The Party Line Panel with Monique Ryan, Mornings with Warwick Long on ABC Radio Melbourne
12 January 2023
You can listen to my interview here.
WARWICK LONG: Party Line on ABC Radio Melbourne and Victoria Warwick Long with you in the chair today and tomorrow here on Mornings. Our Party Line is today Dr. Monique Ryan, the Independent Member for Kooyong, who joins you in the studio - hello.
MONIQUE RYAN: Good morning Warwick, nice to be with you.
WARWICK LONG: On the party line itself, Jane Hume Liberal Senator for Victoria, Shadow Finance Minister and Chair of the Select Committee on the Cost of Living - hello.
JANE HUME: Good to be with you Warwick, and good morning Monique.
MONIQUE RYAN: Morning Jane.
WARWICK LONG: If you'd like to join us on The Party Line today 1300222774 is the number to call you can text as well, 04377747748. Monique Ryan, I wanted to start with you because it's been a really interesting week in terms of federal government climate policy, and we think back to the election involving your own climate policy was at the heart of a lot of that so we got an idea on where the government is moving this area here in two areas. They released their review into the carbon credit scheme, one saying this scheme was itself was sound but some improvements were needed, and another on the safeguard mechanism as well what he wants big emitters to do and to achieve the government's climate goals. Are they acceptable plans from the government in terms of what you've heard so far?
MONIQUE RYAN: So the two reports that have come out, as you say, work on the integrity of the carbon credit, credit units system, and then the government's proposals for what to do with the safeguard mechanism, which is the really, really important way that the government is holding the really big polluters in our country to to account on his on their carbon emissions. So what the safeguard mechanism is, it's quite a complex thing, but it's a way of holding all of those facilities that produce more than 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year to account and to provide us with an explanation of how they're going to reduce their emissions over the next 10 to 15 years. The proposal that the government's put out this week is a start. It doesn't go far enough in terms of what we need to do doesn't provide enough clarity about exactly how those large facilities are going to be held to account. But it also doesn't really provide a comprehensive plan on what the government is planning to do about the 100 or more new facilities which could be coming online and in the future, which will also be emitting carbon and contributing to our emissions target.
WARWICK LONG: So as sort of a, roughly calling for a 5% reduction per year from the biggest emitters $1.9 billion fund to effectively pay for programs for those emitters to reduce the carbon footprint, will that be a success, or is it as some have called it allowing major emitters to greenwash?
MONIQUE RYAN: Well, we've been told and we have legislated last year that the government has committed to a 43% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030. The plan that they came up with this week is asking those big emitters to commit to a 30% reduction. Now that leaves a hole and it means that we're not we're not going to achieve the targets that we have already committed to. And the options there are that other people that would be household, small businesses, agriculture, etc, can take on more of the load, which seems inappropriate, or what we really do need to do is to be more ambitious with the targets that we set those big emitters and we need to set out very clearly how they are going to achieve a 43% or more reduction by 2030. Not the 30% that the government's put up, come up with this week.
WARWICK LONG: Monique Ryan, the Independent Member for Kooyong is with you on The Party Line today. Jane Hume’s with you as well, Liberal Senator for Victoria, the Shadow Finance Minister. Jane Hume, Ian Chubbs review, looking at the carbon credit scheme set up by your Cabinet when it was in power, said the system was sound. What was your reaction to that?
JANE HUME: We were very pleased at the independent review of the Australian Carbon Credits Units because obviously as you said, it was part of a fundamentally sound it was found to be operating effectively and that was from a panel of industry experts, not just Ian Chubb who was the former Chief Scientist. And that outcome of the review should, it should provide the Australian people with real confidence that the ACCU program is fit for purpose, and it will continue to play an important role in supporting Australia to decarbonise its economy because a transparent and effective market is going to be key to driving down emissions and that carbon credit scheme is going to be integral to to our ambition to achieve net zero by 2050.
WARWICK LONG: Monique Ryan says it doesn't go far enough. Business community have said they're broadly supportive of the safeguard mechanism that the next announcement from the government that we heard this week on the big emitters trying to get them to reduce their footprint. What are your thoughts?
JANE HUME: Well, there's a couple of problems with the safeguard mechanism. One is it does seem to be inconsistent with other policies that the Labor Government has introduced in a sort of very knee jerk reaction way that doesn't seem to be an overall and overarching plan to get to where we need to get to. One moment you're compensating coal miners and the other moment you're essentially putting what is the equivalent of a $75 carbon tax on our manufacturers. You know, prior to the election Labor were talking about the importance of Australia's manufacturers and how they were going to reinvigorate manufacturing in Australia and now less than a year later. They're slapping them with an enormous, an enormous imposition, which is essentially like a tax. If you inflict pain on businesses, it puts jobs at risks. It hurts households. We’re already paying a price for inaction on tackling the rising cost of living and now this is going to inflict further pain because it’s an ill thought out policy.
WARWICK LONG: Businesses are broadly supportive of it though aren’t they? .
JANE HUME: We think this has been an ill thought out policy, because while we support action on climate change, we have to do it in a very sensible way that balances emissions reductions, with economic growth, with supporting jobs, and supporting Australian's lifestyles
WARWICK LONG: Monique Ryan?
MONIQUE RYAN: Well I'd like to understand how Senator Hume reconciles that opinion with the fact that as you say, work, the Business Council of Australia and many of the other big industry groups have been supportive of the proposal that the government has put forward this week.
JANE HUME: It’s not big industries that we’re worried about. It's small, small businesses Monique, particularly small manufactures that are so important-
MONIQUE RYAN: There are 10 businesses which are cumulatively responsible for more than 50% of our carbon emissions since 2016.
WARWICK LONG: And this is a policy that targets them specifically doesn't it, Jane Hume?
JANE HUME: Well, it's $75 carbon tax is going to affect all manufacturers, not just the large ones. And this is the problem when you affect your manufacturing capabilities, you affect your international competitiveness. You also push up prices domestically and Australians are suffering enough at the moment from increased prices.
WARWICK LONG: 1300222774 if you'd like to join our party lines today, not just on climate policy, we've got a lot to talk about today, cost of living pressures. Jane Hume, who's been writing herself about how to encourage more women into the Liberal Party. We'll speak about that as well. The Voice to Parliament debate, it’s going to be a big part of this year as well. 1300222774 If you'd like to join us. Peter has called that number from Shepparton. Hi, Peter.
CALLER: G’day how’re you going?
WARWICK LONG: Good. What did you want to say?
CALLER: Look, I'd like to see our politicians take the same strong stance on opposition to coal power stations on China and other countries, as they do here. We’re sacrificing Australia's energy capacity. When we've got China, as of this year, China has 1114 coal power plants in Chinese mainland, and they're building others. So why does Australia have to sacrifice our economy and not challenge China?
WARWICK LONG: Monique Ryan would you like to answer that?
MONIQUE RYAN: Yeah, thanks Peter. The first thing is I don't agree that we have to sacrifice our economy on agree that But although I do agree that we shouldn't, I don't think that that's necessary. What we've seen is that the pathway forward to a post carbon economy in Australia will require us to transition to use of renewable energy. A - because it's the cheapest form of energy. But also because that we do know that anthropogenic climate change is real. And it's affecting all of us, no matter where we live around the world. But we can make that transition effectively and we can benefit from that. And so I also think that for us, to be in a position to take leadership on the world stage in this area, we have to be seen as good global citizens. And we can't just defer to this sort of, I think the trope to actually say, well, we don't have to do it because no one else is doing it. It's not the case. Many countries worldwide have committed to action on climate change. We've done that now and I think we are in a position to take the lead on it and, and benefit economically from that.
WARWICK LONG: And just to follow up on that in terms of policy and how it works. climate policy within different countries has been caused today that the government should start to consider things like climate tariffs on products. From more intensive emissions producing countries that wouldn't have laws similar to our own Europe has that on a so if we're producing a product, without the climate policies that Europe has they can apply a tariff, is that something you would support here?
MONIQUE RYAN: I would support that and so there's what they call the carbon border adjustment mechanisms. Our way of evening up the playing field so that all countries can be held to account on the emissions that they produce. And Europe has, as you say, signaled that if we don't go down the right route and transition to low carbon and a low carbon economy that they will slap us with those tariffs and we will pay it the carbon price. We'll just pay it in a slightly different way.
WARWICK LONG: Jane Hume, and I’m about to ask you about cost of living but this is interesting, I suppose in the first place. What do you think about carbon tariffs? Do you think that's good government policy?
JANE HUME: I'm naturally suspicious of anything that brings back the old protectionist regimes that we've seen in Australia, in decades past that would make us less competitive. And it would push up, again and this relates to the cost of living, would push up prices domestically for ordinary Australians who are already suffering from high levels of inflation, higher fuel costs, high energy costs, and we don't want our imported goods to cost any more and particularly those imported goods that are inputs to things that we make here as well. That is a great concern. I am a protectionist skeptic.
WARWICK LONG: Jane Hume on The Party Line with us today. Dr. Monique Ryan as well. As people are pointing out you've got an Independent on The Party Line. It's just the name of the segment, okay. It's okay, we can handle all of this together. But Jane Hume, I wanted to ask you about cost of living because we're seeing huge inflation figures coming out at the moment and it has been an area where governments will opposition's have put a lot of pressure on governments in times past, are you keeping a close eye on cost of living increases and how that's affecting those in the Australian community?
JANE HUME: Certainly, so you know, prior to the election, Labor said that they had all the answers to the cost of living crisis that Australians were facing, and it's only got worse since then. That's why we established the cost of living committee so that we can speak to those that are affected by this and those that are causing the problems and find some practical solutions that aren't going to be inflationary and make the situation worse. Australia's paying a very high price right now, for the government inaction on tackling this. We still haven't seen an economic plan that coming out of the government promised Australia would feel a change in a change in government in their hip pocket while they are with buying high grocery prices, higher energy prices, higher mortgage repayments, and we've we've seen inflation rise just yesterday to 7.3% over 12 months. So many families are feeling the pinch over Christmas. There was an article just today I think, that said that Oz Harvest has been noticing a 50 to 70% increase in demand for their food services. And 50% of the people that are asking for their services are already employed. They're salaried employees but just cannot keep up with that cost of living.
WARWICK LONG: So you're the Chair of this Select Committee on the Cost of Living, what are some of the things, specific things that you think can be looked at to reduce the effects of the cost of living?
JANE HUME: We're looking at energy prices and what's driving those. We’re looking at grocery prices. We're going to speak to the big retailers and find out where the real pressure points are in the supply chain. We'll be speaking to government departments and most importantly, we'll be speaking to people on the ground. The intention with this committee is to travel right around the country because the cost of living issues affect people differently in different states, regions versus rural.
WARWICK LONG: So there’s no firm policy that you’re looking at yet, you’re looking at the areas?
JANE HUME: The objective of this committee is to develop those policies that will make it, that will effectively make a difference to cost of living for ordinary Australians without pushing up inflation and we have to do that for this cost of living committee because the government isn't.
WARWICK LONG: 1300222774 if you'd like to join us on The Party Line today. The Independent Member for Kooyong Monique Ryan is with you and the Liberal Senator for Victoria Jane Hume is with you as well as we discuss these issues. Monique Ryan, the cost of living pressures, are you hearing commentary on that and complaints about that coming through your electorate office already?
MONIQUE RYAN: Oh, very much so. So it's a good pressure for everybody. Everything is more expensive than it was one or two years ago and there's obviously a number of things which have feed into that. The war in the Ukraine has been a significant contributor. But we also know that the very many natural crisis that Australia has seen in the last year or two and we've seen you know, obviously, tragic floods in Western Australia this week, is an example but the very many 1 in 100 year weather events that we've seen have affected agriculture, primary industry, supply chains, and they're feeding into cost of living as well. And I think they're things that we do have to look at prospectively in terms of how to try and ameliorate the effects of climate change on the cost of living. It is a significant contributor at this point in time.
WARWICK LONG: And Jane didn't have a specific policy position I suppose to put to you but but talked through a lot of the areas that she would look, is there a policy that you think the government could look at, in terms of easing cost of living pressures?
MONIQUE RYAN: Well, I think that the the price cut that we put on gas just before Christmas was an important initiative. I think we also need to look at what we can do to decrease the price of electricity generated from coal. I do agree with Senator Hume that I don't agree with giving fossil fuel subsidies to gas and fuel companies which the government is continuing to do at the order of 12, 13 billion a year and that is money that we could put to towards better purposes, which would include decreasing cost of living pressures for Australians.
WARWICK LONG: John's in Anakie on 1300222774 Hi, John. What did you want to say?
CALLER: Look I wanted to raise the issue of this referendum. I'm not going to talk about my opinion on the referendum. But what I am very concerned about is is having a referendum and not having equal money towards either a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ argument and a complete and utter lack of detail. As it stands, successive governments haven’t been able to sort out the NDIS-
WARWICK LONG: So John, we're talking about the Voice to Parliament Referendum here that we're likely going to get a lot of the rules and details on the vote, when it will happen, how would it work, this year. And you're concerned about the fact that the government doesn't have plans to fully fund a ‘yes’ or and ‘no’ campaign to try and provide the arguments on each side of that debate for this referendum. Is that correct?
CALLER: Yes, that's that's part of it. But the process so far, there's no funding towards a ‘no’ vote, there's only funding towards a ‘yes’ vote. There’s been subtle social engineering, that’s occurring, particularly on the ABC and influencing people and their vote and I think it's trashing the democratic process. This needs to be clear and transparent with good governance and not cancelling out people with other opinions. It needs to be clear and transparent so they, what it's gonna cost and how it's going to work because we can't afford NDIS, we can't afford to look after aged care. We can't manage inflation, to say that we agree to a referendum and then they’ll sought out the detail later is trashing our democracy.
WARWICK LONG: John, thank you very much for your call. I love the engineering of the ABC that let us talk to you for so long. Jane Hume is on the line with us as well. You've been speaking a lot about the Voice to Parliament this week as well, and have been mounting the case for better funding for ‘yes’ and ‘no’ votes as part of that referendum.
JANE HUME: Look I have. And in my role as Shadow Special Minister of State, those machinery provisions, the mechanics behind a referendum are overseen by the Special Minister of State and therefore by me as well. And I’ve got to say I am concerned that there isn't an official ‘yes’ and ‘no’ campaign as there have been in so many other referendums.
WARWICK LONG: Just to clarify what John was saying, there's no public money for ‘yes’ or ‘no’ campaigns as part of this?
JANE HUME: Well, there is no ‘yes’ and no ‘no’ campaign, official campaign, so there is no public money going to those campaigns. And of course, what that then means is that when you try and apply things like donation laws, and foreign interference laws, you’re not actually, it's much harder to track where money is going. If you don't have official ‘yes’ and ‘no’ campaigns. But my biggest concern is in fact that we won't have an official pamphlet going out to households in this referendum that we have done in referendums past. In fact, this will be the first one since Phar Lap won the Melbourne Cup that we will not have had an official pamphlet going out to households.
WARWICK LONG: We’ve had the internet developed since Phar Lap won the Cup too though Senator.
JANE HUME: But there isn't even an official pamphlet going out on the internet. That's what the machinery, this legislation suggests, is that we don't need a pamphlet at all. Now, that is, I think, a great concern because in an age of misinformation, you would think that it would be most important that the government take the lead and provide that clear information.
WARWICK LONG: So you want to see as part of this, an official government site on really bringing together I suppose all the documents and there's a lot of documents out there on an indigenous voice, how it would work and what's been voted on. That's what you'd like to see?
JANE HUME: Previous referenda have had a ‘yes’ case that’s within 2000 word described, and a ‘no’ case described in 2000 words and that had been presented to households and then they make a decision, and then, also other things out there. But of course you make your own decision of the way you want to. Having official words I think is very helpful, it's something that people can trust. You know, AEC every single election, put out a household guide how to vote during the election, and they'll do that again at this referendum too. And they say that 40% of households refer to their household guide. Now, knowing that-
WARWICK LONG: So if it’s going to be done, that’s ok then?
JANE HUME: No, but this is not on the decision, it's just on the mechanics. So the AEC won't talk about the decision that needs to be made. It won't describe the ‘yes’ case or the ‘no’ case it will just say this is where you go to vote and this is how you, you know, you check the box with a cross not a circle or whatever it might be. So 40% of people refer to that. Now if that's the case, if 40% households are referring to a written document now, why would you risk a referendum when you really wanted to get up by not providing as much information to households as possible?
WARWICK LONG: Jane Hume I want to get a response on this from Monique Ryan while we're here just on that because I'm conscious of time. And Monique Ryan, the issue of the voice and not providing a pamphlet or funding a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ campaign is that important in this debate?
MONIQUE RYAN: The voice referendum is really important for Australia. And what the government has, is that they have committed to funding people understanding what a referendum means and how the process will work. The governor said that it won't produce a pamphlet, yes or no. I don't think Senator Hume understands how this has worked in the past. What has happened is that the parliament votes on a referendum and whether or not we're going to have one and on the wording that will be used put before the Australian people.
WARWICK LONG: And that’s still to come?
MONIQUE RYAN: And that will happen. And then what has happened in the past is that parliamentarians who have been supportive of that referendum have produced a pamphlet. And if there's a ‘no’ case than the parliamentarians, not the government, who are opposed to that referendum have produced that ‘no’ case there was nothing to stop Senator Hume from producing a pamphlet of her own if she's opposed to the Voice, that would necessitate her reading the appropriate documents which apparently she hasn't read to date, but there was nothing to stop people who are supportive of or opposed to the Voice from producing their own documentation, which is something that I will do for the people of Kooyong.
WARWICK LONG: Monique Ryan speaking. Jane Hume is with you as well, Jane Hume, will the Liberal Party have an official position like the National Party do on the voice before-
JANE HUME: Sorry, can I just say that I think it's very premature of Monique to suggest that she knows what my position is on the Voice at all. And I really resent that implication.
WARWICK LONG: Well I’m asking you-
MONIQUE RYAN: You told Hamish MacDonald that you hadn't read the documents. You told Hamish MacDonald earlier this week that you hadn't read the documents presented to your cabinet twice by your Indigenous Affairs Minister.
JANE HUME: I'm sorry Monique there is a 273 page document which is the the Langton Calma Report that has suggested a model for the Voice. The government has not adopted that model. If they want to adopt that model, that's fine, I will then immerse myself in what that means, but they haven't said that that's what they're going to adopt yet.
WARWICK LONG: So is the Liberal Party going to have an official position on the Voice January?
JANE HUME: Well, we have to understand what the model is first, and we don't know what that is because Anthony Albanese won't tell us what that is and what the implications of that would mean.
WARWICK LONG: So that will be a question for later this year?
JANE HUME: It is not unreasonable to ask the questions of what the implications of a referendum means. If you want it to win, if you want it to get up surely you would provide more information, not less information, and imply that anybody that questions what it might mean is somehow a bigot, or ignorant.
MONIQUE RYAN: That is not an implication that I made and I resent that.
WARWICK LONG: Just before we finish, Jane Hume thank you very much for your time on the program today. It's been great to have you on The Party Line.
JANE HUME: It's been great to be with you Warwick.
WARWICK LONG: Monique Ryan, it's been great to have you as well in the studio. Thank you very much for coming in.
MONIQUE RYAN: A pleasure Warwick.
WARWICK LONG: Dr Monique Ryan, Independent Member for Kooyong, Jane Hume Liberal Senator for Victoria, Shadow Finance Minister speaking to you on The Party Line today.