Transcript - Insiders - 22 Nov 09

(greetings omitted)

Barrie CASSIDY: Preparing to face the last week of Federal Parliament for the year, and it's sure to be a hectic one: the manager of Opposition business in the House of Representatives, Christopher Pyne. But before that, here's Penny Wong, just a few minutes ago on the Nine Network with the latest on the ETS negotiations.

Penny WONG: We anticipate that we'll be in a position to put a very clear offer to the Opposition on Tuesday morning, having gone through our Cabinet and caucus.

Laurie OAKES: The Coalition won't have an offer from, a final offer, from you in time for a shadow cabinet tomorrow.

WONG: Well, I obviously, I think the Coalition knows broadly, or certainly their negotiators know broadly, where we're likely to land. But we will be putting a formal offer, as we discussed with them, to them on Tuesday morning.

CASSIDY: Christopher Pyne, good morning, welcome.

Christopher PYNE: Good morning, Barrie.

CASSIDY: How does that sound to you then? A formal offer in time for the party room meeting on Tuesday, but not in time for the shadow cabinet meeting tomorrow.

PYNE: Well, it does surprise me actually Barrie that they've been dragging the chain in the Government on this final negotiation with Ian Macfarlane. I'm disappointed to hear that they won't be making a final offer until Tuesday morning. I'm not sure what Ian Macfarlane thinks about that - I haven't had a chance to speak to him. That's the first I've heard about it. But we have been negotiating with the Government for five weeks. That's quite a long time, as you can imagine, in the political world. To wait until Tuesday morning is really cutting it very, very fine. Of course it wasn't the Opposition that insisted that the Government have a three-month delay before they brought this legislation back into the Parliament. That was designed to give them a double dissolution trigger. And quite frankly if the Senate runs out of time because the Government is so dragging the chain, they won't be able to turn around and blame the Opposition for that. Now I hope that doesn't happen. I hope we reach a negotiated settlement that is good for jobs and good for the environment, but I think Tuesday morning is pretty much pushing out the boat.

CASSIDY: Well, the Government is saying that they're prepared to extend the Parliament if you find that it's too tight.

PYNE: Well, why should the Parliament change its legislative agenda because the Government has been too incompetent to organise its legislative agenda successfully, and because they had been looking for a double dissolution trigger? Now I'm not arguing here this morning for this matter not to be resolved by the end of the week. I'm simply pointing out that asking the Opposition to make a decision on a very important change to the Australian economy, that needs to help the environment but also protect jobs, with giving them no time to do it is a pretty, I think, dangerous position for the Government to have adopted.

CASSIDY: But there seems to be a suspicion within the Government now that you'll use lack of time as an excuse to duck a party room decision.

PYNE: Well, that won't happen. That's not the Opposition's position. But nor can the Government turn around and say: you've had plenty of time to consider this, when clearly if the final offer is Tuesday morning, that is not plenty of time. And I think the average mum and dad in Australia would think: hang on, you've had five weeks and you're giving the Opposition no time at all to make a final decision. And that isn't really acting in good faith. But I'm not the negotiator - Ian Macfarlane is. And I look forward to speaking to him perhaps after this interview and finding out what the process has been.

CASSIDY: Well, if Ian Macfarlane and Malcolm Turnbull recommend supporting amended legislation, what are the prospects now of majority support in the party room?

PYNE: Well, the process has to be gone through of course Barrie. But if Malcolm Turnbull and Ian Macfarlane and the shadow cabinet recommend that the legislation be supported with substantial amendments, I have no doubt at all that the party will support that. But that's a matter for the party room when it meets on Tuesday and I don't want to pre-empt that. But we have to wait and see of course what the final deal looks like. As one of my colleagues said the other day, it's like selling your house. You put a price on your house. You don't necessarily assume you'll get the full price, but you'd like to get as much of it as you can. And until we know what the offer is, it would be premature for us to announce a final position obviously.

CASSIDY: And you said that it's not an Ian Macfarlane/Malcolm Turnbull recommendation - it will be shadow cabinet recommendation. Does that mean then, because there won't be a formal offer until Tuesday morning, shadow cabinet will need to meet on Tuesday morning before the party room meeting?

PYNE: Well, there's no possibility that a deal would be put to the party room without first being put to the shadow cabinet. That's our process. The shadow cabinet, the shadow ministry and the party room work in tandem. But one I'm sure we'll probably have to have a meeting on Tuesday morning. I'm quite certain that can be arranged, Barrie. This is a pretty serious and important area of public policy.

CASSIDY: And if shadow cabinet decides to recommend support, are all frontbenchers then, do they have a moral obligation then, to support that position in the Senate?

PYNE: Well, our process has always been that if you are part of the shadow cabinet or the shadow ministry and that group makes a collective decision, then your obligation is to support that decision. I've been in Parliament for almost 17 years and I've never crossed the floor. I've never bucked that process. I think that's the way that collective decisions should be made and that's the best way to govern a country. But whether each person in the shadow ministry agrees with that decision is a matter for each of them.

CASSIDY: Now, did your Senate Leader, Senator Nick Minchin, go in a little hard though in the Senate when he talked about it being idiotic and crazy to support the bill before Copenhagen?

PYNE: Well, Barrie, it's very important to point out that Senator Minchin and all of the other Senate colleagues are talking to the unamended bill - the bill that we voted against last Monday and the bill that we voted against three months ago. So I don't understand the great fuss about Nick's speech and other people's speeches because they're not actually talking to an amended bill. They're not talking about the negotiation that Ian Macfarlane and Penny Wong are conducting. We have no idea what stage that has reached or what has been agreed to. So they are talking to a bill that we have already voted against, we've already described as flawed. We already believe that it will cost jobs, and it won't help the environment, and it's premature to act before our trading partners and competitors and before Copenhagen. So I do think there's been a bit of excitement about something that is actually a replay of the debate three months ago.

CASSIDY: I think Senator Minchin is saying he doesn't want an ETS. I don't think you're going to negotiate an ETS out of the package.

PYNE: Well, that remains to be seen. The deal that will be put to us on Tuesday morning, if not before, will make it clear what we have achieved in these negotiations. If the Government wants an emissions trading scheme it will need to negotiate with the Opposition. If it wants a double dissolution trigger, then we'll notice that because they won't have given us very many of our amendments. But they can't expect the Opposition to vote for an unamended bill with a few fripperies around the edges that are supposed to make, sweeten, the deal. These amendments that we've put are serious ones and we believe that they will save jobs and that they will be better for the environment. And I'm sure the Government, I hope the Government, is negotiating those in good faith.

CASSIDY: Laurie Oakes wrote yesterday that Nick Minchin would do the Liberal Party a big favour if he left politics altogether. What do you say to that?

PYNE: Well, each person in politics has to make their own decision about whether they stay or whether they go - whether they contest the next election. I don't see any evidence from my old friend Nick Minchin - we've been in politics together for over 20 years, in organisational politics and Parliament together. I don't see any evidence that he's about to pull the pin. And I - but his decisions are a matter for him.

CASSIDY: Tony Abbott - he seems, well, Malcolm Turnbull seems to think that Tony Abbott is all over the place on the issue. What do you make of his behaviour?

PYNE: Well, Tony had a strong position a few months ago that was quite the opposite to the position he seems to have adopted in recent days. But he's entitled to change his mind...

CASSIDY: But why has he done it? Why do you think he's done that?

PYNE: And he might change his mind again.

CASSIDY: Why has he changed his mind?

PYNE: Well, that's something you should ask him. But from what I can gather, he's basically saying that the half a dozen or so serious amendments that we've put to the emissions trading scheme are important ones. We're not going to be easy to negotiate with. We're not simply going to roll over and say we'll take whatever you give us. And I think that's a fair statement. Tony has obviously decided that that needed to be said so that the Government and the public know that the Opposition isn't just going to take whatever deal is put to us. We expect the Government to negotiate in good faith because we want to move amendments that will save jobs and that will be better for the environment than the legislation that the Labor Party has put to the Parliament.

CASSIDY: But Tony Abbott was saying at one stage it would be political suicide to go to an early election on this issue. Now he seems to be saying bring it on. Do you get a little confused with his thinking?

PYNE: (Laughs) Well, Barrie, they say a week is a long time in politics and that is absolutely true. And maybe in a week's time we might see a changed position again in national politics. The thing about politics, as you well know, having been around it for a long time, is that until the election time and until election day a lot of water can go under the bridge and count for very little. We are a long way from the election. We need to remember that and we need to make decisions on what we think is in the best interest of the country, and that's what the Opposition is working towards.

CASSIDY: And what's at stake for Malcolm Turnbull in all of this? If he was to recommend adopting an amended bill and had a narrow victory in the party room, would that in itself be seen as a loss?

PYNE: Well, look, it very much depends on what the negotiated settlement looks like, Barrie. I believe that Malcolm Turnbull has managed this issue with real integrity and with real character - he hasn't just walked away. The easiest thing for Malcolm Turnbull to do would have been to say we're not going to vote for this emissions trading scheme; we're not even going to put any amendments; we're simply going to vote it down. But that would have been irresponsible for the tens of thousands of Australians who are relying on their jobs being protected by Government. It would have been irresponsible for industry and irresponsible for the environment. Now Malcolm Turnbull has made some tough decisions. This has been a messy time. There's no doubt about that. This has been a difficult and messy time for the Opposition. But we are a democracy in our side of politics. We do believe in difference, having different views, and being able to work together. We will resolve this this week and then we will go forward as a united team, holding the Government to account because there are so many areas of the Rudd Government that need to be exposed for their failure. The border-protection policies are one. The pressure on interest rates because of their reckless spending are another. And there are myriad others as well. It's very important for our supporters and for the public that we refocus on the Rudd Government as soon as this emissions trading scheme issue has been put to bed one way or the other.

CASSIDY: Now what do you make of the allegations against Premier Mike Rann in your state? Should episodes such as these really matter?

PYNE: Look, Barrie, it really is a matter for Mike Rann and Michelle Chanteloise. I haven't seen the program that will be going on television tonight obviously. I think we need to see what that says and how Mr Rann responds. Generally my view is that people's private lives are their private lives and political lives are a different matter. And I think that's the general view of the Australian public.

CASSIDY: But then if she makes an allegation that sex in fact occurred inside Parliament House, does that then cloud the issue?

PYNE: Well, look, you know we had allegations of a former tourism minister many years ago. I think he even admitted to sex in Parliament House...

CASSIDY: He pleaded guilty to that, yes.

PYNE: When he was a minister. Of course he left politics not long after but that was a matter for him, that choice that he made.

CASSIDY: It did involve his wife.

PYNE: I think this is a matter for Mr Rann and for Michelle Chanteloise. I'm happy to wait and see the program. I might not even watch the program. I generally take the view that people's private lives are their private lives. And I think that we want to be very careful not to assume that the voters will change their vote on the basis of these kinds of discussions.

CASSIDY: Christopher Pyne, thanks for your time this morning.

PYNE: It's a pleasure, Barrie.

(ends)