Interview with Patricia Karvelas, ABC Afternoon Briefing

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Over 15,000 kilometres away from the Liberal Party room's decision on energy policy, the COP climate summit is underway in Brazil. Australia is in a fight for joint hosting rights for next year's summit with Türkiye, and the end of this year's summit is the deadline for the resolution, otherwise it will default to the German city of Bonn. Assistant climate Minister Josh Wilson is attending as our country's representative before Climate Minister Chris Bowen attends for the second week, and I spoke to him earlier. Josh Wilson, welcome to Afternoon Briefing.

JOSH WILSON: Thank you. Good to be with you.

KARVELAS: You're representing Australia at this COP conference, what are you hearing about our bid and how nations are responding to it?

WILSON: Well, there's a lot of support. There's a lot of positivity for the prospect of bringing the work here in Brazil at COP30, the green lungs of Amazon to the blue Pacific continent next year.

KARVELAS: Have you made any progress with Türkiye in your visit?

WILSON: Our engagement with Türkiye obviously happens government-to-government, and we've made some progress recently in conversations of the UNGA. The contact will be between the Prime Minister and other senior ministers like Chris Bowen, the Minister for Climate Change Energy, and the Foreign Minister. We've engaged with Türkiye throughout this process in good spirit and in good faith in seeking to come to a resolution that we know is strongly supported within the global community more broadly.

KARVELAS: Will the Albanese Government host the COP summit at any cost? Is $2 billion, as reported by the Financial Review, an acceptable amount of money to be spending on this?

WILSON: There will be speculation about those kinds of things in relation to bids like ours. The value of Australia and the Pacific together, hosting a COP is very, very significant. First and foremost, because we make a contribution to this vital global effort that is vital for us. It's vital for the Pacific. It is a matter of existential meaningfulness in relation to the Pacific, and it's very, very significant for us in Australia. So, it's a very valuable exercise to be part of and when you look at what happened in the case of the UK's COP, they found that $2 worth of value for every $1 that was involved on the cost side. 

And then in addition to that kind of direct cost benefit, there's the benefit that we would have in Australia from being able to showcase our incredible comparative advantages as a destination for renewable energy investment and a clean industry transition investment, so the cost of it will be determined through the usual, proper budget process, but I don't think there's any doubt that the value of us making that contribution in partnership with the Pacific to a vital multilateral effort at a difficult time when multilateralism, frankly, has been experiencing some rough seas, is enormous and we do also have some significant interests of our own, it will be served by showcasing those advantages that I just mentioned.

KARVELAS: I’ve heard that some inside cabinet wouldn't mind COP defaulting to Bonn. What's your message to those colleagues?

WILSON: I talk with my colleagues in the government all the time about all sorts of things; I don't necessarily accept the premise. I do understand that around these kind of matters there's a lot of interest, and then sometimes some sort of sense of drama or suspense about how it will be resolved and who is contributing to that process. 

This is something that the government's been very clear about as a commitment, and we're making a strong, persuasive joined up effort with our Pacific family because we think that it's in keeping with our values as a nation, certainly in keeping with what the Pacific and Australia together have to offer to this absolutely vital global cooperative effort, and that's a view that's shared in government. But we can't control the outcome ourselves. All we can do is make a strong, characteristically cheerful, good faith Australian effort, and that's what we're doing.

KARVELAS: Is this going to be resolved by the end of the week?

WILSON: Not by the end of this week, because obviously COP will go into the second week, but it will be resolved by the end of COP.

KARVELAS: So, by the end of next week, we'll have a clear answer on this?

WILSON: Yes, one way or another. I mean, there's a point that is the scheduled end for any COP, I believe. This is only my second COP, so I wouldn't describe myself as a COP veteran, but I believe that there have been cases where the process goes on for an additional day or two. 

I wouldn't be able to tell you that that will be resolved by a particular day, but one way or another, in the next 10 days or so, this process, the COP process, will need to reach what is a consensus decision, a consensus outcome on the next presidency. And unfortunately, if there isn't a consensus result, then it does revert to being hosted by Germany in Bonn.

KARVELAS: And why do you think that would be a bad outcome?

WILSON: It would mean that there isn't an active presidency, and so there would be a loss of momentum. There's a lot to be said for making sure that the work we are all doing carries from one COP to the next, with a setting of targets and the adoption of measures that deliver the energy transition, and see decarbonisation, and picking them up from year to year, with a kind of leadership and advocacy that a presidency provides. 

We think that that would 100% be carried forward if Australia and the Pacific together were able to host the COP next year. Whereas, if for whatever reason it was to revert to Bonn, there would be a bit of lack of focus, I suppose, and lack of momentum in the absence of an active presidency.

KARVELAS: South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskis has issued a warning over not trying hard enough to win the summit, saying the economic benefit is similar to the Olympics. Do you think that's a fair comparison?

WILSON: I'm not an expert on the benefit of the Olympics, but I understand the comparison. I mean, the truth is, the world will come to Australia and the Pacific. And as I said before, the UK found, having hosted the COP, that the benefit-to-cost ratio is two to one in favour, and then that's not taking account of the benefit that you get from the world coming to our part of the planet and seeing all of the things that we're doing in the energy transition. 

The Albanese Government has made great strides. I can say that the NDC commitment, we made 62 to 70% reduction by 2035 and the progress we're making in terms of already seeing a doubling of renewable energy and Cheaper Home Batteries program and the new Solar Sharer program that Chris Bowen’s announced, those are all things that get people buzzing at events like this. Those advantages would be really, really serious, if you think about investment and new business opportunities and jobs and all of those positive elements of bringing the world to the blue Pacific continent and to Adelaide.

KARVELAS: The effort of the Prime Minister has also been scrutinized. Should we expect him to make a dash in the next few days?

WILSON: That's probably in that category I mentioned before about sort of suspense and drama. I mean, of course the Prime Minister makes the most important contribution to the way we engage with other countries, and his record on that front is pretty good. He has engaged in good spirit and good faith with Türkiye and with other leaders about our seriousness when it comes to hosting a COP in partnership with the Pacific. 

The idea that that would somehow be improved by him being on the ground here, when President Erdogan, for instance, isn't on the ground here, is a bit fanciful. You know, we're following the same approach that we did last year – I’m here representing the government in week one, and Minister Bowen will be here in week two when the really serious negotiations occur. I think that's pretty sensible.

KARVELAS: Just finally, the Liberal Party has been debating whether to dump a commitment to net zero today. Does it concern delegates at the COP that Australia is losing its bipartisan commitment to net zero by 2050?

WILSON: It's certainly not helpful, and it's not responsible for two parties that make up the coalition and could consider themselves, or try and put themselves forward, as an alternative government to behave in that way. 

But I think most astute watchers of government politics in any nation are able to see the context and understand the circumstances as they are at the moment. The circumstances are that the coalition is in a pretty poor place and is really looking for reasons to tear themselves apart and conduct sort of internal square ups and internal leadership division, rather than thinking about the national interest. 

We're going to continue to do that, and the way that we've done it is recognised, and the way that the Australian community endorsed that agenda is recognised. And I think that gives confidence to our partners in the international community about the approach that Australia is taking as a government and as a community, and confidence about our direction of travel.

KARVELAS: Thanks so much for joining us.

WILSON: Thanks, Patricia. Really appreciate it.