Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

He might want to bet me a year’s salary that there will not be corruption within international trade. We see the carpetbaggers of the Business Council now being criticised by the producers of the Business Council—and I will repeat that word for you if you like, carpetbaggers—over the fact that the people that are going to see themselves making the biggest amount of money out of an emissions trading scheme are the hedge funds, the financial factor and, of course, the screen jockeys. Every time they drive a Porsche down the road, who pays for that? The electors of Braddon, because there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Nevertheless, the government is now being given time to consider whether food prices will rise. The article makes reference to where the government would be, considering its position in opposition, if someone were standing up now saying, ‘Let’s put seven per cent GST on food.’ I well remember the debates in this place on roll-back. A leading economics writer said that ETS should have an extra ‘t’ in it—the emissions trading tax scheme. Prior to getting on to this other measure, which is worthy of consideration, the reality is that an emissions trading scheme will put up prices. The government says it will put up the price of electricity and will therefore give people in the lower income sector compensation. What does that prove? It proves that the electricity generator is going to buy the certificates and not reduce the pollution. I watch a member opposite, so inconsequential I do not even know the name of her electorate, shaking her head.

See this speech in context