Transcript: Julia Gillard, Press Conference, Unley High School
Julia Gillard
posted Tuesday, 10 August 2010
E & O E – PROOF ONLY
SUBJECTS: Unley High School; Murray Darling Basin; Teach Next; Education Reforms; Border Security; Election Campaign; Kevin Rudd; WTO; Climate Change.
PM: Well I feel like I should be saying to everybody, welcome to Unley High School. I’m not sure that that’s my privilege any longer it’s the privilege of the school Principal Susan who’s welcomed us here. But it is terrific to be back at my old school at Unley High School. And of course Unley high school is in the Federal Electorate of Boothby, where I grew up and I’m joined today by our candidate for Boothby, Annabel Digance, who is with me, a great candidate for a great part of the world. And you’d expect me to say that given that I grew up here. And I’m also joined by the Minister for Education, Simon Crean, and by our Minister for Climate Change, Penny Wong.
And today I’m here to make a series of announcements of importance to South Australia and importance to the nation. Firstly can I say, standing here in my old school in the community where I grew up, I grew up drinking Adelaide water. And I understand how important water issues are here in South Australia. Which is why I’m determined as Prime Minister to implement the plan which will be released by the Murray Darling Basin Authority. We want restore the River Murray the Murray Darling Basin to health. That means we need more water flowing through the river that is allowed to flow through the environment. As a Government we stepped up, and we’ve purchased water, so that it can flow down the river. We’ve purchased 900 billion litres of water. That’s five times the amount of water that Adelaide uses each year. And we have provisions in the Government’s budget to keep buying water.
We are also anticipating that the independent authority, The Murray Darling Basin Authority, will release its plan for the future of the Murray in the relatively short term. And when that plan is released it’s inevitable that it will call for more water to go down the river, meaning more water will need to be purchased.
Today as Prime Minister I announce that I am determined that we will do what is necessary to implement the Murray Darling Basin Authority plan. We will buy water as necessary from willing sellers to get the water going down the river, to restore the river to health.
And here today with Senator Penny Wong I have an additional announcement of significance to South Australians and to the future of water in this State. South Australians know that Menindee is an important issue that has been left unattended for too long. People have been very concerned about the circumstances there. Making Menindee more efficient is about infrastructure and completing the infrastructure plan. We’ve never pretended that that was going to be easy. But work is being done and a lot of progress is being made. And we are moving towards the final assessment phase. That’s an important step. But here with Senator Wong I’m also able to announce that agreement has been reached with the New South Wales Government, so when the infrastructure is completed additional water will be available and every drop of it will be able to go to into the lake, be there for environmental purposes. We believe that the additional water will be able to flow from 2012 and it will be up to 200 billion litres. This is an important announcement for those who have been concerned about this very big environmental issue.
I’ll turn at this stage to some comments from the Minister for Climate Change and then come back to just make a further statement. Penny.
WONG: Well first just briefly on the water announcement as the Prime Minister has said, this is a Government that is making clear its commitment to restoring the Murray Darling to health. Standing in stark contrast to the plans of Tony Abbott and Barnaby Joyce. We know that Senator Joyce who would be Water Minister if Mr Abbott were to be elected on August 21st has said that returning water to the rivers is theft. We don’t share that view, we believe that returning the Murray Darling Basin to health is in the national interest. We’ve made substantial progress to date, but there is more work to do. And what the Prime Minister has announced today is our commitment to do just that. To do what is needed to bridge the gap between where we currently are, in terms of how much water we take out of the river and the new limit based on science that the independent authority will announce.
Can I also turn to the Menindee announcement. Can I say that this is an enormous project, an enormous project that for 12 years under the previous Government made no progress whatsoever. We have done a lot of technical work on Menindee because there are two key issues which need to be resolved. The first is we have to drought proof Broken Hill, we have to ensure Broken Hill’s water supplies are secure. And the Government has received technical work which demonstrates that it is possible to do that, through the use of aquifers.
In addition, we want to increase the efficiency of the storages to allow more water to flow downstream. So there’s been a lot of technical work, a lot of mapping, drilling and testing which is underway as we speak.
We’re not pretending that this has already been done we know that there is more to do. But the big step today that the Prime Minister has announced is this. That she has an agreement with New South Wales, that every drop of the water savings made from this infrastructure investment, by the Commonwealth, every drop will be returned to the river as an environmental flow. That is a very large step because were that [sic] not for the agreement that the Prime Minister has achieved with New South Wales, that water that could be used for more irrigation - not returned to the environment, so a significant step involving the $400 million commitment that we previously announced, we will be providing $300 million of that to New South Wales for urban water regional security and the remaining $100 million is provision for these infrastructure works. Thank you very much.
PM: And then if I could say as well, yesterday of course I announced a major plan to transform school education in this country. One thing I learned we I attended this great school, is that there is nothing more important to a child’s education than the quality of the teacher standing in front of the class. Unley High was a school of great teachers, today it’s still a school of great teachers.
Yesterday I announced a plan to better reward great teachers. Today I announce a plan to bring the best and brightest into teaching. As a Government we have already created Teach for Australia; a way in which the best and brightest graduates can come into teaching, and it has successfully to date brought high achieving graduates into teaching, into classrooms for disadvantaged schools.
Today I announce that if re-elected I will create Teach Next. A program to bring new mid-career changers into teaching. Take for example someone who has worked in banking all their lives, who decides now is the right time for a career change. With Teach Next what they would be able to do is go through an accelerated teacher education course over summer supported by up to $10,000 to support their income and then commence teaching in a structured mentored program over two years. The Federal Government will make Teach Next possible by having an organisation run Teach Next just the way we have a not for profit organisation run Teach First. We would recruit the first intake into Teach Next so they were available to teach in the 2012 school year. This is about bringing people into teaching from all walks of life. We know we’re short of maths teachers, we’re short of science teachers, we know that our teaching workforce is aging. I want to make sure that we are able to add to Australia’s great teachers with new people who want to come into teaching, maybe after a lifetime in a position they want to bring those skills into teaching. Something that would have stopped them making that choice is many Australians could not have sustained the income loss to go to a traditional teacher education course. This will give them a way to support them into teaching and they will be there in classrooms making a difference the way our Teach for Australia alumni are already in classrooms making a difference. I’ll turn to Simon Crean, the Minister for Education, for some comments on that.
CREAN: Thanks Julia. Teach Next is another important plank in the Education Revolution this Government has been embarked on. You’ve obviously seen us make the commitment in terms of the doubling of expenditure in schools over our first term of government. We believe in investing in education. It’s not only the great enabler for the individual but it is great for the economic growth and the strength of the economy for the country. It’s not just physical buildings that we’ve been making the investments in, we obviously have been very focused on ensuring greater transparency, greater access to information, particularly by parents, particularly as to school performance. But the other aspect is teacher quality and we’ve made many announcements about how we want to improve and build upon the great profession that teaching is. If we want the best education system in the world, we not only have to invest in the best buildings and state of the art equipment, we also have to invest in the very best of the teaching ability. Teach Next is a mechanism by which we bring people from professional careers into teaching where they decide that they do have talents that they want to pass on. Teaching isn’t just about theory; it is about the practical dimension. We want to tap that partnership and Teach Next will give us an important new vehicle, an incentive vehicle by which we can tap those very talents.
PM: I made it clear yesterday when I announced my plan for the future of school education, that this was an economic plan. It was about the future prosperity of this country. It was about our future productivity, our future participation in the labour market. As I, as Prime Minister, keep outlining our economic plan, what we see on the other side of politics is a shambles emerging. Mr Abbott now of course has a $7 billion gap between what he says is the cost of what he’s promising and what his Shadow Treasurer says and Mr Abbott now has a looming $840 million black hole because the costings associated with their NBN commitments, their national broadband commitments have been, got wrong. This is joining other potential black holes in what Mr Abbott has announced, in hospital beds and beyond. Mr Abbott is racing towards almost $30 billion dollars of expenditure commitments but he won’t put them in for costing. Only around 1.5 per cent of new spending by Mr Abbott has been submitted for costing. In this environment particularly, I say again to Mr Abbott, now is the right time to step up for a debate on the economy. Mr Abbott and I will be in the same place at the same time on Wednesday night, I’m ready to debate the economy. Mr Abbott wants to cut and run from that debate because his economic strategy is in shambles around him. Black holes littered through his costings; this is a big risk for the government’s budget. On, for my team as Prime Minister I can say, we are determined to bring the budget back to surplus in 2013, we will submit our policies for proper costings. Nothing we do in this campaign will add a cent to the budget bottom line. That’s responsible economic management. Mr Abbott is leading a shambles on economic management.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, while we’re talking on economic management, Mr Abbott’s told The Australian today that when the budget returns to surplus, he’s looking at a company tax rate of about 25 per cent and he favours lower income tax rate. I just wonder could we just get your view on taxation rates when the budget returns to surplus? Are you in favour of cutting income tax, lower company tax? And what sort of numbers are you thinking about?
PM: I’m in favour of making sensible costed promises. That’s the difference between me and Mr Abbott. What I say is sensible and costed and the budget can do it. What Mr Abbott is standing for in this campaign: well he can’t name when the budget is coming into surplus, of course he can’t, his costings are littered with black holes. He’s apparently now going to put company tax down, while he puts it up, while he puts it down, while he puts it up, that’s his economic plan. What of course that means is that it will feed through, his real plan to increase company tax, will feed through to grocery prices that every Australian pays and then he seems to be musing at large about economic matters, no plans, no costings. Well if Mr Abbott’s got a plan on tax put it in for costing. Mr Abbott’s got a plan on company tax or any other economic matter – get it properly costed. Their Paid Parental Leave scheme, all of their big ticket items have not been properly costed and that’s because Mr Abbott knows he can’t stand up to the scrutiny. That’s why he doesn’t want to put his policies in for costing. Latika.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister on the water policy, how much money will the Government spend, can you tell us that? Why won’t you release, why won’t the Authority release the report and are you giving them a blank cheque?
PM: The Authority is independent from Government and that’s appropriate and being independent from Government, they make their own decisions and the Authority has made it clear that it has made the decision to not release the Basin plan while the Government is in caretaker so decisions about release of the plan are a matter for the Authority. On the question of paying for water, we have made provision in the Government’s budget to do just that. We have capacity to keep purchasing water because we’ve already made provision in the Government’s budget. Of course beyond the Government’s budget period, the forward estimates period, appropriate provision would be made to implement the Murray Darling Basin Authority Plan, that will be done consistent with our budget rules.
JOURNALIST: - how much is provided?
PM: We provisioned $3.1 billion in the Government’s budget - $1.4 billion has been expended to date.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, there’s a poll today that shows that more than three quarters of Australians would to see both sides commit to not cutting Medicare rebates, can you give that guarantee?
PM: Look, we’re the party of Medicare, Medicare is in this country because Labor brought it to this country and created it, against trenchant, deep felt opposition on the other side of politics. Mr Abbott is very much an inheritor, he says, of the views and predispositions of Mr Howard, well Mr Howard was very opposed to Medicare. Of course Medicare rebates are safe under a Labor Government.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, (inaudible) what you announced today about the Murray Darling Basin Plan is important to people in South Australia, there happen to be a few marginal seats around here where there might be voters who are pretty happy, but there are probably some farmers and irrigators in safe National Party seats that won’t be so happy about this. Is this more about pleasing the marginal voters, and not worrying about those in the country areas?
PM: Well what I’ve announced today is better for farmers. Farmers would be concerned about uncertainty. They know that the Murray Darling Basin Authority is working on a plan, they would be figuring for themselves, that the plan would have implications for them. What they want to know is what will happen next? Now, from today they do know what will happen next, that is, that if I am re-elected we will implement the Authority plan, we will step up to do the necessary water purchases from willing sellers.
JOURNALIST: How much will they lose?
PM: Well this becomes a question of when the plan is available, it will give the details of what is necessary –
JOURNALIST: - (inaudible)
PM: Well the Murray Darling Basin Authority is independent and it’s independent for good reason. When it announces its plan, I anticipate that it will say, return more water to the environment, that does have implications for water users. So for water users they would be looking, if they’re willing to sell, as to whether or not they will be compensated, that is, someone will come along and buy the water. I am saying today, we will buy the water, and let’s do the contrast here. Under the former Government of which Mr Abbott was a senior member, not one drop of water was purchased and Barnaby Joyce as a senior figure in Mr Abbott’s Coalition and if Mr Abbott was elected in his government has said that any water purchasing is theft. That is, we would do nothing to restore environmental flows and proper protections to the river.
JOURNALIST: We all know you’ve set aside for the buy backs, what is the cap? Surely there’s a cap on how much you will spend?
PM: We will implement the Murray Darling Basin Authority Plan, we’ll do it consistent with our budget rules and we can rely on the forward estimates period on the money we have already provisioned in the budget.
JOURNALIST: What’s the cap, how far would you go, how much can it?
PM: Well budgets are about choices and obviously when we make choices, you can work out which areas are for priority, we are saying we will put a priority on implementing the plan.
JOURNALIST: You haven’t seen the plan, but have you been briefed? Has the Government been briefed has Cabinet been briefed and on Menindee Lakes, wasn’t this a promise made at the last election and haven’t you just missed an enormous opportunity with all the floods that have flowed into those lakes in the last few month.
PM: I’ll actually get Penny to answer that question for you.
WONG: Well first on Menindee Lakes, I want to make clear first, we have always said despite what the Opposition pretends, this is a big job. Working out what to do with Menindee how to protect Broken Hill’s water supply and create a more efficient infrastructure there is a big job and I’m always interested to hear the Opposition talk about delay, well they should know about delay because they had 12 years and nothing was done on this. We’ve done a lot of technical work. What we have identified through that technical work, through the studies that have been done, is that it is possible to secure Broken Hill’s water supply through an aquifer storage system. There are a range of options around infrastructure. We are not pretending that there is not a lot, there is not more work to do – there is. But what is important today is that this Prime Minister has for the first time secured agreement from New South Wales that any savings from Menindee will be returned to the environment. Were it not for the agreement that Julia Gillard has brokered, that water could have gone to New South Wales irrigators under the terms of the current Murray-Darling Basin Agreement.
Can I just – can I response – you asked me another question about the Basin plan, and I want to make it very clear. The independent Authority made this decision to not release the plan for the reasons it has articulated. It is independent. That decision was independent of Government and that’s how it should be. We went to the last election making a very clear commitment to the Australian people that we believed an independent authority that looked at the science was the right way to go for the Murray-Darling. And that’s because the bickering between politicians, frankly, is one of the main reasons why the Murray was in the state it has been. So we do respect the independence of the Authority. They will release their plan. What we are setting out today is the certainty that enables it to be met.
PM: Ok, we’ll go to the back.
JOURNALIST: On Teach Next. If you could just take us through how many professionals do you anticipate will take up this plan? When will it start? And how far across is it? And also, if someone is earning say $250,000 a year as an accountant or what not, what’s going to make them want to jump on $80,000 and become a teacher for a few years, apart from goodwill?
PM: Well, I’m full of enthusiasm for the dedication of Australians to making a difference during the course of their lives. To answer your questions, this is a plan about 450 people. Obviously we would create Teach Next and it would be training people in cohorts. The first cohort would be in schools in 2012. If we look at what’s already been achieved with Teach for Australia, and I think this will answer your question, we’ve got Teach for Australia graduates today teaching in disadvantaged schools. I’ve met some of them and they are people who have things like First Class Honours degrees in Commerce. They are people who could have gone and earned double, triple, quadruple or even more in the private sector. And out of a sense of vocation about making a difference, they’ve chosen to go teaching. Now Teach for Australia is deliberately set up so that it harnesses the enthusiasm, the altruism of young people. And those young people will teach for a section in their lives and then many of them will go into the career they originally saw themselves – into banking, financial management, whatever it is.
Then I think there are other people at a different stage of their lives. People who have made some money. People who have lived in a particular way for a period of time. Maybe they’ve done everything they need to see their own kids through school and so they consider the draws on their own finances to be less as they look towards the last part of their career. And they, in the last part of their career, would like to make a difference for young people. If you talk about the kind of people who would do this, well, we’ve had discussions before about Mr Brad Orgill and the fact that he’s leading our Building the Education Revolution taskforce. Mr Orgill made enough money in financial management through an investment bank to retire in his forties. What he’s doing now, leading the Building the Education Revolution taskforce, is obviously something he views as a public service and I believe it has been a public service. But I think there are Australians, maybe not that many who’ve managed to retire in their forties, but I think there are Australians who’ve made a bit of money in the job that they’re committed to, but then they want something else for the balance of their lives.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister?
PM: Yes?
JOURNALIST: On Teach Next, on Teach Next, the Australian Education Union has said about Teach for Australia that it demeans the teaching profession because it implies that you can learn how to be a teacher in six or eight weeks. It’s – I think there’s a good chance that they’ll say the same thing about the Teach Next idea. What’s your response to that?
PM: Well, look, I’ve had this debate publicly and privately with the Australian Education Union and I simply don’t believe that they’re right. Let’s remember – this is an accelerated program for eight weeks and then people go teaching in a mentored, structured, continuing education program for two years. They are not awarded their teaching degree until the end of that period. So it’s the eight weeks accelerated then you start, mentored, structured, two years’ worth of service and you get your teaching degree at the end. That is, it takes around the same time as doing an education degree as a postgraduate – someone who’s done an undergraduate qualification and then goes into teaching would study for around the same period of time. The evidence, in my view, is unambiguous from America, from the United Kingdom, that have had Teach for America and other programs that teachers brought into the teaching profession in this way make a real difference. We would be looking to Teach Next graduates to do just that. Now, I’m just trying to be equitable. We better go over here and then we’ll come back through. Yes?
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, the Opposition are suggesting that you met with the President of Nauru in 2002 and told him that the facility, the detention facility, was good. Is that true and what’s changed in between now and then if it is?
PM: Well I did travel to Nauru when I was Shadow Minister for Immigration. I travelled with Minister Ruddock, who was then the Minister for Immigration, and I did look at the detention facility. My recollection was that was not in 2000. I did not become Shadow Minister for Immigration until after the 2001 election -
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Sorry, 2002. And I did look at the facility there. But really, frankly, that’s neither here nor there because my policy, the policy that I’ve announced is I want to see a regional processing centre, a centre in a signatory to the United Nations Convention on Refugees. East Timor is a signatory. We are in dialogue with East Timor. Nauru has said that it would like to sign up. I’ve said as Prime Minister if that is genuinely what Nauru wants to do, I’ll make officials available to help them engage in the process. The process will take some time. We are in dialogue with East Timor, in dialogue with East Timor about the creation of a processing centre there.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister?
PM: Yes?
JOURNALIST: Do you want Wednesday night’s community forum to be about the economy or do you want a separate debate?
PM: Well, look. I’ve wanted a debate on the economy. I’ve said anytime, anywhere. Mr Abbott said in response to that no, his campaign schedule was in lock down and he couldn’t possibly change any time in his arrangements. Well, he’s changed time in his arrangements. He’s going to a town hall meeting in Sydney on Wednesday night. I’m going to the same meeting. We’ll be, we’ll be in the same time, at the same time in the same place. I’m prepared to stand there and debate the economy. Mr Abbott doesn’t want to be there, you know, next to me. He doesn’t want to be debating the economy.
And given these costings shambles, is there any mystery about this? I mean, Mr Abbott doesn’t want to stump up and try and justify almost $30 billion of expenditure he hasn’t got proper costings for. He doesn’t want to stump up and say why he and Joe Hockey are $7 billion apart on what they think they’ve spent. And $7 billion isn’t pin money. He doesn’t want to be there explaining why he’s got a black hole of $840 million right in the centre of his costings. Well, I’d say to Mr Abbott, if he wants to be Prime Minister of this country he’s got to step up for some scrutiny. There’s no bigger issue in this election campaign than keeping the economy strong. Mr Abbott is a man with a bad track record of judgments about the economy. He would have had this nation in recession. What I want to know now and establish through debate is how badly he’d blow the budget as well. Yes?
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, do you know how much water the Authority will recommend buying back?
PM: No –
JOURNALIST: – (inaudible) and if not, how can you possibly guarantee that there’s money in the budget to do that? It’s a nonsense to be talking about it, isn’t it, when we have- you haven’t seen the Authority’s plan and none of us have seen the Authority’s plan?
PM: Well, you know, can I just say - score board, score board, current budget – there’s money in it for buying water. And we have been buying water. Real money in the budget –
JOURNALIST: (inaudible)
PM: Let’s take this a step at a time because it follows quite logically. We’re a government that believes you need to return water and water needs to be purchased. It’s different from the government Mr Abbott was a participant in. They didn’t buy a drop of water. We’ve made provision in the budget. There is money in the budget to keep undertaking water purchases and we will. Then we will get the Murray Darling Basin Authority plan and we will, as necessary in the future, make the allocations to keep buying water. But we can keep buying water now because we have money in the Budget to do it.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) more sellers than you have money to buy back their water –
PM: Well obviously then we will sequence purchasing and make appropriate provision. Yes.
JOURNALIST: Basically, buying this water from farmers are we encouraging farmers and Australia, essentially to become less of a food-producing nation, less of a wool-producing nation. Is that going to impact our economy eventually?
PM: Well, I’ll turn to Senator Wong for some comments but let’s be clear, we’ve taken major steps to increase the efficiency with which we use water. It’s been about infrastructure and other investments that Senator Wong has led on behalf of the Government and it has been, I think, transparent and transparent particularly for the people of Adelaide that we could not endlessly go on the way we were going on and pretend everything was going to be alright. It wasn’t going to be alright, including for the farmers that you refer to. So we need to take these steps for the future. We’ve taken steps already; steps about infrastructure, steps about water purchasing. We’ve got more financial capacity to engage in water purchasing. We’ll get the plan from the Authority and then we will make the decisions to deliver the Plan. This is a Government that has shown the ability to make those decisions. We’ve done it already. This is a Government that’s shown the ability to make those decisions whilst returning the budget to surplus in 2013. I’ll just have Senator Wong comment too.
SENATOR WONG: Just briefly, of course in addition to water purchase, what we are doing is investing a very substantial amount of money to ensure irrigation becomes more efficient. You don’t ensure that you can continue to grow food by allowing our rivers to continue to decline the way they have. The way you ensure that we can have an irrigation system that is productive, is to make it more efficient. You have to do what the National Farmers Federation has said, you do more with less. We have $5.8 billion of investments in infrastructure that we are rolling out. We have commenced that, we have programs in place and projects on the ground and more to come. And this is all about re-plumbing the system. We have to re-plumb the irrigation systems of the Murray Darling to make them more efficient.
JOURNALIST: Are you confident that there are enough irrigators willing to sell the amount of water the report will likely recommend to restore the Murray Darling?
SENATOR WONG: Well look, what I can comment on is evidence to date and that is we’ve had a lot of interest in our buy-back scheme. And there continues to be a lot of interest. Obviously people do want to make the choice. Some people want to exit, some people want to make their operations more efficient by selling part of their water – using that money to re-invest either in diversifying or making their operations more efficient.
PM: Ok, we are going to have to go soon aren’t we? I don’t think Bruce has had a –
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, Mr Abbott is apparently making some comments about Kevin Rudd and his confirmed role at the UN to the effect that if you are re-elected he will be then be a part-time Minister. Do you have any comment on that at all?
PM: Oh well look, you know, question here from Mr Abbott and I can understand why he’s probably trying to avoid answering questions on this today and so talking about other matters. There’s only one question today for Mr Abbott and that is why is he blowing the Government’s budget, why is he blowing the budget of this nation. Seven billion dollar gap between him and Mr Hockey, $840 million black hole and he won’t come and debate the economy. Why is that?
JOURNALIST: World Trade Organisation’s overturned the ban on New Zealand apples in Australia. It’s been in place for 90 years. Are you aware of that and do you have any comment on it?
PM: I’m standing here with a man who knows a little bit about trade so we’ll take this one and then we may need to call it a day. I’m getting the –
MR CREAN: There had been speculation about this decision in the media some time ago. As I understand it, the report of the WTO has been publicly released. Australia clearly has options in terms of reaction to that report and I am sure that the Minister for Trade and the Minister for Agriculture will be assessing those options in the days to come.
JOURNALIST: Christopher Pyne said Unley Primary School missed out on a science lab (inaudible) and still hasn’t received the computers under the Computers in Schools program?
PM: Well can, we’ll have to make this the last question because we do have another question. I’m also moderately concerned that we’re excluding students from the use of their library, so we want them to be using their library and studying today. What I’d say to Christopher Pyne is: how amazing is that - a man who voted against expenditure in schools. He voted against every science and every language lab in this country. If he became Minister for Education, if Mr Abbott is elected, 120,000 kids around the country would miss out on a computer. If Mr Pyne became Minister for Education, 1.2 million kids would miss out on the opportunity to get a Trades Training Centre. Mr Pyne, audacious yes but his promises and plans are all about cutbacks. He wants to become Minister for Education for no other purpose than cutting education back. Truly remarkable. Thank you very much. Now I feel bad, this had better be a good question. Ok.
JOURNALIST: - all eyes are on you –
PM: No pressure, no pressure – Ok
JOURNALIST: Young Australians have told Triple J that climate change is the most important issue for them in this election. How are you going to ensure that vote? And this is your old school? Any school yard secrets you can give away? Any pash and dash behind the sports shed?
PM: Right ok, I said in the assembly I was a very well behaved student and I think I will settle with that, being a very well behaved student. There were some moments where I may have done some things I shouldn’t. I was not very good at cooking, that stayed with me for a lifetime and then were some things like putting pieces of cactus in a cake and stuff like that. I wasn’t particularly taken with studying laundry so there may have been a day when we put a whole box of soap powder in the one washing machine causing some problems with plumbing. There may have been some incidents like that but I wouldn’t want to speculate. On climate change, look I understand standing particularly with Senator Wong, I understand the frustration that Australians feel particularly young Australians with what happened in Parliament House with the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. I understand that frustration, we shook hands with Mr Turnbull, Mr Abbott came along and tossed our hand aside. He didn’t want a deal, he didn’t want the legislation through so he crashed the consensus we had in Parliament House. I want to work to rebuild a consensus but to make it about people in the community and I want to keep investing in renewable energy. We’ve done a lot: renewable energy target, record investments in solar and renewable energy and now want to bring that energy into the national electricity grid. A billion dollars for transmission lines. I want to green up where we work, greener buildings. I want to green up our car fleet, mandatory emissions standards. I want to make sure there are no new dirty coal-fired power stations and of course I want to reward those companies that do the right thing early. I believe in climate change, I believe in putting a cap on carbon pollution, I believe we need a market-based mechanism to do that and that’s what we will work to achieve. I said last night and I’ll say it again I think Mr Abbott definitive statement on this was during his campaign launch where he said he acknowledged that we only had one planet to share, presumably believing before that point that there was a spare planet and that this Earth was flat and that the appropriate point we jump off the edge on to the spare planet. Now this is just the kind of nonsense that we’re used to from Mr Abbott, a man who has said climate change science is absolute crap. Thankyou very much.
Tags: Darling, education, Gillard, Murray, Teach, teacher, Unley