TOM CONNELL: Well, documents released today revealed Treasury had a preferred option for the government to raise money from the PRRT which seeks to get more revenue from the gas industry. But Labor didn't take that option. Joining me live now is Resources Minister Madeleine King. Thanks for your time. So, why was Treasury's advice ignored on this?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Tom, it was not ignored. What we find when you're in government, a range of options are put to you, as you've said, and we chose one of them and that is what we've done based on advice and consultation and it is the change that will get the most tax more quickly as well.

TOM CONNELL: The documents today suggest that Treasury had a preferred option. There were three options on the table and that if you'd chosen that option compared to the one you did, you would have raised more money. Is that accurate?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: It might be over further time, but the option we chose was the option that gets more revenue in more quickly. But also, it is important to know that it is the role of government Ministers to look at all these options that come before us of course, and we have our own discussion, and, on that basis, we made a decision to change the PRRT –

TOM CONNELL: So better in forward estimates but the option that Treasury was putting forward would have been peaking at a higher amount per year. A higher amount. Is that accurate?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Look, I can't tell you the detail of that. I've not gone through the articles in depth today. But what I do know –

TOM CONNELL: But you know the decision that was made.

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: I do know the decision was made but I'm not going to go into all the figures because I don't want to get them wrong, quite frankly. I'm not a savant when it comes to remembering everything that comes before us as a government because a lot of things come before us. I know we have options, we've spoken about them in depth, we've spoken with many people that have great interests, whether it be particular advocacy groups as well as of course, the industry itself. And we arrived at the decision we arrived at based at that. And I would add that the review of the PRRT was something that the former government brought forward and did absolutely nothing about and we're determined to progress [indistinct] the PRRT.

TOM CONNELL: That’s true the paper was sitting there. So, if you're wary of getting the wrong number, fair enough. But it is true, accurate to say the option Treasury plumped for, if you like, would have had a higher annual figure at the sort of peak of this tax.

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: But the option we have gone for is the figure that gets more revenue into the economy right now and that's what's really important and a priority for government to reform the budget. So, we have a strong underlying economic deadline. So that is what is really important to us - 

TOM CONNELL: Well, actually the short term the budget is in a pretty good position. It's just a $20 billion surplus. The structural deficit people are worried about would have been better if you went for a Treasury model from the sound of it.

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: We looked at the models presented to us and there's a lot more information available to Ministers than may be published right now. And this is a decision we made on the basis of consultations and the various advice.

TOM CONNELL: So, again, without – if you don't want to put a number on it, fair enough. But I'm just trying to clarify the amount the other option would have given you was a higher amount per year, albeit kicking in later. Is that accurate to say?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: I am just going to comment on what we decided on because that is not going to change and that's really important to know. We have –

TOM CONNELL: But shouldn’t we know as well what the other options were?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: You're making your assessment. And yes, Treasury had other options. We chose this option because we thought that was the best option and that's what governments have to do. And elected members as Ministers have to review all the options before them and acknowledge that not everything that is preferred from a central agency is actually what government can and will do.

TOM CONNELL: Were you warning that more money sounds great, but this could hurt the industry in Australia?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Not at all. We consulted with the industry, as well we should, because this is an industry that engages -

TOM CONNELL: I mean the other option, the one you didn't pick. Were you warning sort of, hey, let's not get the maximum amount of money just for the sake of it, let's worry about the industry as well.

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Well, we worry about all our stakeholders, whether it be industry or others. And that makes sense and that's always the case, no matter what the policy matter is. So, in this case, of course, we engaged with the industry that has been subject to the PRRT for a number of years. And we've got different states that are differently affected too by the PRRT. So, it's important to engage with state governments as well. And that is what we did. We arrived at a decision, I am satisfied with it, and it will increase revenue to government from our offshore resources.

TOM CONNELL: Gas supply AEMO noted again, the continued depletion in Victoria, which is gas, that's just the domestic market, which is dwindling. Are you confident this will be replaced, given that the price cap was softened by Labor?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: That the gas supply will be replaced? Well, there's projects already working. We've got the gas code of conduct is settled now, and that has provided certainty to industry. And I know –

TOM CONNELL: Enough for more investment?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: I believe so. And that's the result of our consultations has revealed that, and I'll admit this has been disruptive to industry, but equally, the skyrocketing prices we saw for gas was very disruptive for manufacturing industry and consumers as well. So, this is, I think, a sensible middle path that will encourage investment and therefore encourage supply.

TOM CONNELL: Have you or Chris Bowen given any providers a conditional exemption on the price cap?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: We're still looking at that. Those applications are coming in and we have to let them –

TOM CONNELL: Nothing confirmed yet?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Nothing will be confirmed right now.

TOM CONNELL: Okay. Are you leaning towards them, are there some strong cases?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: I'm not going to comment on that, Tom. We will look at those matters as they come before us and be diligent in that.

TOM CONNELL: Are they sort of saying, look, you will have a shortage if we don't get an exemption? Is that what –

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: No. I will consider the applications as they come in. And to be honest, the engagement we have with the industry don't usually put things in those terms. They're quite forensic.

TOM CONNELL: Sometimes they do in the media.

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Well, they don't in official documentation because they know that's not sensible, and it wouldn't be – it means that a government react to.

TOM CONNELL: Pushing, the Crossbench, to make Ministers consider climate change when assessing coal and gas projects. Would this make sense? We've just had what we think is the hottest ever July. Does it give you pause for thought over these sorts of approvals.

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Well, the government has enacted the Climate Change Act. We've changed how government decisions are made in respect of all industries. If you're a high bidding industry, you’re now are subject to the Safeguard Mechanism, among other things as well.

TOM CONNELL: But not this overarching.

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: What we are doing is making sure that climate change is taken into fact and emissions are taken into consideration and industries that are high emitters need to reduce their emissions or have offsets that are thorough, and people can have confidence in.

TOM CONNELL: Are you considering this seriously? Would you audit?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: We are following our own pathway. I mean, I accept –

TOM CONNELL: That's a no, then?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Well, no, we're following our own pathway. We accept this is a government very different to the last one that accepts the science of climate change. It is a challenge for the ages. It absolutely is. And I agree with the proposals that have come up today and those people that – the proponents of those proposals, that this is the challenge. However, we're the government, we have other challenges we need to balance.

TOM CONNELL: So, this is not your pathway?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: This is not my pathway.

TOM CONNELL: Is it a shadow ban?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: What do you mean, is it a shadow ban?

TOM CONNELL: Well, is this effectively would this be a way of banning new coal and gas if it were passed?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: I do not think so, but also, it is not our pathway. We have had the Climate Change Act. We are working on lowering emissions in this country. We're determined to reach net zero by 2050.

TOM CONNELL: Briefly your neck of the woods, the Rockingham by-election, which had the whole country talking, I'm sure. Big swing against Labor. What did you make of it? Is it sort of a bit of a warning shot around the COVID honeymoon, I guess?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Not at all. I think what we saw is that the Liberal Party in Western Australia got its best result since 2021 and now has a 17.7 or 17.8 per cent primary vote in Rockingham. And that's nothing to crow about.

TOM CONNELL: Not really a Liberal seat, though, is it?

MINISTER MADELEINE KING: Yeah, but it is worse. It's trending down. So, they have had 17 per cent in the last, or lower, in the last three elections, and that is a terrible state of affairs for the Liberal Party in a by-election where they threw everything at it.

TOM CONNELL: All right, Minister, I appreciate your time.