RAF EPSTEIN: Tim Wilson is the proud Liberal MP of the seat of Goldstein here in Melbourne. He is now the Assistant Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction. Tim Wilson, good afternoon.

TIM WILSON: Well, I guess I need to say I'm proudly, happy to join you, Raf, this afternoon.

RAF EPSTEIN: I was just trying to make something of the fact that your seat is named after a significant figure in Australian history...

TIM WILSON: It is.

RAF EPSTEIN: ...and I've stuffed the pronunciation before. So, I'm glad I got it this time. Is it true that you didn't really talk about net zero today in the joint party room?

TIM WILSON: Well, we had a very long meeting yesterday talking about it, so we, there's no point having the same conversation twice. The National Party...

RAF EPSTEIN: Sorry Tim Wilson, was the conversation yesterday with the Nationals as well, or was it just the Liberals?

TIM WILSON: There was a conversation yesterday with the Liberal Party. There was one with the National Party on Sunday. There are some people who raised themes that had come up in both of those meetings in the joint party room today. And of course, continued to raise questions. And that's how a good democracy moves forward. It’s with robust conversation and raising important issues that affect our communities.

RAF EPSTEIN: You didn't have a robust conversation, isn't that the point? The one time you're all in a room together, the Libs and the Nats, you couldn't talk about it.

TIM WILSON: Well, that's not true at all. I mean, people were firstly welcome to raise any issue they wished, and some people did raise the issue of net zero, the plan to get there, etc. But what I heard was a collegiate approach to try and address the big challenge of climate change, building Australia's long term economic future in a cleaner world. And so I didn't, I don't think that's accurate at all.

RAF EPSTEIN: Is the deal done then? Is it just a haggling over the price?

TIM WILSON: Well, I think there's a conversation with some MPs in particular who are standing up for regional communities and making sure that their communities aren't adversely affected, and that's the correct thing to do because there are going to be consequences to going down any path towards net zero. There are some communities that will feel a much bigger burden versus other ones, and we want to both include their views. We want them to have a voice in the Parliament of the nation and, of course, the government. And we also want to make sure that we address those concerns because we want the nation to move forward together in making sure we reduce our greenhouse gas emissions or continue, they're already down by 20 per cent and of course, provide the foundations for the future of the Australian economy.

RAF EPSTEIN: I asked if the deal is done. It's just not, it's not clear to me at all because you seem to be saying there's not really much difference between the Libs and the Nats on this. So is the deal done?

TIM WILSON: So there's, there's a robust conversation. The decisions of these sorts of things are being decided at a Cabinet level and I've been elevated to higher office, but not that high. And so those conversations continue to go on. And the feedback and discussions that we had on Sunday in the National Party room, the Liberal Party room yesterday, and the joint party room today was about airing differences of opinion, the issues that arise, asking legitimate questions, to inform that conversation. So that Australia can move forward together, continue to cut our emissions and of course provide the foundations for the future of the Australian economy.

RAF EPSTEIN: Every or not every, practically every major organisation in the country, from oil companies to banks and the Reserve Bank Deputy Governor, seem to think net zero 2050 is a done deal. Is it not embarrassing that, all of the MPs and Senators in government can't agree, when everyone else in the country is backing the idea?

TIM WILSON: Well, I think it's a good thing that the Parliament actually debates important issues around the future of our country. Now, these conversations have been going around the kitchen tables of the nation, to the boardrooms of the nation and of course, the Parliament of the nation. And you know, there will be people in different sectors who feel it differently, and it might be an easier decision for some, than others. We're not just focused on one issue. We're looking at, how do we reduce our emissions? How do we build the future foundations of the Australian economy? How do we take communities with us? And how do we also make sure that everybody feels they've been heard and a participant in this conversation...

RAF EPSTEIN: Not embarrassing Tim Wilson? I mean, every other, so many other countries, so many organisations, Shell, power generators, gas sellers, banks, accounting firms, everyone else in the country who's got a significant voice. Every academic institution I know of, think this is a good idea. So if I can get a direct answer to that question, is it embarrassing to you or not, that the Coalition hasn't agreed on this yet?

TIM WILSON: It's absurd to think that having robust discussions about the future direction of the country is embarrassing. In fact, I think it's one of the great enhancing dimensions of parliaments, and I'm very proud to be part of a party and part of the government that actually discusses issues and make sure that there's full representation. And you know, the critical difference between Australia and other countries is that when we make commitments, we actually match them with action and deliver outcomes. And there are a lot of countries that, you know, make big commitments on intent, but then don't deliver them.

RAF EPSTEIN: Everyone can poke holes in everyone else's emissions targets, can't they?

TIM WILSON: Sure but.

RAF EPSTEIN: Other countries can say you wouldn't have done it without land clearing. I mean, it's easy to point the finger, isn't it?

TIM WILSON: No, the point is to say we're taking a position based on integrity, which is that we're going to make commitments, we're then going to have a plan to meet them. So the Australian community is taken with us to achieve a better outcome for the environment, a better outcome for the economy, a better outcome for jobs and to make sure that we take our regional communities, who will be impacted, with us on the journey too.

RAF EPSTEIN: Just on the net zero goal itself by 2050, just at the start of last year in Parliament, the Prime Minister was specifically asked about net zero 2050, and he said it was going to lead to things like higher prices on electricity, on farming, on check out, you know, you know, the supermarket, on petrol. What's changed?

TIM WILSON: Well, technology's changed and that's a critical...

RAF EPSTEIN: In two years?

TIM WILSON: Oh yes, technology is moving at incredibly rapid pace. If you go back, say, five years, the cost of a new Tesla electric vehicle would have been $500,000 or $300,000, depending on the model. Now they're down to sort of 60. And this is what's so exciting, is the potential of technology to drive this transformation. And for the government to...

RAF EPSTEIN: Renewables have been cheaper for ten years. That hasn't happened in the last two years.

TIM WILSON: No, but there is more than just renewables. It's a rather simplistic understanding of the scale of the challenge we have. Emissions from agriculture, transport, energy of course, as well as stationary energy and renewables are a part of the conversation, but they're not the whole conversation. And that's, I guess, the thing, we're focused on, how do we have a plan that takes the entire Australian community forward, that addresses all of our challenges to make sure that everybody has a voice and everybody signs up to it.

RAF EPSTEIN: Just want to be really clear, you saying that the technology's changed enough since February last year, when the Prime Minister spoke about higher petrol prices and higher checkout prices, that the technology's changed enough. I mean, it's not even 24 months. I can't do that maths in my head, must be about 19 months. The technological change has been that rapid. In 19 months, you can go from being anti-net zero in 2050, to pro it in that period of time because only of the technology?

TIM WILSON: No there are other factors as well, of course, global changing market demand, which is driving down technological prices, which is making it more competitive. So we're in a dynamic space Raf and we're in an environment where we're where you've got to be both open minded and work through the issues. And that's what the government has done. Now we've had modelling and projections done in the past, and the good news is that we're actually beating our trajectory around emissions reduction and continue to beat them, and we're going to keep fighting to make sure that we drive emissions down, as we have with them already being 20 per cent off 2005 levels.

RAF EPSTEIN: What's your personal ambition then? Look, I know you're an Assistant Minister, so I'm not sure how much you can speak to this. But, there's a lot of talk now about whether or not the goal to cut emissions at the end of this decade, the goal to cut emissions at the end of 2030. That's what you're talking about, that we're at a 20 per cent cut or so now, the government says. Do you want a higher target than what the government has already committed to?

TIM WILSON: Well, we're waiting to see what the updated trajectory for emissions reduction is going to provide. That's coming out just before the Glasgow conference. And that, I think will give us a clearer idea. But every other trajectory I've seen in the public domain says that we're going to exceed our existing targets by 2030, and that will obviously provide the basis for a good conversation. But what I actually want...

RAF EPSTEIN: But can I pass that a little Tim Wilson, do you want to go further than where we're already going to land?

TIM WILSON: What I want is to take a position to the Australian people at the next election, have it endorsed, and this is the fundamental difference between some of our political opponents and ourselves. Every policy we take, we have taken to an election, got endorsed by the Australian people, including, of course, our previous commitments to 2030 of 26 to 28 per cent. And of course, there will be a continued conversation about that, that we will take to the next election.

RAF EPSTEIN: Just a final question on a different matter, Tim Wilson, ninth year in government, still no anti-corruption commission. Is that embarrassing?

TIM WILSON: Well, I understand the Attorney General is going to be presenting legislation to Parliament after consultation shortly. And so it's good to have. We made a commitment we'd do it in this term of Parliament. We're going to honour that.

RAF EPSTEIN: Nine years. Not embarrassing you haven't got one? Victoria's had one for longer than that. New South Wales had one longer than that. That isn't just bizarre, that we don't have one federally?

TIM WILSON: And that's why we promised we'd take one last election and we said we deliver in this term of government and we're in this term of government still Raf. So we're going to deliver that. Legislation is going to be presented to the Parliament after consultation, so we know the consequences of it, and so that we can deliver our election commitment to the Australian people.

RAF EPSTEIN: Tim Wilson, I've been asking listeners for one word to sum up your government's climate change. I know it's hard because you're a politician, but one word to sum up your government's approach to the conference in Glasgow, one word.

TIM WILSON: One word? Committed.

RAF EPSTEIN: Yeah okay, you're good. You get real self-control there. Thank you for joining us.

TIM WILSON: Pleasure.

RAF EPSTEIN: Tim Wilson, Assistant Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction. So that means he assists Angus Taylor. He's also the Liberal MP for the seat of Goldstein.