JOURNALIST: This report will go to the Climate Change Minister, Senator Penny Wong, and she’s been good enough to join us in our Canberra studio. Senator, good morning.

WONG: Good morning to you.

JOURNALIST: Is it alarmist?

WONG: Look I think this is a report which confirms why we have to act on climate change. It confirms the sorts of impacts that we risk and demonstrates yet again why we have to act as a nation to reduce our contribution to climate change. And as you and I have discussed, the first step on that is to pass the legislation the Government has got before the Senate.

JOURNALIST: Onto that in one sec. What’s the premise that they have at the heart of this report in regard to rising sea levels?

WONG: Well the Committee has looked at a range of the scientific opinion and has come to a view about the sort of risk we face from sea level rise. It is the case that scientists vary in terms of the extent of sea level rise. But I think it is quite clear from the consensus science that this is one of the consequences of climate change and we simply can’t ignore it. It is not a case of ignoring it and it will go away.

JOURNALIST: I’m not sure if you have read it all yet – and I wouldn’t expect you to have done that – but is this a worse case scenario, nightmare, doomsday style document?

WONG:  Well in fact the Intergovernmental Panel Report has a fairly wide range of potential sea level rises – between about 18cm and 76cm I think. Since that was done – and that is regarded as reasonably conservative science, in that it looks at very much where the consensus is - since that time, since that report, we have had other reports which do suggest potentially higher sea levels rises. Obviously what governments need to do at all levels is to act on this risk. We have to reduce our contribution to climate change as well as adapt to the climate change we are not going to be able to avoid.

JOURNALIST: Twenty per cent of the Tasmanian coastline at risk. I mean, is that an exaggeration?

WONG: Well as I said Steve, these are scientific assessments of potential risk. And we would be, I think, irresponsible as politicians, as community leaders, to just pretend that these risks don’t exist. That is why we have got to act now and that is why we have to move forward to reduce Australia’s contribution to climate change. Because of course, we know that the impacts will worsen if we don’t act.

JOURNALIST:  Well let’s deal with that. Will the ETS, your ETS legislation, stop the tide rising?

WONG: Our Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme will stop, will reduce, for the first time Australia’s contribution to climate change. We will start to do that. It has to be part of a global solution. We have always said that. But of course, you don’t get a global agreement if you are not prepared to do your part. We have to be prepared to do our bit at home. And as this report demonstrates, we have got a lot riding on action on climate change internationally as well as domestically. We have got a very strong national interest in making sure we act and the rest of the world act.

JOURNALIST: But we can’t say that a reduction in carbon pollution will stop sea levels rising, can we?

WONG: We can say that a reduction in carbon pollution across the world will reduce the level of climate change that the world has to cope with.

JOURNALIST:  But is that all the world?

WONG: Well, the world has to reduce its contribution to climate change. But of course Australia has to play our part in that. You can’t turn up to these negotiations and say can you all please reduce your contribution to climate change, but we in Australia we don’t want to our bit?

JOURNALIST: I understand that, but the question I asked you the other day: if India and China continue to pollute, is that going to mean that we can’t ourselves have any impact on our own sea levels rising?

WONG: I think you and I had a pretty lengthy discussion about this being a global problem. I don’t think anybody disagrees with that. It is a global problem, the only question is what is the best way for Australia to influence the response to that global problem. The best way for us to do that is to do our bit – stop continuing to increase our contribution to climate change. Because that is what is happening. Australia is each year – unless this scheme is passed – each year Australia is actually contributing more to climate change worsening.

JOURNALIST: You and I both know that Barnaby Joyce is a climate change sceptic. But I’ll play you what he has had to say about this today anyway just to get your reaction.

JOYCE: If we end up with an ETS, you have two choices. If sea levels rise yes you could possibly, it could possibly affect your house and that is a major problem. But if you end up with an ETS, the sea levels will still rise, it will still affect your house, you’ll just have a massive tax when you try to rebuild it.

JOURNALIST: Is he there giving a view that many people agree with, do you think?

WONG: Look I think Barnaby is honest at least, that he doesn’t believe in climate change and therefore, I think everything he says has to be taken bearing that in mind. He is going to find his own arguments on why we shouldn’t act because he has been quite public about the fact that he doesn’t believe that climate change is something Australia needs to act on. I don’t agree with him, the Government doesn’t agree with him, and I have to say I think many Australians don’t agree with him. Most people that I meet think climate change is real. They want to do something about it. And what we are saying is the way we do something about it is to put a limit for the first time on the carbon pollution Australia puts into the atmosphere.

JOURNALIST: But you’re giving him credit for at least being honest to you.

WONG: Look I don’t mind Barnaby, I’m happy to debate him. I think he is wrong and I think one of the things that is a real problem is that if we simply pretend that this risk doesn’t exist, I think that is an irresponsible thing for current political leaders to do. This is about being responsible. This is about reducing the risk for our children and for our grandchildren. This report today demonstrates yet again just some of that risk, just some of the sorts of things we could be facing. I think it is irresponsible for us to walk away from this and pretend it is not happening.

JOURNALIST: So this just won’t be a dust gatherer in the bottom drawer of your desk?

WONG: Absolutely not. I mean we asked for this report.

JOURNALIST: What will you do with it?

WONG: Well we will certainly consider it. I mean some of things in it we have already started acting on. For example, the report refers to the fact that we are doing what we call a vulnerability assessment of Australia’s coastline. So actually mapping the coastline to get some sense of where the risks are. We will look at the report; we will consider what we can act on in it and how else the report can inform what the Government does.

JOURNALIST: So is one option to take a heavy hand on coastal development?

WONG: Look on this issue, I think given how important climate change is and given how widespread the potential risks and responses are, I’m very much of the view we have to take a cooperative approach and a coordinated approach. So we need to work with state and local government, we need all levels of government working together in their different fields of responsibilities to respond to this problem.

JOURNALIST: If we accept the figures in this report Senator, it would put much of the South Pacific underwater. Where are those people going to go?

WONG: And I think, as was made very clear at the Pacific Islands Forum in Cairns, this is an issue that is very front of mind for many of our Pacific Island neighbours. And some of them are in a much more precarious position than others. Obviously Kiribati is one of the Island nations that is often talked about. They are already experiencing king tides. They are already experiencing inundation, as are many other Pacific Island nations. And they are a reminder of why the world has to act. Why it isn’t a responsible path for us just to say we are going to pretend that this isn’t happening.

JOURNALIST: And do we have a moral responsibility to take those people if their countries are disappearing beneath them?

WONG: I think we have a responsibility first to act on climate change, to reduce the level of risk that we expose both ourselves and our neighbours to. We do that by reducing our contribution to climate change here in Australia. A second thing we have a responsibility to do as a regional power is to work with these nations to help support them in their response to climate change. Now various island nations have different views about what their priorities are. Some of them want for example to look at different agricultural practices, others are looking at how they protect better against sea level rise. We have a significant program of assistance for these nations which will continue.

JOURNALIST: As usual, I appreciate your time. Can I just ask you one more question. Cubbie Station, a story again this morning suggesting that you’re not going to buy back Cubbie’s water rights through your buy back fund. You’re saying this Cubbie Station is overvalued, are you?

WONG: What we are saying is, well, two things. First I don’t propose, as I’ve said many times, to negotiate with any particular seller through the media or publicly. We are open to purchasing water from willing sellers that is good value for money for taxpayers…

JOURNALIST: They’ve come to you four times, haven’t they?

WONG: That is good value for money for taxpayers and good value for the environment. I’ve said publicly before that we didn’t consider the tender, we didn’t put in a bid for the tender, because the advice to Government was that what was being asked didn’t meet the tests I’ve just outlined. As I said, I don’t propose to deal with this through the media. We have made our position clear.

JOURNALIST: But they will have to come back to you, will they?

WONG: Well, any seller – we will look at any willing seller’s water and we will assess whether that water is good value for the Australian taxpayer and good value for the environment.

JOURNALIST: Thanks for your time Senator, appreciate it.

WONG: Good to speak with you.

ENDS