Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to President Obama’s abandonment of a cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme for the world’s largest economy. As the Prime Minister herself rejected an emissions trading scheme during the period of the Rudd government, which she said had lost its way, can she explain how increasing electricity prices for Australian consumers rather than cleaning up power stations is somehow the government finding its way?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. As he would be aware if he had followed the commentary in the United States, President Obama has been in favour of a cap-and-trade scheme to price carbon in the American economy and, following the mid-term elections, has accepted that the reality of the congress that he faces is that he will not be able to legislate for it. He is experiencing obstruction in the congress for a proposal that he supports and consequently understands that he will not be able to get a scheme through. One should not interpret President Obama’s statement as him changing his mind about an emissions trading scheme. That is simply not true. He is accepting the domestic political realities that he faces.

As I said when I met with President Obama over the weekend, Australia and America are great mates. We are great mates and we will continue to be.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Pyne interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Sturt is warned.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But Australia is not an American state. We will make our own decisions in our national interest. The mid-term elections in America did not determine policy for us. We are Australians; we will make our own decisions. We will make our own decisions in this parliament, where the government has seized the opportunity presented by this parliament to see if we can work through for a parliamentary and community consensus on the most efficient way of dealing with carbon, and that is to put a price on it. The most efficient way of reducing carbon pollution is to put a price on carbon pollution. I am of that view; economists are of that view; President Obama is of that view. Right around the world nations are working through how best to deal with carbon, including pricing carbon.

If the member does want to slavishly follow American examples—and I believe we are Australians and we will make our own decisions—then perhaps he would want to look to the example of California. As he would well know, if California were a nation it would be sitting at the table of the G20. It has moved to price carbon in its economy. In this public policy challenge of pricing carbon, my invitation remains to those on the opposition benches to turn away from their strategy of wrecking and looking for popular slogans, and to work with the government to get a measure done in the nation’s interest. That is the approach we are taking, because I do not believe that it is in the interests of this nation to not deal with the challenge of pricing carbon, or to not deal with the transformation of our economy to a low-pollution economy. We are determined to deal with this challenge and to work our way through.

Members opposite, including the Leader of the Opposition, have had every position possible on this, the Leader of the Opposition changing his mind every 24 hours—famously called a weather vane by the member for Wentworth. Now is the time to put those politics aside and to work with the government on something so clearly in our national interest. National interest before political interest: try it just once.