Sky News interview with Minister for the Environment and Water Tanya Plibersek

SUBJECTS: AUKUS; POWER PRICES.

PETER STEFANOVIC: Back to Sydney now. Joining us live is the Environment and Water Minister Tanya Plibersek. Minister, good to see you. Thanks for your time. Let's start with Paul Keating. We are quite used to his colourful sprays, but he did more than that yesterday. He obliterated your government. What are your thoughts on what he said?

TANYA PLIBERSEK, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: Well, I love Paul Keating, but I don't always agree with him and I think, given the delays we've seen in our defence policy in recent years, making sure that we are able to defend ourselves as a nation in the future is absolutely critical. I think under the last government we had 28 defence projects running a cumulative 97 years late. We need to be able to defend ourselves in a changing world. Our government has spent an enormous amount of time and energy and thought into making sure that this, the most consequential defence decision we make in a generation, is the right decision.
Now, Paul Keating's got a right to his view. Malcolm Turnbull's got a right to his view. There are a number of people who have followed defence policy closely, who care passionately about our country, who are expressing their views. You wouldn't expect anything different at a time like this. This is one of the biggest - well, it's the biggest decision we'll make in regard to defence policy in our generation, so it's good to have a strong debate around it.

STEFANOVIC: Is he out of touch?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I think we live in a changing world, and I'd say that Paul Keating is one of the closest observers of foreign policy, one of the closest observers of Australian history and global history and that we've got in our nation, so I always listen very carefully to what he's got to say. But I think the people who've said that the China of today is not the same as the China of his prime ministership have got a point.

STEFANOVIC: He hasn't had an intelligence briefing since the 1990s, though. Was it fair that he went after Penny Wong and Richard Marles and Anthony Albanese the way he did?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I certainly don't agree with the personal remarks he made about my colleagues, but I do think it is important that we have a thoughtful debate about what is an incredibly consequential decision for Australia, and I wouldn't want former prime ministers to feel that they can't comment.

STEFANOVIC: Do you agree with anything he said?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Every single Australian has a right to their views and I'm not going to dissect the whole speech and I'm not going to dissect the questions and answers after. But I think every Australian has a right, and I would say even a responsibility, to inform themselves about this, to think about it, to debate it. It is consequential, it's an enormous commitment and it will run for many decades. Our kids and our grandkids all inherit this decision, so I'm not surprised that there's a debate about it. I think that's healthy.

STEFANOVIC: I mean, many have said that he's out of touch. And these are views from the 90s, even the 80s and 70s. How much influence does Paul Keating have over Federal Labor these days?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Look, I think it's a changing world and we need to build our defence capability, not for today, but for whatever may eventuate in ten years' time, or 20 years' time or 30 years' time. These are projects that will last for generations. So we need to prepare for the way the world may continue to change in coming generations. That's why we're making this decision. And I think it's also very wise to think about what this does for our domestic economy. Of course, we're focussed on the defence of the realm, but this gives us a manufacturing capacity that means that we'll be an advanced manufacturing economy in decades to come as well.

STEFANOVIC: Sorry, Tanya. It also opens the door to nuclear now. And given our energy problems at the moment, we've going to have the nuclear subs. It's triggered the debate about nuclear. Should we at least - I know Labor is against it, but should we at least explore the potential for it now that technology is better and will only get better?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: No, because this is the most expensive form of electricity available to humans and it would take years, potentially decades, to have a nuclear domestic nuclear energy arrangement.

STEFANOVIC: Why not start now, then? Given the subs will be a way off.

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: I don't think anybody wants to live next door to a nuclear reactor.

STEFANOVIC: But that point is that reactors are different now. You can get smaller - smaller ones now.

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Yeah. Small, expensive, slow ones that give you really expensive energy. We have got the capacity to have unlimited amounts of cheap, renewable energy. Cheap, clean, renewable energy. That's the way the global economy is going. We have an absolute abundance. We can be a green energy superpower. Why wouldn't we be? We're already on that track.

STEFANOVIC: Well, in your space, given that there's going to be a couple of tough winters ahead, you recently approved the Santos expansion. Are you under pressure or will you fast track any more approvals to increase gas supply?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: I've experienced no pressure to fast-track anything. I will make every decision based on the information before me, based on the law as it stands. Now, where there are new energy proposals, those proponents have to follow all of the rules. They have to do all of the proper environmental assessments. And if they pass all of the proper environmental assessments, if their new project can be developed without destroying our natural environment, then it gets a tick. It's as simple as that.

STEFANOVIC: Are you expecting shortfalls, energy shortfalls this winter and beyond?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I'm not an energy market expert, but I know that the global energy market is under enormous pressure because of the conflict in Ukraine. We've seen what that's done, not just to energy prices in Australia, but to energy prices in Europe, in the US, and globally.
The other thing that of course we faced in Australia is a decade of inaction from the previous government. If any one of the 22 energy policies that the previous government had had actually been completed, we'd be in a better position today to deal with any shortfalls. We've had a decade of inaction. We're getting on with the job of building our transmission lines so we can get more renewables into the grid. And we're seeing enormous strides in things like offshore wind where my colleague Chris Bowen has been identifying areas where we can far fast track offshore wind energy production. That's how we're going to solve the energy pressures that we face as a nation.

STEFANOVIC: Okay. Tanya Plibersek. Appreciate your time. Thank you. We'll talk to you again soon.