House debates
Tuesday, 22 March 2011
Questions without Notice
Carbon Pricing
2:24 pm
Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source
I thank the member for Robertson for her question. She is right. It would certainly be better if we saw bipartisan support for the major reform that lies in front of this nation. It would be better if the opposition had not given way to denial of the science of climate change. It would be better if the Liberal Party had not turned its back on its traditions and denied the power of markets. It would be better if the Liberal Party accepted what I believe it would have accepted at any other point in its history, which is that it is not right to take money from taxpayers and use that as a subsidy for big polluters, which is what the Leader of the Opposition stands for. It would be better if this major transformation of our economy so we can be a prosperous nation in the future and so we can make our contribution to combating climate change—this big reform—had bipartisan support.
Of course, pricing carbon has had support from time to time before they gave way to being in perpetual scare campaign mode and standing for absolutely nothing except raising fear in the community. The government is committed to pricing carbon. We are committed to doing that because I do not want this nation left behind. I want us to invest in a clean energy future. We have to make a start because the rest of the world is moving. We have a high-pollution economy and we cannot afford to be left behind. We need to start to have our economy transition.
Yes, this is going to be a difficult process of reform; I absolutely accept that. But it is a reform the government is determined to lead notwithstanding the fear campaign and scare campaign coming from the opposition. I take the House to the following words—it would be better if the opposition remembered some of these words:
Despite an initial protest from industries taxed not only have they survived but many have flourished because the cleaner industry has often proved to be more efficient.
No comments