WEBVTT - The Opposition Leader on ditching net zero

0:00:00.520 --> 0:00:03.240
<v Speaker 1>Already and this this is the Daily Off.

0:00:03.400 --> 0:00:06.840
<v Speaker 2>This is the Daily OS. Oh, now it makes sense.

0:00:14.680 --> 0:00:17.480
<v Speaker 2>Good morning and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Wednesday,

0:00:17.520 --> 0:00:18.960
<v Speaker 2>the nineteenth of November.

0:00:19.120 --> 0:00:21.279
<v Speaker 3>I'm Billy fitz Simon's I'm Sam Kazlowski.

0:00:21.600 --> 0:00:25.239
<v Speaker 2>The Coalition has announced it will abandon Australia's target of

0:00:25.280 --> 0:00:29.640
<v Speaker 2>net zero by twenty fifty to instead focus on affordable energy.

0:00:30.000 --> 0:00:33.280
<v Speaker 2>On Sunday, they promised they would bring down energy bills

0:00:33.320 --> 0:00:37.600
<v Speaker 2>for Australians by removing the renewable energy targets enshrined in

0:00:37.720 --> 0:00:41.560
<v Speaker 2>law by Labor. It is the biggest policy announcement from

0:00:41.600 --> 0:00:45.559
<v Speaker 2>the Coalition since their loss at the last election in May. Today,

0:00:45.720 --> 0:00:48.280
<v Speaker 2>I sit down with Susan Lee, who is the leader

0:00:48.320 --> 0:00:51.760
<v Speaker 2>of the Liberal Party, about the reasoning behind that decision.

0:00:56.240 --> 0:00:58.640
<v Speaker 3>Billy, firstly, I'm really excited for people to listen to

0:00:58.680 --> 0:01:01.920
<v Speaker 3>this chat. I think it was a really interesting interview.

0:01:02.000 --> 0:01:04.200
<v Speaker 3>But I do think that there's a lot of concepts

0:01:04.200 --> 0:01:05.959
<v Speaker 3>that come up during the chat that we need to

0:01:05.959 --> 0:01:08.800
<v Speaker 3>get our head around so that we can understand exactly

0:01:08.840 --> 0:01:11.280
<v Speaker 3>what you guys are talking about. Why don't we start

0:01:11.280 --> 0:01:12.800
<v Speaker 3>with net zero as a key concept?

0:01:13.240 --> 0:01:17.360
<v Speaker 2>So net zero refers to balancing the amount of greenhouse

0:01:17.400 --> 0:01:20.960
<v Speaker 2>gases we produce with the amount that we then take

0:01:21.080 --> 0:01:23.600
<v Speaker 2>out of the atmosphere. And what you need to know

0:01:23.640 --> 0:01:26.280
<v Speaker 2>is that Australia currently has a plan to reach net

0:01:26.360 --> 0:01:27.560
<v Speaker 2>zero by twenty.

0:01:27.319 --> 0:01:30.960
<v Speaker 3>Fifty and so over the weekend the coalition announced it

0:01:31.000 --> 0:01:34.960
<v Speaker 3>will abandon that target. Will let the opposition leader explain

0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:37.800
<v Speaker 3>their thinking behind that and how they got to that decision.

0:01:38.000 --> 0:01:40.600
<v Speaker 3>But to be very clear, that wouldn't happen unless they're

0:01:40.640 --> 0:01:41.960
<v Speaker 3>elected to government, right.

0:01:42.040 --> 0:01:44.440
<v Speaker 2>No, So just be clear. We're talking about the coalition.

0:01:44.520 --> 0:01:47.000
<v Speaker 2>They are made up of the Liberal Party and the Nationals.

0:01:47.040 --> 0:01:49.960
<v Speaker 2>Susan Lee, who I am interviewing today is the leader

0:01:49.960 --> 0:01:52.960
<v Speaker 2>of the Liberal Party. She took over from Peter Dutton

0:01:53.080 --> 0:01:56.000
<v Speaker 2>after their loss at the last election, and so they

0:01:56.040 --> 0:02:00.560
<v Speaker 2>are currently in opposition. So all of their policy and nenouncements,

0:02:00.720 --> 0:02:02.600
<v Speaker 2>the one that we heard on the weekend and the

0:02:02.600 --> 0:02:06.200
<v Speaker 2>ones that they i'm sure will continue to announce, is

0:02:06.240 --> 0:02:08.800
<v Speaker 2>them saying this is what we would do if we

0:02:08.840 --> 0:02:12.280
<v Speaker 2>are elected at the next federal election, which isn't due

0:02:12.360 --> 0:02:14.360
<v Speaker 2>until twenty twenty eight, so we have a while.

0:02:14.520 --> 0:02:17.480
<v Speaker 3>So we've got about two and a half years until then. Yes,

0:02:17.520 --> 0:02:19.800
<v Speaker 3>but if they won and Susan Lee were still in

0:02:20.080 --> 0:02:22.560
<v Speaker 3>power as the leader of the Opposition, she would then

0:02:22.600 --> 0:02:25.640
<v Speaker 3>be the Prime Minister exactly. One last thing to note

0:02:25.800 --> 0:02:28.040
<v Speaker 3>is the Paris Agreement. It comes up a bit in

0:02:28.080 --> 0:02:30.600
<v Speaker 3>the interview quickly talking through what that is.

0:02:30.880 --> 0:02:34.640
<v Speaker 2>So the Paris Agreement is an international treaty on climate change.

0:02:34.680 --> 0:02:37.200
<v Speaker 2>It was signed by countries around the world in twenty fifteen,

0:02:37.520 --> 0:02:41.160
<v Speaker 2>and under that agreement, countries agreed to limit global warming

0:02:41.240 --> 0:02:45.320
<v Speaker 2>to one point five degrees above pre industrial levels. Now

0:02:45.320 --> 0:02:48.120
<v Speaker 2>to do that, there are specific targets that need to

0:02:48.160 --> 0:02:50.200
<v Speaker 2>be met, but we get into all of that in

0:02:50.240 --> 0:02:50.840
<v Speaker 2>the interview.

0:02:51.120 --> 0:02:53.400
<v Speaker 3>A really helpful outline. Why don't we get straight into

0:02:53.400 --> 0:02:55.680
<v Speaker 3>that chat with Billy and the Opposition leader here.

0:02:55.560 --> 0:02:58.600
<v Speaker 2>It is Susan Ly thank you for joining the Daily Oz.

0:02:58.800 --> 0:03:02.160
<v Speaker 2>It's a pleasure talking today because on Sunday the Coalition

0:03:02.200 --> 0:03:05.400
<v Speaker 2>announced that it would abandon Australia's net zero by twenty

0:03:05.440 --> 0:03:08.799
<v Speaker 2>fifty target. For anyone who missed that announcement, do you

0:03:08.840 --> 0:03:10.160
<v Speaker 2>want to just take us through it first?

0:03:10.600 --> 0:03:12.480
<v Speaker 1>Thank you, Billy, And I said when you and I

0:03:12.520 --> 0:03:14.880
<v Speaker 1>caught up last time, soon after I became leader, that

0:03:14.919 --> 0:03:18.160
<v Speaker 1>I wanted to meet with young Australians wherever they are

0:03:18.760 --> 0:03:21.360
<v Speaker 1>and listen to them. And I have, and I've made

0:03:21.400 --> 0:03:24.640
<v Speaker 1>a decision, and I appreciate the opportunity to explain it.

0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:29.639
<v Speaker 1>Our plan that I'm talking about today is about affordable

0:03:30.160 --> 0:03:34.760
<v Speaker 1>energy and responsible emissions reduction, and I know that a

0:03:34.760 --> 0:03:36.920
<v Speaker 1>lot of young people are really struggling with the cost

0:03:36.960 --> 0:03:40.040
<v Speaker 1>of living right now, and that's one of the reasons

0:03:40.120 --> 0:03:44.720
<v Speaker 1>we've made affordability of energy central to the plan. But

0:03:44.800 --> 0:03:47.400
<v Speaker 1>emission's reduction is still important. And when you talk about

0:03:47.440 --> 0:03:49.760
<v Speaker 1>net zero you mean a long term target that the

0:03:49.800 --> 0:03:53.440
<v Speaker 1>government has signed up to. Unfortunately, they're not going to

0:03:53.440 --> 0:03:56.640
<v Speaker 1>meet that target, and the costs that they've incurred so

0:03:56.800 --> 0:03:59.560
<v Speaker 1>far haven't really bought emissions down either.

0:04:00.200 --> 0:04:02.960
<v Speaker 2>So you're saying that you have gone away, you've listened

0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:06.000
<v Speaker 2>to young people, and as a result of that, you

0:04:06.200 --> 0:04:08.160
<v Speaker 2>have decided to abandon net zero.

0:04:09.160 --> 0:04:13.040
<v Speaker 1>Not quite in the terms that you've just presented. What

0:04:13.120 --> 0:04:15.160
<v Speaker 1>I've done is listen to young people and they've told

0:04:15.200 --> 0:04:17.680
<v Speaker 1>me they care about the climate, and I care about

0:04:17.680 --> 0:04:18.200
<v Speaker 1>the climate.

0:04:18.520 --> 0:04:23.000
<v Speaker 2>But with this decision, abandoning net zero bad for the climate.

0:04:23.160 --> 0:04:27.440
<v Speaker 1>It's a target that unfortunately the government is not going

0:04:27.480 --> 0:04:29.960
<v Speaker 1>to reach and already if you look at where they've

0:04:30.000 --> 0:04:34.480
<v Speaker 1>come from and where they're going, their emissions from Australia

0:04:34.480 --> 0:04:38.080
<v Speaker 1>are flatlining. But most importantly, energy prices are going up.

0:04:38.120 --> 0:04:40.839
<v Speaker 1>And remember they told you that renewables were the cheapest

0:04:40.880 --> 0:04:43.679
<v Speaker 1>form of power and your energy bills would come down,

0:04:44.360 --> 0:04:49.480
<v Speaker 1>and they've gone up forty percent. So because energy is unaffordable,

0:04:49.720 --> 0:04:52.800
<v Speaker 1>everything is unaffordable. So we have to get the cost

0:04:52.839 --> 0:04:56.160
<v Speaker 1>of energy affordable. But we do need to play our

0:04:56.200 --> 0:04:59.880
<v Speaker 1>part in reducing emissions, which is why I've said that

0:05:00.160 --> 0:05:03.960
<v Speaker 1>a coalition government would stay signed up to the Paris Agreement.

0:05:04.800 --> 0:05:07.919
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so you're saying we need to abandon climate targets

0:05:07.960 --> 0:05:11.400
<v Speaker 2>to bring down the cost of energy bills. But experts

0:05:11.400 --> 0:05:13.839
<v Speaker 2>have said that there are a mix of reasons for

0:05:13.960 --> 0:05:17.680
<v Speaker 2>higher energy bills. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an example

0:05:17.720 --> 0:05:20.160
<v Speaker 2>of one of those reasons. So what is the evidence

0:05:20.200 --> 0:05:25.160
<v Speaker 2>that higher energy prices are caused by renewable energy.

0:05:25.400 --> 0:05:28.440
<v Speaker 1>The government told you that your energy bills would go

0:05:28.520 --> 0:05:32.479
<v Speaker 1>down because of renewable energy, and your energy bills have

0:05:32.560 --> 0:05:34.960
<v Speaker 1>gone up by forty percent. This is all after the

0:05:35.080 --> 0:05:38.240
<v Speaker 1>Ukraine War. Any effects from that have washed out.

0:05:38.080 --> 0:05:40.720
<v Speaker 2>And while that war is still ongoing. So we are

0:05:40.760 --> 0:05:41.920
<v Speaker 2>still seeing the effects of that.

0:05:42.000 --> 0:05:45.119
<v Speaker 1>Yes, but the effects that Australia is seeing are from

0:05:45.279 --> 0:05:48.280
<v Speaker 1>the renewable energy build and the government's energy policy. So

0:05:48.320 --> 0:05:51.400
<v Speaker 1>the government has said we're building eighty two percent of

0:05:51.440 --> 0:05:56.200
<v Speaker 1>the grid to be renewable by twenty thirty. They're woefully

0:05:56.200 --> 0:05:59.160
<v Speaker 1>off track with that. That actually is not going to happen,

0:05:59.200 --> 0:06:01.680
<v Speaker 1>and the government privately, I think would admit this too.

0:06:02.279 --> 0:06:03.960
<v Speaker 1>They're failing to do what they said they would do,

0:06:04.000 --> 0:06:05.760
<v Speaker 1>which is to keep prices down.

0:06:06.240 --> 0:06:08.320
<v Speaker 2>I want to move on just quickly. I've heard you

0:06:08.320 --> 0:06:10.640
<v Speaker 2>say before that you do believe in the science behind

0:06:10.720 --> 0:06:11.400
<v Speaker 2>climate change.

0:06:11.440 --> 0:06:12.000
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely.

0:06:12.560 --> 0:06:15.760
<v Speaker 2>You were standing next to National's leader David littl Proud

0:06:15.839 --> 0:06:19.640
<v Speaker 2>on Sunday as he explicitly said that this decision is

0:06:19.760 --> 0:06:22.240
<v Speaker 2>not based on science. Is that right.

0:06:23.560 --> 0:06:26.080
<v Speaker 1>I don't believe that's what he said. He said that

0:06:26.240 --> 0:06:29.080
<v Speaker 1>the economics is what we need to focus on.

0:06:29.279 --> 0:06:31.880
<v Speaker 2>Say, this debate is not about science.

0:06:32.480 --> 0:06:35.479
<v Speaker 1>Mister bib is not one predicated on science, It is

0:06:35.480 --> 0:06:38.880
<v Speaker 1>one predicated on economics. He's certainly not walking away from

0:06:38.920 --> 0:06:40.560
<v Speaker 1>the science of climate change. There may have been a

0:06:40.560 --> 0:06:44.000
<v Speaker 1>misunderstanding there because I've heard him on other occasions and

0:06:44.240 --> 0:06:47.640
<v Speaker 1>we're very clear that we accept the science of climate change,

0:06:47.760 --> 0:06:51.080
<v Speaker 1>which is why we're staying with the Paris Agreement, because

0:06:51.360 --> 0:06:53.000
<v Speaker 1>that's what the Paris Agreement is about.

0:06:53.200 --> 0:06:56.200
<v Speaker 2>Let's look at the Paris Agreement. You say that you

0:06:56.400 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 2>will remain committed to it, but to reach the goals

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:03.520
<v Speaker 2>set out in that agreement, countries need to achieve net

0:07:03.600 --> 0:07:07.640
<v Speaker 2>zero by twenty fifty. So if you're serious about ditching

0:07:07.680 --> 0:07:11.160
<v Speaker 2>net zero, why not leave the Paris Agreement as well.

0:07:11.400 --> 0:07:14.360
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to disagree with you about the net zero

0:07:14.360 --> 0:07:16.440
<v Speaker 1>by twenty fifty being in the Paris Agreement. What the

0:07:16.480 --> 0:07:20.000
<v Speaker 1>Paris Agreement says is that countries must submit their nationally

0:07:20.040 --> 0:07:24.040
<v Speaker 1>determined contributions and they can resubmit them or as some

0:07:24.200 --> 0:07:26.600
<v Speaker 1>have changed the baseline accounting to make them look a

0:07:26.600 --> 0:07:27.120
<v Speaker 1>bit different.

0:07:27.440 --> 0:07:29.880
<v Speaker 2>It's more specific than that, though, because so it has

0:07:29.920 --> 0:07:33.320
<v Speaker 2>the target of limiting global warming to one point five degrees,

0:07:33.840 --> 0:07:38.720
<v Speaker 2>and in order to scientifically achieve that, net zero is required.

0:07:38.880 --> 0:07:41.280
<v Speaker 1>So believe it is the only way to achieve that target.

0:07:41.720 --> 0:07:44.080
<v Speaker 1>How much can Australia achieve if we're only one percent

0:07:44.160 --> 0:07:45.239
<v Speaker 1>of those global emissions?

0:07:45.280 --> 0:07:47.160
<v Speaker 2>But are you saying if we can't one hundred percent

0:07:47.200 --> 0:07:48.720
<v Speaker 2>get there, then we shouldn't even try.

0:07:49.040 --> 0:07:51.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm saying that we should responsibly play our part in

0:07:51.920 --> 0:07:53.760
<v Speaker 1>the ways that I've said, which is bringing down our

0:07:53.800 --> 0:07:55.760
<v Speaker 1>own emissions, because that's what we should do.

0:07:56.160 --> 0:07:56.400
<v Speaker 3>Lok.

0:07:56.400 --> 0:07:58.400
<v Speaker 1>I know the lots of disagreement about what it means,

0:07:58.680 --> 0:08:01.360
<v Speaker 1>but let's take a step back. Does anyone in Australia

0:08:01.400 --> 0:08:04.400
<v Speaker 1>really think that we would let an international agreement determine

0:08:04.440 --> 0:08:07.880
<v Speaker 1>a policy that will crash Australia's businesses, that would make

0:08:07.880 --> 0:08:10.560
<v Speaker 1>our young people inherit a lower standard of living, that

0:08:10.600 --> 0:08:14.200
<v Speaker 1>would even then not make an appreciable difference to the

0:08:14.200 --> 0:08:17.200
<v Speaker 1>world's climate. Now, I appreciate that Labours put this target

0:08:17.240 --> 0:08:19.960
<v Speaker 1>on the table and they've talked a big game, but

0:08:20.080 --> 0:08:22.440
<v Speaker 1>when you look at where they are now and where

0:08:22.480 --> 0:08:25.280
<v Speaker 1>they are expecting to land, it's almost impossible.

0:08:25.800 --> 0:08:28.560
<v Speaker 2>Let's get back to the specifics of the Paris Agreement.

0:08:29.280 --> 0:08:34.240
<v Speaker 2>It is specific in saying that countries targets can't go backwards.

0:08:34.720 --> 0:08:39.240
<v Speaker 2>Under this policy that you've proposed, Australia's targets would go backwards.

0:08:39.640 --> 0:08:43.439
<v Speaker 2>So is the coalition strategy to remain part of the

0:08:43.480 --> 0:08:46.840
<v Speaker 2>Paris Agreement but then actively breach it.

0:08:47.440 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 1>Well, we'll sit at the table in the forum that

0:08:50.280 --> 0:08:52.720
<v Speaker 1>is the Paris Agreement, and we'll talk about what our

0:08:52.800 --> 0:08:55.840
<v Speaker 1>nationally determined contributions will be in our national interest when

0:08:55.840 --> 0:08:58.400
<v Speaker 1>that time comes. And when you say that, so, what

0:08:58.480 --> 0:09:00.640
<v Speaker 1>other countries are doing right now, because because many of

0:09:00.679 --> 0:09:03.280
<v Speaker 1>them have realized it's not possible to reach targets that

0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:06.920
<v Speaker 1>they set, is they're changing their baseline accounting, so they're

0:09:06.920 --> 0:09:09.800
<v Speaker 1>watering it down, or they're taking certain things out and

0:09:09.840 --> 0:09:12.240
<v Speaker 1>saying we're still there, but we're not counting this, this,

0:09:12.320 --> 0:09:16.040
<v Speaker 1>and this. So plenty of countries are changing what they're

0:09:16.080 --> 0:09:17.079
<v Speaker 1>prepared to do in.

0:09:17.040 --> 0:09:20.360
<v Speaker 2>W they're not going backwards on the targets.

0:09:19.600 --> 0:09:23.040
<v Speaker 1>They are because well, countries that are saying our nationally

0:09:23.080 --> 0:09:25.360
<v Speaker 1>determined contributions are now going to be calculated in a

0:09:25.400 --> 0:09:26.040
<v Speaker 1>different way.

0:09:26.280 --> 0:09:27.679
<v Speaker 2>But who's going backwards on that time?

0:09:27.720 --> 0:09:30.920
<v Speaker 1>Well, several countries are doing things differently because of this.

0:09:31.120 --> 0:09:32.440
<v Speaker 1>And i'll get your list.

0:09:32.240 --> 0:09:33.800
<v Speaker 2>Gone backwards, well, look forward to them.

0:09:33.840 --> 0:09:36.080
<v Speaker 1>It depends, It depends what you mean by going backwards.

0:09:36.200 --> 0:09:39.040
<v Speaker 1>The Labor Party has given a target, so they've given

0:09:39.080 --> 0:09:42.880
<v Speaker 1>forty three percent by twenty thirty and they've said between

0:09:43.000 --> 0:09:45.560
<v Speaker 1>and twenty thirty five it'll be sixty two to seventy percent.

0:09:46.559 --> 0:09:49.320
<v Speaker 1>There is no way that that can be reached. So

0:09:49.800 --> 0:09:51.880
<v Speaker 1>they're going to have to go backwards if they're still

0:09:51.920 --> 0:09:54.320
<v Speaker 1>in power, because there's no way they can reach that.

0:09:54.520 --> 0:09:56.960
<v Speaker 1>There's no way that number will work at all. But

0:09:57.000 --> 0:10:00.000
<v Speaker 1>it's not just about a target and an international agreement.

0:10:00.120 --> 0:10:03.120
<v Speaker 1>Important though international agreements are. It's about what's in the

0:10:03.160 --> 0:10:04.680
<v Speaker 1>best interest for our country.

0:10:05.120 --> 0:10:07.280
<v Speaker 3>We're going to get back to that chat between Billy

0:10:07.320 --> 0:10:09.160
<v Speaker 3>and the opposition leader Susan Lee in the SEC. But

0:10:09.160 --> 0:10:10.800
<v Speaker 3>here's a quick message from our sponsor.

0:10:14.040 --> 0:10:17.400
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so we've established what you're not doing, Let's look

0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:20.400
<v Speaker 2>at what you would do. Can you say, in really

0:10:20.440 --> 0:10:24.320
<v Speaker 2>clear terms, how would a future coalition government bring energy

0:10:24.320 --> 0:10:25.679
<v Speaker 2>prices down.

0:10:26.040 --> 0:10:28.480
<v Speaker 1>By getting more supply into the system. I talked about

0:10:28.480 --> 0:10:31.280
<v Speaker 1>a balanced energy grid. At the moment, the grid is

0:10:31.400 --> 0:10:33.800
<v Speaker 1>out of balance. There are too many renewables at it.

0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:37.080
<v Speaker 1>Renewables are good, but by the time you firm them

0:10:37.120 --> 0:10:41.120
<v Speaker 1>with dispatchable, reliable base load power, and by the time

0:10:41.160 --> 0:10:44.080
<v Speaker 1>you build the transmission systems, by the time you put

0:10:44.120 --> 0:10:47.720
<v Speaker 1>all that in there, it's incredibly expensive. And the delays

0:10:47.880 --> 0:10:50.200
<v Speaker 1>in that equipment coming to Australia is a year to

0:10:50.280 --> 0:10:52.840
<v Speaker 1>three years behind, so that's pushing up prices. So what

0:10:52.880 --> 0:10:56.160
<v Speaker 1>we're saying is, yes, renewables in the right place, but

0:10:56.240 --> 0:10:57.600
<v Speaker 1>let's bring gas into the system.

0:10:58.000 --> 0:11:01.360
<v Speaker 2>But you're confident that you could increased supply of gas

0:11:01.920 --> 0:11:04.360
<v Speaker 2>and at the same time bring down emissions.

0:11:04.520 --> 0:11:08.920
<v Speaker 1>Well, we've got probably the second or third largest resource

0:11:08.920 --> 0:11:11.559
<v Speaker 1>of gas in the world. We're the second or third

0:11:11.679 --> 0:11:18.200
<v Speaker 1>biggest exporter of LNG. Renewables cannot operate without base load

0:11:18.240 --> 0:11:22.040
<v Speaker 1>power to what we call firm the grid. So in

0:11:22.240 --> 0:11:25.840
<v Speaker 1>Spain and Portugal a few well not that long ago,

0:11:26.200 --> 0:11:29.679
<v Speaker 1>they tried to run the whole Iberian Peninsula off renewables.

0:11:29.960 --> 0:11:30.839
<v Speaker 2>They said that they were.

0:11:30.800 --> 0:11:31.840
<v Speaker 1>Going to be able to do it. So if you

0:11:31.920 --> 0:11:35.760
<v Speaker 1>like an experiment, it didn't work. One part of the

0:11:36.160 --> 0:11:39.920
<v Speaker 1>grid got out of frequency and there was a cascading

0:11:40.040 --> 0:11:44.280
<v Speaker 1>series of shutdowns. The whole peninsula went dark. Eleven people

0:11:44.320 --> 0:11:46.000
<v Speaker 1>lost their lives, and it was.

0:11:46.840 --> 0:11:51.120
<v Speaker 2>The Spanish government said that wasn't because of renewables.

0:11:50.559 --> 0:11:54.520
<v Speaker 1>It was it was because renewables were unable. The generation

0:11:54.800 --> 0:11:58.520
<v Speaker 1>of electricity was too renewable to keep the grid stable.

0:11:58.520 --> 0:12:01.439
<v Speaker 2>But the official report on that there is no evidence

0:12:01.480 --> 0:12:02.680
<v Speaker 2>that that was because of renewal.

0:12:03.320 --> 0:12:07.080
<v Speaker 1>The honest answer to this is that's what happened. But

0:12:07.080 --> 0:12:09.880
<v Speaker 1>back to the LG, well maybe not, back to the

0:12:09.920 --> 0:12:13.000
<v Speaker 1>fact that you can't. You do need to have baseload

0:12:13.000 --> 0:12:16.640
<v Speaker 1>and dispatchable power and that helps renewables and it's a

0:12:16.679 --> 0:12:18.800
<v Speaker 1>good thing. Now, the only way you can get zero

0:12:18.880 --> 0:12:20.200
<v Speaker 1>emissions is to have nuclear.

0:12:20.960 --> 0:12:24.360
<v Speaker 2>The Coalition still supports nuclear energy as part of this policy.

0:12:24.640 --> 0:12:28.240
<v Speaker 1>We are completely technology agnostic and that includes nuclear. And

0:12:28.280 --> 0:12:29.800
<v Speaker 1>when I talk to a lot of young people, and

0:12:29.840 --> 0:12:31.719
<v Speaker 1>I know there's quite a movement of young people in

0:12:31.760 --> 0:12:36.200
<v Speaker 1>Europe to be very pro nuclear because it's zero emissions,

0:12:36.559 --> 0:12:40.319
<v Speaker 1>and it's baseload power, and it's reliable and what it.

0:12:40.280 --> 0:12:42.920
<v Speaker 2>Takes it at least fifteen years to build.

0:12:43.120 --> 0:12:46.280
<v Speaker 1>Well, look, you know there's different technologies being built all

0:12:46.280 --> 0:12:48.480
<v Speaker 1>the time and being explored, and I know some of

0:12:48.520 --> 0:12:52.320
<v Speaker 1>those are micro nuclear reactors which are very small, and

0:12:52.360 --> 0:12:55.400
<v Speaker 1>I know that overseas in the US they're considering how

0:12:55.440 --> 0:12:58.280
<v Speaker 1>they might be applied to data centers and AI. Now

0:12:58.280 --> 0:12:59.400
<v Speaker 1>the technology is not their.

0:13:00.280 --> 0:13:04.760
<v Speaker 2>Explaining of policy on technology that you don't know will exist.

0:13:05.360 --> 0:13:07.720
<v Speaker 1>Well, we have to be technology agnostics. So whatever's there,

0:13:07.960 --> 0:13:10.400
<v Speaker 1>whatever it can provide, should be part of our plan.

0:13:10.600 --> 0:13:14.360
<v Speaker 1>That's the critical thing. Now we're agnostic about what the

0:13:14.400 --> 0:13:17.280
<v Speaker 1>technology is, but it needs to fit in with our

0:13:17.360 --> 0:13:20.600
<v Speaker 1>affordable electricity scheme and it needs to do the job,

0:13:20.920 --> 0:13:25.319
<v Speaker 1>because ultimately we can't have power that people can't pay for.

0:13:25.880 --> 0:13:28.800
<v Speaker 1>But I would encourage you to do some more research

0:13:28.840 --> 0:13:31.960
<v Speaker 1>on some research. No, no, I'm not suggesting you have

0:13:32.000 --> 0:13:35.240
<v Speaker 1>it on zero emissions nuclear people don't think about it.

0:13:35.480 --> 0:13:38.679
<v Speaker 2>I've also done some research on that because.

0:13:38.440 --> 0:13:40.040
<v Speaker 1>A lot of young people are talking to me about

0:13:40.080 --> 0:13:43.480
<v Speaker 1>about nuclear and yeah, I mean people my generation obviously

0:13:43.520 --> 0:13:46.520
<v Speaker 1>have the memory of military grade nuclear and some of

0:13:46.559 --> 0:13:48.559
<v Speaker 1>them that's not a good memory, and I understand that.

0:13:48.800 --> 0:13:51.079
<v Speaker 1>But your generation is, well, this is interesting. It has

0:13:51.080 --> 0:13:54.480
<v Speaker 1>no emissions and if we we want to look after

0:13:54.520 --> 0:13:57.400
<v Speaker 1>the planet, and we do, we should definitely consider it.

0:13:58.160 --> 0:14:01.040
<v Speaker 2>Just lastly, I want to turn to the space around

0:14:01.160 --> 0:14:05.640
<v Speaker 2>your leadership. Your colleague Sarah Henderson recently said I can't

0:14:05.679 --> 0:14:09.400
<v Speaker 2>pretend things are good. I do think Susan is losing support.

0:14:09.840 --> 0:14:11.120
<v Speaker 2>What's your response to that.

0:14:12.080 --> 0:14:15.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm not going to comment on the commentary of colleagues

0:14:15.280 --> 0:14:18.199
<v Speaker 1>or others who tend to then comment on that commentary,

0:14:18.800 --> 0:14:23.400
<v Speaker 1>except to say that we as a team signed off

0:14:23.440 --> 0:14:26.360
<v Speaker 1>on this affordable plan. And you know what, well, I

0:14:26.400 --> 0:14:29.600
<v Speaker 1>get these questions and obviously understand why people have to

0:14:29.640 --> 0:14:32.520
<v Speaker 1>ask them. I am not going to lose focus for

0:14:32.600 --> 0:14:36.000
<v Speaker 1>a single second on what is really important to me,

0:14:36.560 --> 0:14:40.880
<v Speaker 1>which is how we develop and deliver an affordable and

0:14:40.960 --> 0:14:43.000
<v Speaker 1>reliable energy system for Australians.

0:14:43.080 --> 0:14:45.920
<v Speaker 2>I understand that you're focused on it, and I believe

0:14:45.920 --> 0:14:48.880
<v Speaker 2>that you're focused on that policy. But the thing is

0:14:48.880 --> 0:14:51.640
<v Speaker 2>that your colleagues don't seem to be focused on it,

0:14:51.720 --> 0:14:55.000
<v Speaker 2>because every single day in the media there is speculation

0:14:55.240 --> 0:14:58.880
<v Speaker 2>that your colleagues don't want you to be the leader anymore.

0:14:59.360 --> 0:15:01.000
<v Speaker 2>So how do you respond to that.

0:15:01.400 --> 0:15:04.320
<v Speaker 1>I just don't comment on commentary, and you know, there's

0:15:04.360 --> 0:15:06.040
<v Speaker 1>all sorts of things in the media about who said

0:15:06.040 --> 0:15:07.920
<v Speaker 1>what to whom. I pay no attention to it, because

0:15:07.960 --> 0:15:10.680
<v Speaker 1>I genuinely am focused on this. And you know one

0:15:10.680 --> 0:15:13.160
<v Speaker 1>of the reasons I am because I remember how as

0:15:13.160 --> 0:15:15.360
<v Speaker 1>a young mum I had three children I was parting

0:15:15.440 --> 0:15:17.760
<v Speaker 1>them into the car. One of the things that really

0:15:17.800 --> 0:15:22.000
<v Speaker 1>worried me was my energy bills because they were pretty steep.

0:15:22.160 --> 0:15:25.720
<v Speaker 1>For you if you're managing on a small budget and

0:15:26.240 --> 0:15:28.320
<v Speaker 1>when you don't know how you're going to meet your

0:15:28.360 --> 0:15:31.240
<v Speaker 1>expenses week to week is something that sure it was

0:15:31.280 --> 0:15:34.120
<v Speaker 1>many years ago for me, but I've never forgotten you're

0:15:34.120 --> 0:15:36.840
<v Speaker 1>facing Young people are facing increased cost of living, which

0:15:36.880 --> 0:15:44.640
<v Speaker 1>is why your report pass pivot. It's not quite as

0:15:45.680 --> 0:15:46.520
<v Speaker 1>fifty nine percent.

0:15:46.560 --> 0:15:51.040
<v Speaker 2>Look at that graph, great graph, that question speculation.

0:15:51.640 --> 0:15:53.840
<v Speaker 1>I just want to read it that when young Australians

0:15:53.880 --> 0:15:56.960
<v Speaker 1>say I love it, they trust themselves over the system.

0:15:56.960 --> 0:15:59.360
<v Speaker 1>I don't love that. That worries me. This is what

0:15:59.400 --> 0:16:02.240
<v Speaker 1>they mean. They're earning more than their parents did at

0:16:02.240 --> 0:16:05.000
<v Speaker 1>the same time, yet they're feeling less secure, working harder,

0:16:05.360 --> 0:16:09.880
<v Speaker 1>falling further behind on the milestones that defined Australian's success.

0:16:10.480 --> 0:16:13.120
<v Speaker 1>Fifty nine percent, this cost of living is their single

0:16:13.240 --> 0:16:15.760
<v Speaker 1>biggest concern, more than all the other issues combined.

0:16:15.880 --> 0:16:18.680
<v Speaker 2>I don't dispute that can't be. Young people are concerned

0:16:18.680 --> 0:16:19.760
<v Speaker 2>about host of living.

0:16:19.600 --> 0:16:21.600
<v Speaker 1>And to be a responsible leader in this country, we've

0:16:21.640 --> 0:16:22.520
<v Speaker 1>got to address that.

0:16:23.000 --> 0:16:26.480
<v Speaker 2>Have you spoken to your colleagues like Andrew Hasty who

0:16:26.920 --> 0:16:28.680
<v Speaker 2>potentially want your job.

0:16:29.400 --> 0:16:32.080
<v Speaker 1>That's your observation, and as it said, I don't think

0:16:32.320 --> 0:16:35.280
<v Speaker 1>being quite clear about it, but I talked to all

0:16:35.320 --> 0:16:38.000
<v Speaker 1>of my colleagues we were all involved in developing the plan,

0:16:38.520 --> 0:16:41.160
<v Speaker 1>we were all involved in having our say and now

0:16:41.600 --> 0:16:44.160
<v Speaker 1>we really want to talk to Australians about how they're

0:16:44.160 --> 0:16:45.520
<v Speaker 1>being let down by this government.

0:16:45.720 --> 0:16:47.840
<v Speaker 2>You're confident you'll be the leader of the Opposition at

0:16:47.880 --> 0:16:50.240
<v Speaker 2>the next selection. Yes, I am seasonally. Thank you so

0:16:50.360 --> 0:16:51.080
<v Speaker 2>much for don't thank you.

0:16:51.880 --> 0:16:54.280
<v Speaker 3>That's all we've got for today's podcast. Thank you so

0:16:54.360 --> 0:16:56.600
<v Speaker 3>much for listening. Thank you to the Opposition leader for

0:16:56.640 --> 0:16:59.400
<v Speaker 3>coming into TDA, and for Billy for doing that interview

0:16:59.520 --> 0:17:02.400
<v Speaker 3>for us. We'll be back this afternoon with your evening headlines,

0:17:02.400 --> 0:17:04.080
<v Speaker 3>but until then, have a great day.

0:17:08.359 --> 0:17:10.719
<v Speaker 1>My name is Lily Maddon and I'm a proud Arunda

0:17:10.920 --> 0:17:13.480
<v Speaker 1>Bungelung Kalkudin woman from Gadighl Country.

0:17:14.280 --> 0:17:17.440
<v Speaker 2>The Daily oz acknowledges that this podcast is recorded on

0:17:17.480 --> 0:17:19.960
<v Speaker 2>the lands of the Gadighl people and pays respect to

0:17:20.040 --> 0:17:23.360
<v Speaker 2>all Aboriginal and torrest Rate island and nations. We pay

0:17:23.400 --> 0:17:26.320
<v Speaker 2>our respects to the first peoples of these countries, both

0:17:26.359 --> 0:17:27.280
<v Speaker 2>past and present.