JOURNALIST: In the middle of all of this is our Climate Change Minster Senator Penny Wong. The Senator’s on the line, good morning to you.

WONG: Good morning to you Steve.

JOURNALIST: Were you always going to concede agriculture?

WONG: [laughs] We were always going to have a good negotiation with the Opposition once they were prepared to negotiate. They’ve said to us this is one of their key asks. We’ve indicated, as you’ve said, over the weekend that we’re willing to move on this because we’re serious about trying to get this through. 

JOURNALIST: All good diplomats go into negotiations with things they’re prepared to give up though, so did you always feel that that was something you were relaxed about giving up?

WONG: Look I’m not sure I’d, if I answer that I’m sure you’ll then ask me about a range of other things about whether I’m relaxed about them or not, but look I always knew going into these negotiations, the Government always knew going into these negotiations, we were going to have to move on some issues. We’ve been clear that we’re prepared to move on agriculture. They’ve got a whole range of other things they want. They’re not going to get everything they want, and we’re going to have to continue to consider what we are prepared to move on. Ultimately what we’re trying to do is get some legislation through the Parliament.

JOURNALIST: Senator Penny Wong’s with us, what does that actually mean for farmers?

WONG: What it means is that farmers have the certainty that we’re not including them in the Scheme, where as previously we had said we’d review that at 2013, and they wouldn’t come in until 2015. What we’ve said is we’ll agree, as part of these negotiations, to accept the Opposition’s proposition that agriculture is excluded indefinitely and what we want to do is work through with the Opposition how farmers can contribute to the task of reducing emissions.

JOURNALIST: Have you got some ideas on that?

WONG: We’ll we’ve already got one idea on the table and it’s in the legislation, that forestry, people can gain credits for planting trees. But there are a range of other ideas around. Some of which the National Farmers’ Federation have put forward, some of which the Opposition has flagged, so we’re going to have a discussion with them about that.

JOURNALIST:  What does this change do to any of your projected incomes? I mean if you had gone beyond 2015 and taxed the emissions from cattle for example, had you done the numbers on that?

WONG: Look we hadn’t included anything from agriculture in our budget figures. We released, you might remember, 10 year figures about the cost of the scheme; we didn’t include any income from selling permits to agriculture because it was still reasonably uncertain. So this won’t have an effect on the figures we’ve released. It does have an effect on the scheme. It does mean we’re saying we’re going to exclude farmers. So we have, as I’ve said, given what the Opposition has asked.

JOURNALIST: Is this about politics or the environment?

WONG: Oh look I think this is about getting a scheme through and that’s ultimately about doing our bit…

JOURNALIST: So it’s a political solution?

WONG: Well I think what I’m saying is that the environmental outcome is achieved by getting the legislation through. We’ve spent a lot of years in this country having a chat about this issue, and we’ve been talking about it a lot since we’ve come to Government. We’ve done a lot of consultation, talked to lots of people and really we’re at the point now where we have to take action. That’s what we want to do this fortnight and that’s what we’re focused on.

JOURNALIST:  Will this put pressure now back on Malcolm Turnbull?

WONG: I suppose you’d have to ask Malcolm that. I mean all I can say is this is the thing they said was one of their key asks, we’ve indicated we’re prepared to move on this. I hope that the way in which these negotiations are proceeding will continue. Ultimately the question will be whether Malcolm can get this through his party room. And we’ve seen a lot of Liberals, as well as many National Party people, making it pretty clear it doesn’t matter what is negotiated they’re still going to oppose it.

JOURNALIST: Shouldn’t the Nationals now - given their constituency - support you?

WONG: I don’t know if you’ve spoken to Barnaby Joyce in recent times, but I don’t think he’s a man for the turning and I don’t think anything we would put up would change his mind. He’s made his mind up and he doesn’t believe that climate change is being caused by human activity and he’s not going to support any action on it. I disagree with him but I don’t think he’s going to be changed.

JOURNALIST: Are you negotiating on the impact of electricity costs, still?

WONG: There is a long list that the Opposition put to us. Agriculture was one of the things on the list; there’s a lot of other things on the list. As I said at the outset obviously they’re not going to get everything they asked for. Equally we’re going to have to move on a range of things and we’ve indicated we’re prepared to move on agriculture. Other than that, I’m going to leave the negotiations for the negotiating room and have that discussion with Ian Macfarlane.

JOURNALIST: Will we get a bill within the two weeks that you’re back sitting?

WONG: I hope so, that’s the idea.

JOURNALIST: Your timetable is still to have that happen?

WONG: Absolutely.

JOURNALIST: Now APEC was pretty pessimistic over the weekend, so was the Prime Minster. Does it not now make a little more sense for us to be a little patient and to wait given the pessimism around the world leaders at the weekend?

WONG: Well the first issue about waiting more is the cost. We had figures out last week from the International Energy Agency which estimated the cost of every year of delay of action on climate change to be around $500 billion, that’s globally.  That gives you some sense of what the cost is of continuing just to have a chat about this as opposed to acting. So we’re very clear, we think the right thing to do is to act and we think it’s in Australia’s economic interest for us to act. In terms of Copenhagen, I’ve been saying for some time, what we need is the effective international political agreement to tackle climate change. That isn’t the same thing as the final legally binding outcome, what some people might call the treaty. We’ve always thought that might take a little more time to dot the I’s and cross the T’s on that one. But we need that effective political agreement, that’s what we’ve got to push for.

JOURNALIST: So is having a framework of legislation in and passed with a pause button on it an option?

WONG: Well we, we effectively have…

JOURNALIST: I should explain what I mean by that?

WONG: Yeah, I think I get it, I think I get what you mean and I guess what I’d say is we’ve made our scheme flexible enough that it can take into account whatever comes out of Copenhagen. So we won’t set our, the cap, that is the limit on how much is, how much carbon pollution is emitted each year from Australia. We won’t set those until we know what the rest of the world is doing. But what we’ve got to do Steve is give the signal to investors. There’s a lot of long term investors that need to be informed by a carbon price, that need to know what the policy framework is for action on climate change. That’s why we need to get this legislation through, we need to get that signal going because as the International Energy Agency has told us, and as has Prime Minister Howard was told by his own advisers, the longer you delay the higher the cost.

JOURNALIST: I see the former Telstra boss, Ziggy Switkowski, this morning saying we need 50 nuclear reators by the middle of the century. Still not an option from your point of view?

WONG: Well I think Mr Switkowski is advocating on behalf of, you know, the nuclear industry, and that’s fine. He’s entitled to put that view. I think you’ve asked me these questions before and I just think we’re better off putting our money into renewable energy and that’s what we’re doing.

JOURNALIST: The Prime Minister’s back in the country, he’s going to apologise today, offer a bipartisan apology to half a million forgotten Australians. I wonder if you’ve caught up with your Senator colleague Steve Fielding’s comments on his way to Parliament this morning, if now I’ll play them for you... That’s quite a remarkable admission by Senator Fielding there, I mean, do you make any, are you going to comment on that?

WONG: Only to say that obviously that’s a deeply distressing event for him and I would acknowledge how difficult that’s been for him. I think it’s obviously an intensely private issue and I wouldn’t want to make comment on it other than to express sympathy.

JOURNALIST: Appreciate your time as usual, thanks a lot.

WONG: Good to speak with you.

ENDS