LYNDAL CURTIS:
Josh Frydenberg and David Bradbury, welcome to News 24.
DAVID BRADBURY:
Good afternoon.
JOSH FRYDENBERG:
Thank you.
CURTIS:
David Bradbury, is there a rift between the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister over a 'No-Fly Zone' over Libya?
BRADBURY:
I don't think so. I've seen the comments that have been reported both by the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister and I think that the Prime Minister's comments have been entirely consistent with the position she has been stating from as far back as the 2nd of March. If we look at what she said in the House on the 2nd of March she made it very clear that the Government supports the UN Security Council considering this question of a no fly zone. I know that in her recent comments there has been some focus on the fact that she has said that any response should not be limited to any one particular measure, well I don't think that in any way that is inconsistent with the proposition that the no-fly zone is something that we're seeking through the UN Security Council. But to the extent that that is a part of a range of measures, then I think that position has been entirely consistent throughout.
CURTIS:
Josh Frydenberg, Coalition front-benchers have been trying to make much of this reported rift between the two but if you look at the language from both Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd they've both advocated a no-fly zone haven't they?
FRYDENBERG:
Not at all, this is a real rift with significant ramifications for Australian foreign policy. In effect Lyndal, we've got two Prime Ministers out there at the same time from the same party. Julia Gillard said that a no-fly zone is just one of the options to consider. Kevin Rudd goes on to CNN and tells the world that Australia has been asking for a no-fly zone for a couple of weeks.
CURTIS:
But didn't Julia Gillard previously advocate a no-fly zone?
FRYDENBERG:
No, no and Lyndal the point here is even the US Embassy has reportedly sought a clarification from the Australian Government. Then you have Julia Gillard's office backgrounding journalists on the front pages of Australian papers today saying Kevin Rudd is out of control. This is clearly unsustainable, the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister are not speaking, they're not syncing their lines and Stephen Smith himself, the Defence Minister, said after he left the post of Foreign Minister that there needs to be no difference in position between the Foreign Minister and Prime Minister of a country. Clearly this is not happening, it's sending the wrong message to the world and I think this is going to have very serious ramifications for Australia.
CURTIS:
David Bradbury, Kevin Rudd has been very strong in his advocacy for a no-fly zone both in his public statements, his interviews and also taking to the social media site Twitter to advocate it, has he been going a little bit over the top in this?
BRADBURY:
I think he's been strong in his advocacy of our position and there is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, I think that that is a good thing. In relation to whether or not he should be Tweeting about his position on this, I think the Prime Minister made what I thought was a pretty good point on this, and that was to say that right throughout this part of Northern Africa and the Middle East, there are a number of movements underway where people are using these forms of communication, so in terms of the strength behind the Governments advocacy of their position on this, I don't see there being any difficulty with that. To come back to the point about whether there was any difference, I listened carefully to what Josh had to say and frankly I thought he pretty much said everything that I said in terms of the comments being attributed to the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister and when you look at those comments side by side we can try and make all sorts of mischief around that, but when you look at the comments there is no inconsistency between them.
FRYDENBERG:
That's not true at all Lyndal. Clearly Julia Gillard has said it's just one of the options to be considered. Kevin Rudd is going out there telling the world that we must have a no-fly zone.
BRADBURY:
He hasn't said that's the only measure..
FRYDENBERG:
That's what he's telling us, you look at the transcript from CNN.
BRADBURY:
He hasn't said...
FRYDENBERG:
That's exactly what he's saying and the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister aren't speaking and Julia Gillard has made that point, so this is completely unsustainable.
BRADBURY:
Well that's all of your commentary Josh but the facts remain that the position that's being asserted by the Foreign Minister is not inconsistent in any way with the no-fly zone being a part of a broader suite of measures and if you view the facts of what's actually being said here rather than injecting the sort of commentary that, for obvious political reasons, you want to inject into this discussion but if you look at the facts I think that it is pretty clear that there is consistency between the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister and what they've said.
CURTIS:
Josh Frydenberg if we can go to differences of opinion on your side of politics, Nick Minchin has said that he doesn't accept Ross Garnaut's update on the science of climate change, he in fact believes that the planet is in a cooling phase, now your leader has previously said he accepts there is validity in the facts of climate change and that humans may be contributing to that. Are there still large differences of opinion amongst Coalition ranks about the science?
FRYDENBERG:
No, and Nick is entitled to his opinion and Tony Abbott as the leader has made very clear his opinion and I share his opinion that there is climate change and humans do contribute. This is not a debate about the science Lyndal, this is the debate about a tax. A new, nationwide economic measure that is going to hurt households and push up electricity prices by more than $300 per household and petrol prices by more than 6.5c per litre.
BRADBURY:
Well that's not true, your making that up Josh.
FRYDENBERG:
No, no the truth of the matter here is that this is a nationwide tax and it's going to hurt Australian families. This is a broken promise that Julia Gillard said, before the election, that no Government she leads will introduce a carbon tax, she is now taking a carbon tax. I find it very interesting Lyndal, why didn't Julia Gillard refer to a carbon tax in her speech to the US Congress? It's because the US hasn't gone down the path of a carbon tax and that's pretty notable.
CURTIS:
David Bradbury, Ross Garnaut's report pointed out that fewer people believe that climate change is happening and that there is some trouble selling the science of this. Has the Government not done enough to sell its message on the science rather than concentrating on the economic side of the argument?
BRADBURY:
Is it any wonder why people are confused around the questions of the science on climate change? The Liberal Party evidently is confused enough to have a senior Senator out there saying one thing, and then having to be pulled in to line by Tony Abbott today. I think that to the extent of what's occurred today, is now that we have some clarity that at last the Liberal Party has reaffirmed its commitment to a 5% reduction, it's affirmed its commitment that not only is climate change real but it is man made, except for Senators Minchin, Bernardi and others but at least Mr Abbott has come out and said that so at least to the extent that there can be some bipartisanship on most points I think that it's incumbent upon all members of Parliament to get out there and make the case when it comes to the climate change science. But can I make this point, now that we have clarity around those issues, the focus of this debate will really start to shift towards who has the plan to deliver those reductions, who has the plan to tackle climate change and there are two very stark alternatives here. You've got the Abbott plan which is about taking taxes out of my pocket, your pocket and the pockets of taxpayers and paying assistance to polluters, or you've got the Gillard plan which is about taxing the big polluters and providing assistance to households.
CURTIS:
Don't you have to get your detail out quicker than is planned?
FRYDENBERG:
Treasury has actually modelled this Lyndal, at $26 a tonne and that's why its going to be lifting electricity prices for households by more than $300 and petrol prices more than six cents.
BRADBURY:
Josh will jump on the scare campaign. Tony Abbott said that he was the great advocate of truth in this debate. The point that Josh has just made is entirely inconsistent within the premise of your question. Of course, we need to get further detail out there but in absence of that, you will get the scare campaigns that we're getting. But can I make this point as well and that is when it comes to a big debate of this sort, this is not going to be lost in a week or two, this is going to be a knock em' down, drag em' out fight that will go on for the entire term of this Government and we're committed to pressing ahead to make the case, not just on the science of climate change but to make the case in relation to our plan which is the best plan which is the cheapest way for our economy to make the transition to a low carbon future, we're committed to doing that and we will fight tooth and nail between now and the next election to achieve that. Detail will come, but this will be a debate that we will have.
FRYDENBERG:
Promises, promises, promises. Lyndal the truth is is that on the front page of The Australian, Craig Emerson the Trade Minister in the Gillard Government was warning the green groups and his fellow members of Cabinet, do not put a carbon tariff on the Australian economy. This could lead to a depression he said in his words and there are great divisions on the Labor side.
BRADBURY:
He's talking about tariffs.
FRYDENBERG:
He's talking about the carbon tariff.
BRADBURY:
That is one of the most misleading things I've heard in a debate that's been characterised by misleading comments. For you to say that Craig Emerson's comments were criticising the pricing of carbon…
FRYDENBERG:
Read the front page…
BRADBURY:
For you to say that his comments were to criticise the pricing of carbon is a total deception...
FRYDENBERG:
No it's not, read the front page.
BRADBURY:
The point he was making...
FRYDENBERG:
It was on the front page of The Australian today.
BRADBURY:
The point he was making was that we should not move towards green Tariffs…
FRYDENBERG:
Oh right, okay!
BRADBURY:
Green tariffs, not a price on carbon.
FRYDENBERG:
Why was he attacked by the ACTU's Jeff Lawrence? Look Lyndal, the truth of the matter is the Labor Party can try and point to the divisions on our side, but they are riddled with divisions. Not only does Kevin Rudd want Julia Gillard's job, not only is Tony Burke hovering around, not only is Bill Shorten and Greg Combet measuring up the drapes in the Lodge, but the truth of the matter is that Craig Emerson is out there effectively having a go at the Greens and the Unions and they're having a go at him. So, this is division on the Labor side.
BRADBURY:
That's just absolute diversion from the real issue.
CURTIS:
If we could move on to one final issue, AFL footballer former star Brendan Fevola spoke last night about his battles with gambling, with alcohol and with depression. While it's a tragic story for him and something that's very difficult for him to speak about, Josh Frydenberg is it good that public figures feel like they can speak about depression and mental illness in public these days?
FRYDENBERG:
Absolutely, and I did watch what Brendan Fevola was saying last night on The Footy Show and you couldn't help but feel for him and he has a number of serious problems that he needs assistance with and Andrew Robb on our side has also been very outspoken about the challenges, the health challenges that he has faced. The truth of the matter, in Australia more than 2,000 people committed suicide in any particular year and this is leading to much pain in our community. We need to do more, and it should be a bipartisan commitment to do more for early intervention to fund proper research, to fund proper health care services and we took to the last election a very significant policy in that regard and people like Patrick McGorry and John Mendoza have spoken out about the need for more resources. So I just hope that the Gillard Government, come the budget, will make a more significant contribution to helping those in need of mental health services.
CURTIS:
David Bradbury, your Government has flagged that there is more to do on mental health, but does the fact that people are willing to speak about in public, people that others may see as role models, help others to speak to deal with it and to acknowledge that it's a big part of a lot of people's lives?
BRADBURY:
I think that what has occurred with Brendan Fevola, making the confession he has to the rest of the community in a way has allowed people to gain an insight into some of the personal challenges that he has been facing. I think that it is all too easy for people to have a look at things from the sidelines and to pass judgement all too quickly on the situations that they see emerge before them. I think to hear the story of someone like Brendan Fevola makes us all think that we shouldn't be as quick to judge about some things we see and to be honest it takes a lot of courage for someone with such a profile to come out and say what he said and I hope that that will inspire many others that are facing the sorts of challenges that he has faced and continues to face, to seek the assistance they need.
CURTIS:
David Bradbury and Josh Frydenberg, thank you very much for your time on this Friday.
BRADBURY:
Thanks very much Lyndal and Josh.
FRYDENBERG:
Thanks Lyndal, thanks David.