Transcript of
Senator Mitch Fifield
Shadow Parliamentary Secretary
for Disabilities, Carers and the Voluntary Sector
Sky News AM Agenda
Kieran Gilbert and David Bradbury MP
5 October 2009
8:40am
E & OE
Subjects: Peter Dutton, ETS
KIERAN GILBERT:
Welcome back to AM Agenda and welcome to our panel. Joining me from Sydney, Labor MP David Bradbury. Good morning David.
DAVID BRADBURY:
Good morning Kieran.
GILBERT:
And from Melbourne Liberal frontbencher Senator Mitch Fifield. Senator Fifield thanks for your time.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Good morning.
GILBERT:
I want to start with you. This Peter Dutton preselection really didn’t end up the way senior Liberals wanted it to and you heard what Barnaby Joyce had to say a little earlier, that suggestions of a conspiracy, a National Party conspiracy in his view have no credibility.
FIFIELD:
Well Barnaby did say that Southerners should be careful in their comments so I will certainly take up his injunction. Peter Dutton is one of the great talents of the Liberal Party. He is a big part of the Party’s future. He was a terrific Assistant Treasurer. He is a very effective Shadow Minister for Health. And like all my Federal Parliamentary colleagues I want to see Peter remain in the Parliament. But I think in understanding what happened at the weekend it is important to appreciate there is something of a compact between the Parliamentary Party and the Organisational Party. The Parliamentary Party reserves for itself the right to determine policy. And the Organisational Party in return reserves for itself the right to select parliamentary candidates. And that is a prerogative which they, quite rightly, jealously guard. Obviously I want to see Peter remain in the Parliament. And I must say I was heartened yesterday to hear that Malcolm is in close consultations with the LNP organisation and I hope that Malcolm, together with the LNP organisation, can work through this and find a way for Peter to remain in Parliament where we need him.
GILBERT:
How damaging would it be if a way forward can’t be found for Peter Dutton?
FIFIELD:
Well the simple fact is we need to find a way to have Peter Dutton in Parliament. This is an opportunity for the Queensland Division of the Party to show maturity and to show that it is a sophisticated political operation and that it can cope with this circumstance and that it can find a way for Peter Dutton to remain in Federal Parliament to continue the good work he is doing.
GILBERT:
David Bradbury the Labor Party would be pleased to see the back of him, he is one of the Liberal Party’s better performers in Parliament?
BRADBURY:
Well look I think it is extraordinary what we are seeing here Kieran. We’re seeing the rise of this new expression that when it comes to Liberal Party preselections in Queensland it really is strictly a matter for the National Party. The fact that you were interviewing Barnaby Joyce a bit earlier in the program shows what a shemozzle this has turned out to be. Just a couple of points that I’d make, and the first one is that the Liberal Party finds itself in this situation because Peter Dutton chose not to stay and fight in a seat that as an incumbent with only a small swing needed, I think that was hardly a vote of confidence in Malcolm Turnbull, in him cutting and running on the seat of Dickson. But I think the bigger issue really is that whether it’s Malcolm Turnbull’s leadership or whether it is Peter Dutton in Dickson or McPherson or Wright or wherever it may be, the Liberal Party seems to be much more focused and interested in their own jobs and their own internal matters than in key matters affecting the national interest. It’s a case in point when you see Peter Dutton who is the Shadow Health Minister. We as a Government are out there consulting in communities all around the country to try and determine the best way forward, to address the massive health challenges that we as a country face, and you’ve got the Shadow Health Minister navel-gazing and out there knocking on doors in several seats around Queensland looking for a place at the next election. I think it really does show that the Liberal Party has become very internally focused and that’s not what I think people are expecting of the Opposition.
GILBERT:
Mitch Fifield you wouldn’t really be, you wouldn’t envy Karen Andrews coming into Parliament when all of the Liberals are suggesting that Peter Dutton would have been the better option.
FIFIELD:
Well I think we have to respect that the Queensland Division of the Party like all Divisions of the Party have fair, open, transparent and democratic preselection processes. The preselectors have made a decision. That’s a fact. We now have to work with the Queensland organisation to find a way to keep Peter Dutton in Parliament. That is a matter for the Party organisation but I think with goodwill, wisdom and judgement they should be able to find a way through.
GILBERT:
Malcolm Turnbull at the weekend, and there were reports he was threatening to quit if he doesn’t get his way with the Emissions Trading Scheme, he spoke about this on the ABC, he denied that he is threatening to quit. Let’s recap a little bit of what the Liberal leader had to say yesterday.
OPPOSITION LEADER MALCOLM TURNBULL:
I certainly haven’t said that and I am very committed to my service to the people of Wentworth and I’ve got no plans to leave. You know my tenure as the Member for Wentworth is subject only to the support of the electors of Wentworth. But as far as the climate change policy is concerned, I am committed to the Liberal Party playing a constructive role in the debate about the design of the Emissions Trading Scheme, I am committed to the Liberal Party taking effective action on climate change and proposing amendments which will protect thousands of Australian jobs which are at risk from a poorly designed, flawed Labor Emissions Trading Scheme.
GILBERT:
Mitch Fifield, Malcolm Turnbull denies he’s threatened to quit, but would his leadership not be untenable if he was rolled on this issue?
FIFIELD:
Well Malcolm has made it clear that he is going to continue as our Leader regardless of the Party Room determination on the ETS legislation. And I think that is a good thing because these issues should be considered on their merits, not against the backdrop of leadership. But if I can just put this in some context. There are colleagues who are comfortable with voting for Labor’s ETS, with appropriate amendments, before Copenhagen. There are others, including myself, who have a slightly different perspective. There’s no difference in terms of the belief that there should be an ETS. There’s no difference in seeing the need for negotiations. There’s no difference in seeing the need for amendments. The difference relates purely to timing. And my belief is that we shouldn’t conclude negotiations on amendments prior to Copenhagen for the simple reason that we won’t know many of the pertinent facts before Copenhagen, such as what a majority of nations intend to do. For that matter, if we are also to give effect to another element of Liberal policy, which is to ensure that Australian business and industry isn’t worse off compared to America, then as a matter of logic we need to wait until the American design is finalised and we need to wait until we know what is going to pass through the US Senate before we can make that determination. Now Kieran, what I have just put to you is in fact Coalition policy. And I hope in doing so that I’m not branded a maverick, a rebel, an outrider, a dissenter or a smart-alec. I think in looking at these issues it’s important…
GILBERT:
But you are certainly, we you are dissenting from them, when it comes to Malcolm Turnbull’s approach, that’s not what he is advocating.
FIFIELD:
Well I think it is important when we are looking at these issues, regardless of your rank in the Party organisation, to treat the views of colleagues with respect and with courtesy. And I think if we do that, then we can reach a good outcome in the Party Room deliberations.
GILBERT:
So are you saying that that hasn’t been the case thus far, that your colleagues haven’t been treated with respect?
FIFIELD:
As I say, I don’t think it’s accurate or helpful to describe colleagues who have the view that I do in relation to negotiations not being finalised before Copenhagen, as rebels or dissenters or outriders. I don’t think that is accurate and I don’t think that is helpful.
GILBERT:
Or smart-alecs or the other term that the Opposition Leader used the other day? You’re saying that as well?
FIFIELD:
Well I think that the best thing to do is to treat colleagues with courtesy and respect. That’s my intention and I think that is the best way forward for all colleagues.
GILBERT:
And you don’t think the Liberal Leader has done that?
FIFIELD:
We should treat each other with courtesy and respect. And we should put the focus on the Labor Party. We should continually put to the Labor Party the onus to explain, why is it that we need to have this legislation passed just a matter of weeks before Copenhagen? We are not going to know what most of the rest of the world is doing before Copenhagen so it is prudent to wait until after Copenhagen so that we have in possession all the relevant information before making a decision that has profound consequences for Australian business, Australian jobs and the Australian economy.
GILBERT:
All lot of your backbenchers, the Liberal backbenchers have spoken out, or a number of them. Not many frontbenchers. Now you have this morning. Did it take much, did you have to contemplate this before you decided to speak out against the Leader’s position?
FIFIELD:
Kieran all I am doing is stating the Party’s policy as it stands. And the Party’s policy as it stands today is…
GILBERT:
But it’s not, the Party’s policy as dictated by the Shadow Cabinet and the Leader is to negotiate an outcome before Copenhagen. You’ve said this morning, and our viewers have heard it, that you don’t back that approach.
FIFIELD:
No Kieran let’s be very clear here. The policy of the Parliamentary Party is that we don’t support a vote before Copenhagen, now it may well be that amendments are brought to the Party Room, and the Party Room takes a different decision. But as Party policy stands today, our position is that we don’t take a vote on the ETS legislation before Copenhagen.
GILBERT:
But you’re, you’re clutching at straws because you know what the Leader has been advocating.
FIFIELD:
No Kieran the Party policy is clear, and as we all know, amendments are being drafted by the relevant Shadow Minister, who has undertaken to take those to the Party Room. Now the Party Room may well decide that negotiations should take place with the Government. The Party Room may well decide that they should be put into the Parliament before Copenhagen. That may well be the decision of the Party Room. But, the Party policy, as it stands, and I repeat it, is that a vote not be taken supporting the Government’s ETS legislation before Copenhagen.
GILBERT:
Alright, David Bradbury to you, is this a difficulty for the Government to the extent that the Prime Minister has repeatedly said he doesn’t want to go to an early election. But if he doesn’t get the ETS through, that might be the only thing, the only option he’s got. Or is that all just talk from the Prime Minister, that he actually wouldn’t mind going early?
BRADBURY:
Well look we are not in the business of trying to take the electorate back to an election any time earlier than would otherwise be the case. We don’t want that. But what we are very much committed towards trying to achieve is to implement our Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme and to take action against climate change. Having heard what Mitch has just said, I’m even more confused as to what the Liberal Party position is when it comes to the CPRS. Every time I hear a different member whether it is frontbench or backbench of the Liberal Party I’m getting a different position. Malcolm Turnbull on the one hand says that he wants to take action on climate change. The opportunity that he had, not that long ago when the legislation came before the Parliament, he chose to not even propose one amendment. We know have this rather artificial debate that’s going on, where Malcolm Turnbull says that he is going to stake his leadership on securing agreement within his own Party Room to put forward a proposal. So we are not even talking about the Liberal Party playing an active part in achieving a solution or the implementation of a CPRS to tackle climate change. We are now only talking about him staking his leadership on securing agreement for Liberal Party policy. Having heard what Mitch has just said, I guess that’s not to underestimate what a job that’s going to be for him. But frankly I think if Malcolm Turnbull is serious about wanting to take action on climate change, he needs to be a part of that solution. And that means coming forward with amendments, negotiating in good faith, and being able to carry, to demonstrate the leadership within his Party Room to carry enough support within that Party Room to implement what is going to be one of the biggest reforms our economy has needed to implement in a long time.
GILBERT:
Ok. David Bradbury and Mitch Fifield, as always, appreciate your time today, thank you very much.
BRADBURY:
Good to be with you Kieran.
FIFIELD:
Thank you Kieran.
GILBERT:
That’s all for the program.
ENDS