House debates

Monday, 22 February 2010

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2009-2010; Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2009-2010

Second Reading

4:51 pm

Photo of Bruce ScottBruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

And with no compensation and no capacity for the dairy farmer to pass it on because they are at the end of the line. They are at the primary stage of production. Dairy farmers, like so many farmers in Australia, buy everything retail and sell everything wholesale. So this would have been just another impost on the costs of production. Of course, the ETS was just another way for this government to raise revenue to compensate for its mismanagement of our economy.

What I find most concerning is that we have a Prime Minister who gazes across the seas for clues on how to govern our nation. He does not look inward across our nation. He does not take his cue from the people he is meant to lead—the Australian people. It is no wonder that Australians are angry and that we are seeing that anger being reflected in the polls. We have a Prime Minister who was voted into government by the people who thought that he would have had their best interests at heart, yet he is still prepared to sacrifice 126,000 jobs in regional Australia for his giant new tax, a tax which would have done very little for the environment here in Australia or around the world. That was the net result: 126,000 jobs lost in regional Australia—in seats like Gippsland, Riverina, Farrer, Indi, Murray and my own electorate of Maranoa. And these were figures from Treasury! They were the sorts of numbers of jobs that would have been lost. Of course, as the member for Gippsland knows, with every job there is a family. There is a family to feed. There are children. But that would have been the net number of jobs, based on figures from Treasury, that regional Australia alone would have lost as a result of this great big new tax.

We can talk a lot about the impact on businesses but I just want to focus a little longer on households and how they would have been worse off. Households would have been worse off because there was not going to be compensation for every household for the increased costs of living, for the increased cost of electricity—which was well documented, I might say, by the government—that would have affected every household. Some would have received some compensation, but what about the aged-care facilities, as the member for Gippsland would know? Would they have been compensated for the increased cost of living that would have been an impost on the aged-care facilities which care for some of the most vulnerable in our community and which do a magnificent job? Their costs would have risen without an offset in compensation and without an increased payment for their recurrent funding.

There are some 900,000 small businesses in Australia. There has never been any mention of how small businesses would be compensated. Small businesses, not multinational businesses, are the engine room of our economy. We all have small businesses in our electorates. They are in the suburbs, in the cities and out in the country. There is no compensation for small businesses to pay for the increased cost of electricity for everything they produce.

The Prime Minister himself has admitted that in the first two years of the ETS there would be a 19 per cent increase in the cost of electricity. Some 19,000 jobs would be lost in the mining industry alone in the next 10 years and 45,000 jobs would be lost in the energy-intensive industries. Queensland, with its coal industry, is an energy state. In my electorate of Maranoa we have the Surat Basin. To the north, the electorates of Flynn, Capricornia and Dawson would all be affected by the emissions trading scheme put forward by the Labor government. Thankfully, the scheme has been defeated in the upper house—twice. Unfortunately, in the lower house the opposition cannot muster the numbers or get those on the other side with any courage to come across and vote with the opposition. The member for Flynn, a representee from the Labor Party, has a large proportion of the Bowen Basin in his seat and jobs that are dependent on the coal industry. And what about the member for Dawson? Where has he been? Dawson has a coal export terminal with a massive number of jobs. Often the workers who live there fly in and out to jobs west of Mackay. It is the same in Gladstone, Emerald, Blackwater Bluff, Tjuringa, Capella, Tieri and Middlemount. All those towns are very much dependent on the viability of the coal industry.

But where is the member for Dawson? Where is the member for Capricornia? Where is the member for Flynn? Do they have the courage to come across to our side of the House and say: ‘Prime Minister, we think we’ve got this wrong. We’d better vote for the people we represent in this place. We want to represent the working families who’d be affected by the ETS.’ No, they blindly follow the Prime Minister. I know that at the next federal election, which is coming up sometime this year, those working families will be able to make judgments on those from the other side of the House who do not have the courage to stand up for the jobs and families that will be affected if the Senate ever passes this flawed legislation, which is nothing more than the introduction of a great big new tax on everything.

As I said earlier, the ETS would not only cost jobs; it would also cost families. Labor’s ETS would cost Australian families something like $120 billion over the next 10 years. I spoke a moment ago about compensation, but it would have been dependent on the government legislating to bring forward that compensation. We have seen how this government sometimes handles those issues when it comes to the delivery of a promise being converted into legislation and law. Families have no guarantee that they are going to be compensated adequately. They are relying on a Prime Minister and a government which says one thing prior to an election but delivers something else after the election.

Mr Deputy Speaker Schultz, I, like you, represent a regional seat. I know that the emissions trading scheme proposed by this Labor government would have had a huge and negative impact on my electorate of Maranoa. I have almost the entire Surat coal basin in my electorate. Xstrata are proposing new coal mines for the Wandoan area, which is almost in my electorate, and within the next three to four years they plan, obviously if a coalition government—which will not bring in the great big new tax that the Labor Party is proposing—is elected to export 30 million tonnes of coal from their Wandoan coal leases. Then there is coal seam methane gas. British Gas, Arrow Energy, Queensland Gas Co., Origin Energy and Santos are all energy companies that are tapping into the coal seam to extract the coal seam methane gas and they will be sending that to Gladstone to convert into liquefied natural gas for export to markets overseas.

When they are competing for the same market with countries which do not have the threat of a great big new tax overhanging their production and the cost structures of their industries, we have to ask ourselves whether this will ever be a viable proposition. Something like 15,000 jobs are going to be generated by the coal seam methane industry in Maranoa during both the construction phase and the ongoing production of LNG out of Gladstone. Gladstone is of course in the seat of Flynn. More jobs have been put at risk by the member for Flynn. He did not have the courage to come to this side of the House and stick up for the potential jobs that would have delivered wealth to Gladstone and the working families who live there.

There is also the Galilee Basin, which is east of Barcaldine and out near Jericho and is in fact a larger resource than the Surat coal basin. Two major companies are looking at the development of that—Gina Rinehart, from Western Australia, with one lease and Clive Palmer with his leases. Once again, there are more jobs, but jobs will be at risk if there is a great big new tax impacting on the coal industry and the viability of those leases, which are some 500 kilometres from the port at Mackay. When you have to carry coal that distance every kilometre adds another cost and you have to compete with other countries that do not have that huge transport component. These mines, and these jobs, may never be developed if this government is ever able to pass this flawed legislation and introduce a great big new tax that would impact on the viability of potential mines like those in the Galilee Basin or the Surat coal basin.

But this is not just about local jobs; it is about wealth for the nation. When people have jobs they pay income tax, so the Commonwealth also benefits and the economy grows. But, as we know, this government really has no idea about managing the economy let alone an understanding of how their great big new tax would impact on the mining sector and on my electorate of Maranoa. Maranoa is not only a huge agriculturally based economy but a growing base for the production of energy from coal and for the production of alternative and renewable energy. Right out in the west of my electorate is the Cooper Basin, a huge resource in a very remote part of Australia. It feeds into the Moomba oil and gas fields, which pump gas into Adelaide, Sydney, Melbourne and Mount Isa. Not once did we hear any concern from the Labor Party about those resources, which are so essential to driving the energy needs of our major capital cities, and the costs that would be imposed on the production of the gas and oil wells in the outback of my electorate.

But thankfully there is the opposition—the Liberal and National parties and the crossbench senators as well. We have given the people of Australia a very clear choice. We have a direct action plan that will put a carrot out there to encourage energy companies to put in technology that will reduce their carbon emissions. But we do not have a stick and we do not have a great big new tax. One of those energy companies in my electorate is the Tarong Power Station. Already they are looking at how they can utilise algal research—new technology that would be able to capture carbon at the point of burning it and convert it, through synthesis and other processes, into algal oil and protein meal. So companies are looking for ways to deal with carbon, but what we have is a great carrot to encourage companies or businesses to apply for money in a competitive process to allow them to reduce their carbon footprint. That would become a credit in terms of carbon accounting here in Australia. The company will invest in the new technologies. They will have a carrot in the form of some grant money from the Commonwealth government.

The alternative is quite clear. We heard from the Labor Party throughout last year and again when we were denied the opportunity to speak in the House. The Leader of the House used the guillotine and denied opposition members their right to speak when the bill was before the House of Representatives. Our direct action plan is something that I believe all Australians understand. It is simple. It is not a great big tax. It is a carrot. It is encouraging new technology and it will not hurt families. It will be good for Australia and I put to the Main Committee this afternoon that this is an alternative to Labor’s great big new tax. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments