think most people listening at home. And you know, to be fair, I would have thought to that every COP is a step forward. They know that every COP is about making forward progress. That's not necessarily the case. There was a lot of momentum around going backwards on what was agreed at Glasgow.

KARVELAS: Can you name who was.. what which countries were pushing that?

BOWEN: There were countries that are traditionally petrochemical powerhouses that were arguing both in private negotiations, and elsewhere that what was agreed at Glasgow was too much. Now, what the good news is that Australia, not just us, of course, but Australia, working very intensively with countries like the United Kingdom, New Zealand, US, Canada, the EU and the Pacific nations were able to withstand that and resist that.
 
We also had language put in about renewable energy, which I was very grateful for because some argue that the energy crisis caused by the war in Ukraine is a reason to halt or to slow the move to renewable energy. In fact, if anything, it's an argument for faster transition to renewable energy. And that's reflected in the covering decision. So that was another contribution that we successfully made. Now, of course, these are international negotiations and discussions.
 
In terms of our own domestic policy, we continue at a pace to implement those policies, whether it's Rewiring the Nation where we've made huge progress in our first six months. Safeguards reforms to reduce emissions in our top 215 emitters, so we'll have more to say, in the not too distant future about the detailed design. We're getting on with all that job, because we have 85 months now to do it Patricia between now and 2030. It's a big ask in 85 months but we intend to do it.

KARVELAS: Just a couple of extra questions. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie has released evidence that major coal exporters are falsifying data to make their coal seam cleaner than it is to sell it at a high export price. That's quite damning. Are you looking into it? Are you investigating?

BOWEN: Yes, we do take that very seriously. Now, a couple of points. Mr. Wilkie hasn't raised this with me directly. He's raised it in the parliament. So we'll turn that means we'll take our time to obviously look at what he's raised in the Parliament
 
Are you meeting with him?
 
If he wants to meet, I'd be very happy to. He hasn't, to my knowledge approached for a meeting. But also, I do note that there have been inquiries into these matters by ASIC and others. So it has been examined. But that's not to say that the government, I know Madeline King is getting advice from her department and regulators, I'll do the same. We do take these concerns very, very seriously. They need to be worked through properly by the relevant agencies. There have been investigations. So we just need to note that this is not something that hasn't been looked at previously. But obviously, I want to ensure the absolute accuracy of all claims made by Australian firms and I will continue, I will look at the matters that Mr. Wilkie has raised yesterday, which I read about in the newspaper, when he has indicated he will be raising them in Parliament. And as this government does when issues arise like this, we take them very, very seriously.

KARVELAS: How close are you to announcing a plan to cut gas prices or power prices more broadly, you've already confirmed a code of conduct but what else are you planning to do?

BOWEN: Well, the timeline that we've outlined has been pretty, pretty strong and pretty clear that and obviously, every day that passes is a day closer to the government having done its very important due diligence, policy analysis, modeling about all the impacts of all the policy options, and the senior members of the government, who are tasked with this, this job. And we're working very closely, we'll continue that work. I think I've used the term before because it's the accurate term, but a day later, that we that we can another day earlier than we should.

KARVELAS: Just days ago, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak lifted the windfall tax from 25%, imposed by former leader Boris Johnson to 35%. If the conservatives, the Tories can do that, why is Australia so hesitant?

BOWEN: Well, because we take these matters very seriously and carefully. We work through the consequences intended and unintended of all our policy options. There'll be no knee jerk reactions under this government. That was the modus operandi of the last lot. We take advice, we work through the issues very, very carefully. I know that, you know, it's your job to, to some degree, Patricia and fair enough to push us on timing, etc. We have a slightly different role. Our job is to get it not only expeditious but to get it right. That's exactly what we're doing.

KARVELAS: Just two industrial relations, the Senate report inquiry report on the industrial relations bill will be handed down today after a final hearing with senior public servants. If the government refuses to split the bill, and allow more time to debate multi-employer bargaining next year, what else you prepared to offer the crossbench to get them over the line?

BOWEN: Well, Patricia, let me at the outset say having just landed back from Egypt. I know Tony Burke, these discussions are in his extremely capable hands. So I'm not going to second guess what he does, he will be handling that. But I'll just make this general point. Patricia. I know it might be controversial to have a government that's actually trying to lift wages. That's a good thing. I mean, you don't we lift wages easily. This government is actually tackling this big issue. And yes, the crossbench and Senator Pocock, who I know very, very well, and he's very assiduous in in taking his job seriously and doing his due diligence, we'll continue to do that. But it's also in the capable hands of Minister Burke to work those issues through with him and other crossbench senators. I would hope for a very positive outcome because I think anybody would acknowledge that wages growth has been too low for too long in Australia.

KARVELAS: They are saying they're prepared to pass 90% of the bill. So they are obviously willing to.. but they're also saying David Pocock says as it stands right now, he can't vote for it.

BOWEN: Well also, we believe in the government, that 100% of the bill is necessary to get wages moving finally in Australia, but I'll leave those detailed discussions to Minister Burke because it is extremely capable hands. He will continue to progress them with the Senate crossbench.

KARVELAS: Thank you so much for joining us this morning.

BOWEN: Always a pleasure Patricia.