Sky News AM Agenda
Kieran Gilbert and Mark Butler MP
7 June 2010
8:35am
E & OE
Subjects: Nielsen poll, mining tax, leaders debates
KIERAN GILBERT:
Thanks for being with us on AM Agenda this morning. Joining me now from Melbourne is the Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities, Senator Mitch Fifield. Good morning Mitch.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Good morning Kieran.
GILBERT:
And in Sydney from our CBD studio in Sydney the Parliamentary Secretary for Health Mark Butler. Mark good morning to you. First to you. What do you make of this poll? The support for the government, for your government has fallen off the cliff.
MARK BUTLER:
Morning Kieran. Morning Mitch. Well Kieran you get paid to commentate on polls. That’s not in my job description. But look its not uncommon for governments in a lead-up to elections to suffer polls like this. I guess what it does show is that if the election were held today, Tony Abbott would be Prime Minister and I’m sure he’s be happy with this. Mitch would be the Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities. It demonstrates that we’ve got a job of work ahead of us to explain and communicate our agenda not only for the nation right now but for the nation into the future in terms of building a strong economy, improving our health and hospital system and bringing in the Budget back into surplus. We also have a job of work ahead of us to communicate to the community what an Abbott-led government would mean to them. Cuts to hospitals, cuts to school funding and the return of Workchoices. So these polls do come and go as the glib phrase goes. But we know we’ve got a tough job ahead of us to win the election. First term governments in Australia have always had a very tough road to hoe to win government again.
GILBERT:
Mark, the pollster John Stirton you heard in the first part of the program. He was pointing to the emission trading scheme delay and suggesting that you look at the record vote for the Greens, 15 percent, that it’s just basically fallen off your government and to the Greens and that people have lost faith in Kevin Rudd. That they don’t know what he believes in and what he stands for given that he campaigned so much on the ETS. Was that now in hind-sight a mistake to delay the ETS?
BUTLER:
Well, look the ETS was very difficult for us. There’s some irony if the Greens vote has improved because of that, because people should know and remember that the Greens opposed action on climate change in the Senate on a number of occasions. If the Greens had supported our CPRS scheme, our action on climate change, it would now be law and we would be looking forward to its implementation over the next couple of years. So the Greens record on action on climate change is not a particularly happy one. But we had a very tough decision to take in the face of ongoing obstructionism in the Senate by the Liberal Party and also by the Greens and also a very disappointing outcome in Copenhagen. That was all against the backdrop of the nation and the government having to steer its way through the toughest economic period globally since the 1930’s. So look it was a very tough…
GILBERT:
…It was messy wasn’t it? The way the Prime Minister and the government handled it was messy. It looked like you were discarding this core belief.
BUTLER:
It was a very tough decision to take after trying on many occasions to get a plan through the Senate against the obstructionism of the Liberal Party and the Greens. We’d worked incredibly hard, particularly the Prime Minister and Minister Penny Wong had worked incredibly hard with industry, with environment groups, with the broader community and with those parties in the Parliament whose support we needed in the Senate and at the end of the day it was a decision by Tony Abbott, Nick Minchin and Bob Brown that blocked the ETS.
GILBERT:
Ok, Mitch Fifield lets look at your side of things. Obviously you’re pleased this morning. I can’t see your face but our viewers can. I’m sure you’re smiling. Tony Abbott’s approval rating though, 41 percent Mitch. Is that your weak point? Are people still not convinced by your leader?
FIFIELD:
To be fair Kevin Rudd has been leader for best part of four years. Tony has only been our leader for about six months and I think considering that relatively short period of time, what he’s managed to achieve has been nothing short of remarkable. The recovery in our primary vote from the end of last year is a cause of some heart and some hope for us. I think these poll results are partly a vindication of our decision at the end of last year to adopt a new leader, a new policy and a new attitude. But we’re still very much the underdogs. First-term governments aren’t often defeated. But I think the message from this poll for the government is that the public pay on results. The public expect governments to keep their word. They don’t expect them to break their election commitment on things as fundamental as the ETS. The number of times I’ve heard the government blame the Coalition for their abandonment of the ETS. If you believe in a piece of legislation, you keep putting it up to the Parliament. And if you really believe in it then you’ll go to a double disillusion election if necessary to try and get it through. The public are sick of this government breaking its word. They’re sick of this government blaming everyone else for their problems.
GILBERT:
Does Tony Abbott have a bit of work to do? I mean to convince people he is a viable alternative? It seems the approval rating in this poll, while the numbers are good for the Coalition, for him individually, it’s fallen further than Kevin Rudd.
FIFIELD:
You’ve got to look at all of the poll numbers. The position that the Coalition is in today is a dramatic improvement on where we were at the end of last year and Tony Abbott deserves the full credit for that. But we have a job to earn the trust of the Australian people. You will have noticed over the last 20-odd years there’s been a process of de-alignment from the major political parties going on. Once upon a time, 80 or 90 percent of people would support the major political parties. They’d essentially vote the same way as their parents and if someone was tired of one of the parties, they’d automatically go across to the other major party. That doesn’t happen now. We have a very sophisticated electorate and the onus is on us to earn the trust of the public and that’s what Tony Abbott is endeavouring to do.
GILBERT:
Mark Butler, the poll in the Herald and The Age today suggest that you’ve got a fair bit of work to do when it comes to the mining tax. 41 percent according to the Nielsen Poll support the mining tax. 49 percent oppose it. The mining industry has commissioned a Newspoll in The Australian as well that shows the numbers are even worse when you look at the marginal seats in WA and Queensland. How important is it for the government to get this message to win this debate on the mining tax because it seems you’ve got a lot way to go.
BUTLER:
This is an incredibly important piece of economic reform so it’s incredibly important that we continue to explain its benefits to the broader community and I know the Prime Minister and the Treasurer and others are committed to doing that. But as the Prime Minister has said over the last week or two, this is not something that is going to be resolved this week or next week. It’s got a fair way to go yet. We’re committed to continuing the process of consultation and negotiation with those constructive parts of the mining industry that are willing to come to the table and talk constructively with us. But, look this is incredibly important for the future of the nation economically and in terms of infrastructure and our national savings in terms of our superannuation reforms that are linked to it. So, you know, this is very important work for the Prime Minister and the Treasurer and they’re committed to continuing it.
GILBERT:
Mitch Fifield, the Coalition seems to; well you’ve locked in behind the mining industry on this. Is this really the key point upon which this election will turn in your view? Or do you look at other issues like the asylum seeker debate? In the poll today, the Nielsen Poll, it seems that your recent policy has been endorsed by two-thirds of those surveyed.
FIFIELD:
This election will be fought on a range of issues. Labor’s inability to control the borders will be one. Labor’s inability to manage the Budget will be another and the mining tax looks like it’s shaping up to be another significant issue. With the mining tax, one of the most astounding things I think is having an Australian Government that is seeking to demonise a particular industry sector. An Australian Government that is seeking to demonise individual business executives. That’s not something we’ve seen in Australia before. It’s not the fault of the mining industry that this government didn’t consult. It’s not the fault of the mining industry that this government has got the design wrong. And it’s not the fault of the mining industry that this government can’t actually sell and explain its tax. We’re now seeing the quite extraordinary situation where the Prime Minister is paying actors in TV ads with taxpayer’s money to explain a mining tax that he himself is incapable of doing. So we now have paid actors in government TV ads trying to do the job that the Prime Minister and the Treasurer should be doing.
GILBERT:
Ok Mitch, just one last issue I want to get both of your thoughts on. Mitch, first to you. The Greens yesterday, the Greens leader Bob Brown expressed an interest in being part of the leader’s debate. What do you think of that? The Greens are now at fifteen percent support. Where do they have to hit? What sort of threshold before the Greens leader should be included as a three-way debate?
FIFIELD:
Well I think the threshold for a party to be included in a leaders debate is if they’re likely to be in a position where they could form government. The Greens are nowhere near that situation. Leaders debates should be for the leaders of those political parties who are putting themselves out as alternative Prime Ministers. If the Greens want to have a debate with other minor parties then they should feel free to do that. But I don’t think it’s appropriate that they’re part of the major leaders debate. And also we’ve seen this before. Many a time, the Australian Democrats were said to be on the verge of winning a seat in the House of Representatives. Were seen to be on the verge of becoming a new major force in Australian politics. I think what we’re seeing with the Greens is probably that again. But certainly I think they’re a long way off major party status.
GILBERT:
Mark Butler, just quickly. I think you might be on a unity ticket with Mitch Fifield there. You guys don’t want to get the same opportunity that Nick Clegg got, the Liberal Democrats leader in the UK?
BULTER:
Well I think Mitch is right. This is a debate for alternative Prime Ministers and the situation in Britain was quite different. Nick Clegg led a party with several dozen members of Parliament in the lower house of Parliament in Britain. And on the polls given the nature of the British voting system of first-past-the-post system, Nick Clegg did have a possibility of becoming Prime Minister as long as that possibility was. So the situation is quite different. Bob Brown has never won a lower house seat as far as I know at a general election. He won a by-election in the south-coast of NSW, but not at the general election and I don’t think that anyone, even him, that he has a vague hope of being an alternative Prime Minister and that really is what the debates are for to test the views of alternative Prime Ministers.
GILBERT:
Mark Butler and Mitch Fifield, appreciate your time today gents. Have a good week.
BUTLER:
Thanks a lot.
FIFIELD:
You too Kiernan.
ENDS