Interview with Tom Connell, Sky News

TOM CONNELL, HOST: Well, joining me now for more, Environment Minister Murray Watt. We'll get to your portfolio in a moment. A lot of thoughts have turned to the Middle East. Australia has been involved in every major conflict the US has been involved with since the Second World War. Could that happen again?

MURRAY WATT, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: No, well Tom, we've made clear that the defence assets which we're deploying to the Middle East are for the purposes of evacuating Australians when the time is right to do so. The reality is that Australia is not a central player in the Middle East, so it would not be our intention to become involved in that kind of conflict. But more broadly, what we're actually seeking to do is to encourage dialogue and diplomacy as a way of resolving this so that we don't see the situation escalate. That's where we want to see this get to, rather than ourselves or anyone else being involved in further conflict.

TOM CONNELL: And I understand that's what the Minister is saying at the moment, that's what you're saying, but can you be any clearer than that? Not our intention to get involved. Would you go further and just say Australia won't be involved in a war with Iran?

MURRAY WATT: Look, I don't want to split hairs on terminology, Tom, around such a serious matter, and obviously, there are some of my colleagues who are far more intimately involved in this planning than I am. But Australia's position is to not get involved in this conflict and actually to help to de-escalate it. That would be the best thing for everyone.

TOM CONNELL: Ok. Would you think any Australians travelling there from now on couldn't expect Australia to put in time, money and risk to evacuate them? It's pretty clear it's not a good or a safe part of the world to go to right now.

MURRAY WATT: Well, certainly we encourage all Australian travellers, wherever they might be going, to have a look at the guidance on the Smartraveller website. I don't think anything could be clearer that it would be a bad idea for Australians to travel to Iran or Israel right now. There would no doubt be other parts of the world where we're providing similar advice. And we do need people to take responsibility for their decisions once that guidance is provided. So, the guidance is clear. You know how difficult it is for us to be able to evacuate people from these areas right now. And the last thing we need is for other people making decisions contrary to that advice. So, people need to take that advice seriously.

TOM CONNELL: Alright. The first thing on your in-tray as Minister is the environmental protection laws that Tanya Plibersek was working on. Reports yesterday emerging that you had confidence that the two key sides on this or the most previously opposed, mining groups and conservationists, could come to agreement on new laws. What have you done differently when they might actually be on the same page here?

MURRAY WATT: Well, I don't want to pretend that this is over yet, Tom. There's a lot of work yet to be done, and the reality is that there are still points of disagreement between different players in this debate. But certainly, the meeting that I hosted in Canberra yesterday was incredibly constructive. I think it was well over a year since we'd had all of those different groups in the same room, either physically or online, discussing these issues. And what became clear is that while there are some areas of dispute and they will take some time to work through, there's also a lot of agreement at a higher level from all the players that our current environmental laws are broken, they're not protecting the environment adequately and they're not working for business. So, it really doesn't matter which kind of angle or interest group you come from; there's something in it for you to see these laws reformed. We think we can come up with laws that are better for the environment and better for business. You will have seen, I've made clear, both in the room and outside, that we're going to need to see some compromise from all of the players. But look, I think also the thing that's changed is the political climate. You know, it was very difficult for Tanya and the government to be able to finalise these reforms in the months leading up to an election when, you know, people would have been taking bets on who was going to be in government and who wasn't. We're now through all that. The government's got a strong mandate to get on with these reforms, as we do with a range of other things. And I intend to seize this window that's available to get these reforms done.

TOM CONNELL: Also, the indication from you has been no so-called 'climate trigger'. Does that mean in any way emissions will be covered? I know they are for domestic use or domestic company, but there'll be no other trigger or any way that emissions would have to form part of a consideration for projects?

MURRAY WATT: Yeah, well, Tom, as you may have seen, I'm not ruling things in or out at this early stage of the negotiations, but the point I have been making is that for the groups who say that the act doesn't pay any attention to climate and there's no restrictions on approving or having projects with climate impacts, the reality is that the government strengthened our safeguard mechanism when we came to office, made it real, made it effective. And what that means is that big emitting projects like smelters or mines or gas plants are already required under that law to bring down their emissions by 5 per cent a year and to reach net zero. So, if you like, that covers what are known as the Scope 1 and 2 emissions, the emissions generated on site and when it comes to what are known as Scope 3 emissions. So, the emissions that are caused overseas when people use our coal or use our gas. That's exactly what the Paris Agreement that well over 100 nations have entered into, where nations have committed to bring down their emissions so that we do avoid temperature rises overall. And different countries are doing that in different ways. You know the analogy I make is that Japan and Korea make cars that are sent to Australia, it's Australia's responsibility and our consumers to reduce our emissions, which is why we're bringing in new fuel efficiency standards. Similarly, the countries that buy our fossil fuels are required under the Paris Agreement to reduce their emissions too.

TOM CONNELL: Well, but there's nothing concrete, for example, for China. So, your attitude, if there's a new coal mine, we ship it off to China, that's up to them. But right now, they don't have an actual target for when they're getting to, you know, going to reduce their emissions to a certain amount. So, to that, you just say, 'not our problem'. Scope 3 is not your problem, and there won't be any changes to that?

MURRAY WATT: No, I wouldn't put it that way. I wouldn't put it that way, Tom. But, and as I say, I'm not ruling things in or out when it comes to the legislation at this point. We do have an international compact -

TOM CONNELL: When you say you wouldn't put it that way, that is the effect, isn't it? It's up to China, or whatever company, or India -

MURRAY WATT: What I was going to say, what I was going to say, is that we all accept that climate change is a global problem that needs a global solution, and we do have a global agreement that most countries are part of, and they've made commitments under that agreement to reduce their emissions over time, just like Australia has. We've agreed and legislated that we'll reduce our emissions by 43 per cent by 2030 in order to get to net zero by 2050. We need to achieve that by for instance, moving much more towards renewable energy, reducing the emissions of our cars that we use and the emissions that we generate as a country are counted against Dow balance sheet, if you like, just as other countries’ emissions are counted against theirs. So, all countries need to be making moves in this procedure so that we achieve what's sought under that international agreement.

TOM CONNELL: Yeah. Albeit, I mean, all China's got is peak emissions by 2030 and net zero, 2060. So, doesn't quite tie in with, anyway-

MURRAY WATT: Having said that, I mean, it's a matter for China. It's a matter for China to explain their own practices. But I'm sure you'd be aware that China even is making enormous steps towards renewable power, much more than any other source of power, in order to reduce their emissions. So, whether they've set targets or not, even they are making steps in the right direction.

TOM CONNELL: Minister, got to leave it there. Appreciate your time. Thank you.