Interview with Sarah Ferguson, ABC 7.30 Report

SARAH FERGUSON: Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen joins me now live from Canberra. Chris Bowen, welcome to 7.30.

CHRIS BOWEN: Great to be back, Sarah.

SARAH FERGUSON: The Greens have drawn a line. They will vote for your legislation if you can promise there will be no new coal and gas projects. Can you see any way of meeting their demand?

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, Mr Bandt's made it clear, including on your show last night, Sarah, that that was an offer, not an ultimatum. And I think that's the right approach that he's bringing to the conversation. Mr Dutton has ruled himself out of the conversation by declaring he's against the policy, including the elements that his own government proposed. Mr Bandt has a view, his party has a view. We don't share that view, but there is a commonality of interest in good faith across the parliament that was elected last year to see emissions come down. And I believe that the parliament that was elected in May last year was elected with a mandate to reduce emissions.

So therefore, I'm confident of getting this policy through the parliament. Now I'm in good-faith negotiations with Mr Bandt and with David Pocock and others. I'm not going to go through the details of those, but clearly this is a once-in-a-decade opportunity for the Parliament to get emissions down from our biggest emitters. We're not going to get emissions down as a country, Sarah, unless we achieve the ambition of reducing emissions from our 215 biggest emitters. It's 205 million tonnes of emissions that this policy reduces. And I think it's incumbent on the parliament, we have a choice in the coming weeks to seize the opportunity to reduce emissions, or to squander that opportunity.

SARAH FERGUSON: If I may break in there. It does, however, that there's a change in the language and the tone, and I hear that at the same time, it does seem like a red line drawn by the Greens. But one possibility that they've put forward, as well as the Climate Council, is a pause on new projects. Now, that would allow the Government time to pass a climate trigger, which could help you manage new projects. Are you open to that?

CHRIS BOWEN: No, we're not contemplating that and that's not part of the discussions that I would entertain. But we are, as I said, I'm in discussions with Mr Bandt about sensible suggestions and I've always taken this approach. And under Anthony's leadership, the Government's always taken this approach, where there are sensible suggestions from the crossbench, or indeed from submissions to the process. I announced this on the 9th of January, this position paper. It was out for consultation until a couple of weeks ago. We're working through all the submissions where there's sensible suggestions, either through those submissions or from the crossbench, which enhance, which improve the policy in keeping with our agenda, in keeping with what we're trying to achieve, in keeping with our mandate, then, of course, a sensible government of adults would take those on board and that's exactly what we will do.

SARAH FERGUSON: Alright, well how about this. So your own climate modellers, the people on whose expertise you relied, RepuTex, are saying that 16 new or expanding coal and gas projects already committed to, to be clear, could cause the emissions budget to blow out. How do you respond to that?

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, I've read the modelling and the modelling agrees. Their base case, their central case, is basically very closely aligned with the Government's analysis.

SARAH FERGUSON: Yes, except that well -

CHRIS BOWEN: - That's a statement of fact in their modelling.

SARAH FERGUSON: Well, let's not confuse the audience. So, according to RepuTex's models, with those 16 new or expanding projects, the overshoot of carbon emissions is 13 to 35 million tonnes. So how do you respond to that? Because that would 'blow your budget' is a big term, but that would blow your carbon budget.

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, let's just work through quickly but carefully the situation for new entrants. In fact, Sarah, the design takes into account new entrants, so new facilities which are possible to proceed, that are at a certain level of development, they're already factored in. So we achieved the 205 million tonnes of abatement, even factoring in those occurring. That's very important.

SARAH FERGUSON: Unless, as RepuTex says, there are changes in the amount of emissions that those companies produces, which leads to the overshoot.

CHRIS BOWEN: If I could just finish the point, Sarah. So we already factor in the expectation, prudently and carefully and conservatively, this is not a government decision that they should occur, it's a prudent element of planning that they may well occur. So, in fact, a lot of those proposals are factored in and we still get 205 million tonnes of abatement. Secondly, in addition to that, we've factored in what we call a reserve, if you like, a buffer of an extra 17 million tonnes, in case an existing facility increases production or more new facilities come on. Whether they're whatever they are, whether they're big industrial producers, whether they're lithium mines, whether they're other facilities.

SARAH FERGUSON: I'm sorry to jump in here, but RepuTex is saying that there is, they have modelled possibilities in increased production in those new coal and gas projects that lead to a larger amount of emissions. In their case, they're saying within a range of 13 to 35 million tonnes. That is what that report finds.

CHRIS BOWEN: Of course, Sarah, they've modelled potential outcomes where people increase production or new entrants come in.

SARAH FERGUSON: What happens if that is the case? What happens if there are unexpected increases in production, larger than expected demands from overseas? How do you manage? How does the safeguard mechanism manage those increases?

CHRIS BOWEN: Indeed, Sarah, there could be changes either way. There could be facilities that reduce production for a range of international demand circumstances. Our design takes all that into account.

SARAH FERGUSON: And what will you do if they go up? 

CHRIS BOWEN: We've factored in conservatively and prudently. We've factored in a whole range of potential projects which may or may not happen. We've assumed for the purpose of the design that they happen. We still achieve. So, to your question, about will the budget blow out? No, because we still achieve that 205 million tonnes of abatement. In addition, I don't want to get too sort of focused for the viewers on figures, but in addition, we've also factored in a buffer, an additional reserve of 17 million tonnes, which would absorb those changes. Now, of course, the third point, Sarah, is that we're proposing a review in a few years time, after the scheme has been implemented and operating. Obviously, this is a scheme that will be in for a long time, right up to 2050. So obviously, over that time, there'll be a case to review how it's working. The most important thing, after a decade of denial and delay, this is the only opportunity to get a regime in place which has been welcomed right across the board. I've been through the submissions. There's a lot of support for this, to say we need this certainty, we need this regime so that we can now invest in the abatement and the technologies that will increase when they become available. 

SARAH FERGUSON: Yes in the future. Let me just go back to one particular point, because on that list of projects, these are the committed projects that are coming down the line. There are seven projects on that list. Are you prepared to break the impasse that exists at the moment in these negotiations to agree that after those coal projects, there will be no more coal? Is that a way of breaking the impasse? 

CHRIS BOWEN: Well, we've assumed for the pace, as I said before, on the basis of prudent and conservative planning, we've assumed a whole lot of facilities, not just coal and gas, lithium mines, et cetera, because we hope those lithium mines, for example, are developed.

SARAH FERGUSON: But in relation to coal? 

CHRIS BOWEN: No, I'm not contemplating and will not contemplate any sort of blanket moratoriums on any particular proposals. I mean, what we've got to do is have a regime in place which deals with existing facilities, new facilities. Here's the choice before the Parliament. Here's the choice before the parliament, Sarah. If there are new facilities and this doesn't pass, there'll be no constraint on emissions. If there are new facilities and this does pass, there'll be a constraint, and indeed, new facilities will be obliged to comply with the world's best practice on emissions. That’s the choice before the parliament.

SARAH FERGUSON: Let me just ask you one final thing on those new projects. Will you be asking those new projects, coal and gas projects, that are coming down the line to abate 100% of their emissions? 

CHRIS BOWEN: We'll be requiring all facilities, whether they're coal, gas, lithium, anything, to comply with world's best practice. Some people say that's too onerous, some of the submissions say this will be too hard. I don't think it is. I think it's appropriate that in Australia, which has restored climate leadership since last year, to require our new facilities to be the best in the world when it comes to emissions. I believe that's an appropriate thing to ask, and that's what we'll do.

SARAH FERGUSON: It's a complicated topic and thank you very much for coming on to talk about it. No doubt there's a lot more to say on the subject. Thank you, Chris Bowen.
 
CHRIS BOWEN: Sure will be. Pleasure, Sarah.