Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

He interjects on time, ‘The money churn.’ Guess what churn those opposite have decided to use. They reach their hand into the pocket of taxpayers and churn that money into the pockets of the big polluters. That is exactly what they have done. That is Liberal Party churn, front and centre, because what they have done is transfer the burden of climate change transition from the big polluters who cause it onto working families as taxpayers or consumers. That is it in a nutshell.

I am also taken by the fact that for the first time in my life that I have been in this position I have heard those opposite cite as their source of authority a publication of the government of New South Wales. But I will just leave that to one side and ask him to reflect on the numbers that I provided before from the Treasury. The Leader of the Opposition concluded his question with this: he referred again to what he describes as the great big tax, on which he was asked three specific times last night on television whether it was an impost on consumers and taxpayers. He ducked and he weaved because he knew the answer was no.

The bottom line is this—their approach is as follows: (1) they do less with their scheme, (2) it costs more for taxpayers and (3) it is not even funded. On this there are only two ways to go. You will fund your scheme by a huge additional tax yourselves because you are charging taxpayers at least three times more than the government scheme or, secondly, as the Leader of the Opposition was asked again this morning, you cut services. When asked whether he was going to cut schools, cut hospitals, cut defence, he refused to rule it out. Can I just say to the Leader of the Opposition that there are two ways you can go when you have an unfunded policy. One is that you jack up taxes and you pass them on to working families; the second is that you cut services. When asked whether he would cut hospitals and defence this morning he ran a million miles.

The heart of the climate con job by the Leader of the Opposition is this: they are putting forward a scheme which costs the taxpayer three times as much. That is point 1. Point 2: those opposite know that, when it comes to the value of the carbon market over the next 10 years, the value of the carbon market is not a cost to taxpayers. It is like saying that the value of the electricity market is a cost to taxpayers and they therefore know that the value of a market as one concept does not equal a direct impost on taxpayers. What he has deliberately done is mix apples with oranges. That is the heart of the big con. It is at the very centre of the climate con job which he has tried to put forward to the Australian people. Bit by bit, tile by tile, as each day passes, it starts to crumble into a total lack of credibility.

See this speech in context