JOURNALIST: Climate Change Minister Penny Wong joins us now on Breakfast. She’s also in our Parliament House studio. Minister, good morning.

WONG: Good morning Fran.

JOURNALIST: Minister according to Senator Nick Minchin on Four Corners last night, the Liberal party room is packed with climate change sceptics. Given that, what are the prospects of getting the legislation passed?

WONG: Fran, Malcolm Turnbull said he would never lead a party that was not committed to action on climate change. I think what we saw last night on Four Corners was a direct attack on Mr Turnbull’s authority by someone no less than the third most senior person in the Coalition and the most senior Senator in the Coalition. So really Mr Turnbull, if he is serious about acting on climate change, has to live up to the tough talk. And he should repudiate the views that were put last night by members of the Coalition. Some of which were really quite outlandish, to suggest that somehow action on climate change, or people committed to climate change is the new religion, replacing communism. These are the sorts of extraordinary claims made by Senator Minchin.

JOURNALIST: Well Malcolm Turnbull repudiates the sceptics all the time. He is a public advocate of some kind of emissions trading scheme. In terms of politics, I don’t know why the Government continues to poke a stick at Malcolm Turnbull on this issue. The PM was doing that quite deliberately in a speech last Friday when the Opposition Leader is on your side on this issue. And clearly, and very publicly, has enormous problems within the party.

WONG: Fran, he is the leader of the party. This is not poking a stick at him. This is saying if you are the leader of your party and you have senior members of your party saying these sorts of things, then that requires a public repudiation. We are…

JOURNALIST: … but he’s already repudiated that and he said he’s not a climate sceptic…

WONG: Well I think the question that most Australians would have is, who is speaking for the Liberal party? I think the question most Australians would have is is the Coalition able to negotiate in good faith if these are the views of many of its Senators. I think Malcolm is the leader of the party and his views are clear. The question is whether or not he can match the talk with action. Unfortunately for him, many members of his party have directly attacked his authority. This is not an issue of the Government’s making, Fran. If there is a stick that is being poked at Mr Turnbull it is being poked by Senator Minchin and others.

JOURNALIST: This is not an issue of the Government’s making of course, but the Government seems to be –and you’re continuing today – making hay with it. I’m just wondering why you would do that given, isn’t it in your interests that you want this legislation passed, to have a Coalition leader who is more supportive of the direction the Government wants to take.

WONG: Fran, we want an agreement to get this legislation through. After over a decade of delaying and talking about it, we want this legislation through the Parliament. That is why I am engaged in negotiations at length with Ian Macfarlane and I will continue to do that. But ultimately this issue will come down to whether Mr Turnbull is able to exercise authority over those in his party room. And let’s remember that many of the people who appeared last night on these issues, repudiating – directly repudiating – his authority on these issues were his Senators.

JOURNALIST: Well in terms of your negotiations with Ian Macfarlane, he calls you Penny, you call him Macca. It sounds like things are going well around the negotiating table.

WONG: Well it would take a long time if every time we spoke to each other Senator and Mr Macfarlane.

JOURNALIST: How are the negotiations going?

WONG: Look as I have said, he is a very straight shooter. They have put forward a range of demands, we’re working through those. Obviously, particularly given the fiscal situation, what I’ve made clear is that we are not able to accept the entirety of what they have put forward – it would be fiscally unsustainable. We have laid out two tests which we will continue to hold to because we think they are the right tests and that is: environmentally effective and economically responsible. And we will continue to talk to Ian about the range of positions they have put forward.

JOURNALIST: Ian Macfarlane last night expressed publicly that he has got a tough job ahead of him convincing the party room. Has he expressed that to you?

WONG: Well I wouldn’t disclose what he talks to me about privately. But I don’t think anybody would be under any illusions that it is going to be tough for him if he and I do get to a position where we are able to agree. It will be tough for him to get whatever position he has negotiated through the party room. I think Senator Minchin demonstrated that last night.

JOURNALIST: Does that bring some pressure onto you to be a little bit more flexible than you otherwise might have been even if it mightn’t be strictly in your political interests or maybe even in the environmental interest?

WONG: Well our flexibility is constrained primarily by the fiscal situation where we already see that the scheme does come at a cost to the budget out to 2020. So every additional ask, every additional request comes at a cost. So that has to be very clearly in mind. We are not going to walk away from the national interest. We will continue to do what we think is responsible. That’s how I will be guided in these negotiations.

JOURNALIST: Do you think you will get an agreement?

WONG: I think it will be difficult. I think it will be particularly difficult given what happened last night on the television. I think the issue there demonstrates that there are too many people in the Liberal Party who are not fair dinkum on climate change, who do think it is some sort of conspiracy. Goodness knows why they went to the last election supporting action on climate change and an emissions trading scheme – which was John Howard’s policy. But I think last night people made very clear their prejudices on this issue and that is unfortunate because it is clearly in the national interest for us to act, it is a pity that more members of the Coalition, particularly the Liberal Party, could not take a more responsible approach to this issue.

JOURNALIST: Senator Wong the Prime Minister has called climate change the great moral challenge of our time. What does it say then that five weeks before Copenhagen we still don’t know whether he is going to be attending the summit?

WONG: Oh Fran, the Prime Minister said if the Danish hosts, the Prime Minister of Denmark, believes it is a good thing, a useful thing for leaders to attend, then the Prime Minister is willing to attend.

JOURNALIST: But I am just wondering why it wouldn’t be useful?

WONG: Come on Fran, that is a step, you are drawing a very long bow there. Kevin said ‘I am willing to attend if this helps get the deal’, but ultimately the responsibility for making that judgement should be with the Danish hosts. If they think that there is benefit in leaders attending in order to get an agreement, the Prime Minister has said he is willing. Now I don’t think you can doubt the Prime Minister or the Government’s willingness to work on this issue or the importance we place on it. This is, we have made this a very significant priority. We have made this a significant domestic priority as well as international. The Prime Minister is a friend of the chair, working with other like-minded world leaders to try and get an agreement. That is on top of the work that we have been doing at my level and at negotiator level. Clearly this is a key priority for us and the reason is simple. This is an issue; climate change will hit Australia hard and fast. We are extremely vulnerable to increases in temperature. We know what this will mean – not just for now but for the future – and we think this generation of political leaders, media leaders, community leaders need to take responsibility.

JOURNALIST: The UN Secretary General, the head of the Intergovernmental Panel, the Danish Prime Minister and the chief US Negotiator all now say there are really only prospects for political agreement at Copenhagen, not a legally binding agreement, do you agree with that?

WONG: I have said, for sometime actually, that what we need at Copenhagen is that effective political agreement. We need the key step that ensures we know what we are going to do, that we will take action, but not every detail of the treaty is going to be sorted out by Copenhagen. That is not surprising. But what we do need is to take that opportunity to take that key political step to get the key political commitment for action and what sort of action that regrettably as yet we do not have. It’s the step that the world needs.