PATRICIA KARVELAS: I want to bring in my first guest - the Energy Minister Angus Taylor joins me now. Angus Taylor, welcome.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Thanks for having me.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: You were, of course, Cybersecurity Minister so you are across these issues.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Yeah.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: The Prime Minister says if you can write an algorithm to ensure that people can get basically advertising, which is true - we get this targeted advertising now as individuals - then an algorithm should be able to deal with this kind of offensive material. Can Australia do something immediately rather than wait for the G20 to take action?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, we've been doing something for some time, but the real challenge is live streaming, Patricia. So, there's been big improvements with dealing with videos that are known and understood. The challenge is when you see a livestream, how quickly you can intercept it, cut it off, and make sure it's not replicated anywhere, and that's where work needs to be done. Look, the social media platforms need to take accountability for what they do.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: They could do this straight away, couldn't they?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, there needs to be accountability. They need to do everything in their power to make sure this doesn't happen. The fact that so many people saw these videos to me is appalling because they were heinous acts. It was an atrocious thing to watch - I didn't watch it, but people close to me did see some of it and it really is dreadful that the social media platforms aren't doing absolutely everything in their power to make sure this kind of live stream is intercepted instantaneously or prevented in the first place. I think there's room for Australia to play a leadership role. We have in the past, particularly amongst the Five Eyes, in taking down terrorism-related videos, terrorism related violence, and I think we can play a leadership role here. There shouldn't be ungoverned spaces, Patricia.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Is there need in Australia for immediate law reform here as well?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, at the end of the day, the social media platforms don't necessarily host from here, so we need to work with our partners from across the world. This is why we've worked so closely with the Five Eyes countries and of course, the Prime Minister is proposing to work with the G20. But at the end of the day, Australia does play an important role. We've led the way in thinking and working on regulation of the social media platforms. We should. This is an important catalyst for us to get this right, because what got out there into the public domain was absolutely appalling.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: So, at this stage, would you denounce them? Do you think they're not playing their role as global citizens?

ANGUS TAYLOR: I think they need to take accountability. I think they-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Have they failed?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, they need to take accountability and they've failed in this instance, that's for sure. We've known for some time that live streaming had the potential to create a situation like this. It's done it now. Now, we probably shouldn't have had to wait for this event for the action to occur. Now we need to see action from the social media platforms. It's crucial they do it.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: How about hate speech online? So yes, that's the live streaming and that's an incredibly- that's at the high end, isn't it? I mean, this is incredibly violent stuff. But how about some of these posts from some of these white supremacists, in this case, who are calling for appalling acts against Islamic people?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, I think the principle should be that the way we deal with things offline should be parallel to the way we deal with them online. I mean, the idea that the online space…

PATRICIA KARVELAS: There is no consistency now, is there?

ANGUS TAYLOR: The offline space should be fundamentally different, to me, is all wrong. We should have the same respect, politeness and demeanour online as we do offline. Now, in some cases, when we see bad behaviour offline, we censure it. That's the right way. In some cases, it's illegal. I mean, we believe in free speech in this country, so there should- you know, we've got to get the balance here right. But at the end of the day, I don't see why the offline principle shouldn't apply online.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Let's talk about your current portfolio. And you've released modelling today on Labor's emissions reduction plan saying there would be 336,000 fewer jobs. You said the report by BAEconomics had been peer reviewed, so I want to talk about that peer review. John Weyant is the man that's peer reviewed it. He's a key witness in the Trump administration's fight against the landmark climate lawsuit brought by children. Doesn't that compromise him? He's a key witness against these kids who are taking action on climate change.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Let me correct something you said. You said we released the modelling; we didn't release any modelling. The release was independent...

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay.

ANGUS TAYLOR: The modelling was independently-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: You referred to this peer review.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Right. And it's true that over the course of the day, we've watched the usual suspects, led by the Labor Party, trying to play the person and not the ball...

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, is that true or not? Is he the key witness?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Look, I don't know because we haven't released the modelling.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Haven't you checked? Isn't that part of-

ANGUS TAYLOR: It was peer reviewed and the modelling has been done, more importantly, by an economist who advised the Hawke and Keating governments, who contributed to three IPCC reports, and is one of our leading economists in this country, and it's the most detailed, comprehensive piece of modelling we've seen. Now, the point he is making is a very simple one, Patricia, which is that you can't achieve reductions in emissions without cost. And he's quantified those costs, and what we see is when you go for very high targets, very aggressive targets, almost halving the emissions-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay, but do you accept that the actual role that this peer reviewed man- what he's done, is relevant to the story?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, you know, what I look at is whether there is an issue here with assessing the costs of policy; whether Brian Fish-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: But I've asked you another question about-

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, you know, I don't go in and s- it's not my modelling.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Isn't it relevant, though, to see if any of these people are compromised by their agendas? For instance, the man you talk about - I mean, he's said previously: there is nothing we can do alone that will have a material impact on the global climate.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Brian Fisher is extremely credible. He has advised governments for many, many years, including the Hawke and Keating governments, he was head of ABARE and the Bureau of Agricultural Economics in the past, and he's a very well respected economist. He makes a simple point, which I think is appropriate - and by the way, which has been supported by other similar work. What we've got here, though, is the most comprehensive piece of work. And if Labor has a view that the modelling's wrong, they should put out their own.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, they have been saying the modelling's wrong.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, they should put out their own. And the problem they've got is they haven't even announced their policies, let alone modelling to support those.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, you haven't modelled all of your policies, either.

ANGUS TAYLOR: We have, Patricia.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Not all of them together. You've been making lots of announcements - you haven't modelled the cumulative effect of all of those announcements.

ANGUS TAYLOR: That's not correct. So, two and a half weeks ago the Prime Minister made a speech where he laid out exactly how we were going to achieve our 26 per cent emission reduction target. We need to find 328 million tonnes over and above the Kyoto carryover - we've laid out how we're going to achieve that: 102 million tonnes from the Emissions Reduction or Climate Solution Fund, 63 million tonnes from energy efficiency and so on - the hydro projects we announced; Snowy and Battery of the Nation. So, we've laid it down, down to the last tonne.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, you've told us the policies, but not the cumulative effect on the economy. Look, I have another question on the 66 projects which there is a submission process for the Government to underwrite. These are power generation projects. Will we know before the election which 66 will get the go ahead?

ANGUS TAYLOR: We're working through them.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Will we know before the election?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, we're working through them. And we're going to get this right, Patricia.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: So, will it happen before the election? You haven't answered.

ANGUS TAYLOR: We are working through them and when we know we have the right shortlist, we'll announce it. Now, what's crucial here-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: So, you don't know what the timing is of that?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, what I know is we got 66 submissions across a range of different fuel sources and technologies. We need more supply and competition. We're following the ACCC recommendation - technology neutral process - and we're working through them as quickly as we can. Now, the truth is it takes time to assess what in some cases are multibillion dollar projects - you can't do it overnight. I've been involved in assessing projects like this all my career. You don't rush it. You get it right. We took two years to make the final investment decision on Snowy and we're not going to rush it.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay, so we may not know before the election.

ANGUS TAYLOR: What I'm saying is we'll do it when we know we've got it right.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay. So, just to be clear: it's unlikely we'll know before the election.

ANGUS TAYLOR: I didn't say that. I said when we-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: You didn't say anything, so I'm trying to get an answer.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, the point is, that for too long people have rushed things to meet deadlines which are politically imposed. We're not going to do that. The deadline here is to get prices down in a reasonable period of time so that consumers, businesses can get a fairer price for electricity. That's our focus.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: And is there still a possibility that a coal project may be underwritten?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, it's technology neutral.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: So that's still a live option?

ANGUS TAYLOR: It's technology neutral and that means whether it's hydro or batteries or gas or coal, we're considering them all. And that's what the ACCC rightly recommended.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: I've got to ask you about One Nation preferences. Why doesn't the Coalition make a decision to put One Nation and Fraser Anning and Queensland last?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, we don't do preference deals. This is a matter of policy. We don't do preference deals at the national level, and this is the point that the Prime Minister made. It's not-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, individually, why wouldn't you ask your candidates to put One Nation last?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, the Prime Minister has made the point that we're not going to do a preference deal. There's nothing new in that - that's been the case in the past.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: So, would One Nation presumably in some electorates come up before Labor in your how-to-vote card?

ANGUS TAYLOR: An election hasn't even been called yet.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: No, but do you think that would be acceptable, to have One Nation before Labor on a how-to-vote card?

ANGUS TAYLOR: We're speculating on this.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: The question.

ANGUS TAYLOR: What I do think, though, is Fraser Anning's comments were unacceptable. He should be censured.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: But One Nation also won't censure him.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, that's what we're dealing with at the moment and I agree with you - One Nation should censure him. I mean, they were inappropriate comments. He is making this into some kind of tribal war and it shouldn't be. An individual committed a heinous act. That individual should be held to account. We should of course have a sensible discussion about the influences, but at the end of the day, we have a system of government in this country where individuals are made accountable for bad actions, and this was heinous action.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Do you think- you say it's all individual, it's all based on electorate and the state. So, does that mean in some cases One Nation might be preferenced before Labor?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Look, again, we're into speculation when we haven't-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: But do you think that would be acceptable, for One Nation to be preferenced on an LNP how-to-vote card before Labor?

ANGUS TAYLOR: What I am saying is we haven't even had an election called, Patricia. No doubt there'll be lots of discussion about this in the coming-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: What's your own instinct about that? Would that be okay?

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, I've said my own instinct on Fraser Anning's comments.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: No, but on the preferences going to One Nation.

ANGUS TAYLOR: We haven't even got to that point. We haven't had an election called-

PATRICIA KARVELAS: So, you're leaving the door open that they may be preferenced before Labor.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Well, what's clear is we're not going to do a preference deal. The Prime Minister has made that absolutely clear and I think that's appropriate. That's been our policy in the past and it should continue to be our policy into the future.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Angus Taylor, thanks for coming in.

ANGUS TAYLOR: Thanks, Patricia.

PATRICIA KARVELAS: And that's the Energy Minister Angus Taylor.