Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to the statement by the Chairman of BlueScope Steel, Graham Kraehe, today that the carbon tax meant that there was ‘a high risk of the steel industry reaching a tipping point where it will no longer be viable to keep a steel industry in Australia; and compensation to industry is ‘like putting a bandaid on a bullet wound.’ Will the Prime Minister guarantee workers in industries like the steel plant at Kwinana in outer metropolitan Perth that not one Australian job will be lost overseas as a result of her carbon tax?

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

I thank the member for her question. I am aware of media references to the supposed impact of a carbon price on BlueScope. I am aware of that. The government is aware of the issues confronting BlueScope and will continue to consult with them about the introduction of a carbon price.

BlueScope and the broader steel industry were heavily consulted during the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme debate regarding assistance for emissions-intensive, trade exposed industries. Our commitment is to consult with the steel industry. Our commitment is to consult with businesses. We have a business round table for that purpose and, of course, we have a broader outreach than that. As we engage in that broader outreach, let me explain to the member that, with the carbon price mechanism we have announced, we will be putting a price on carbon and we will be getting the biggest polluters in this country to pay that price. That is because we want to cut carbon pollution. At the moment they can put that carbon pollution into the atmosphere for nothing. We will put a price on it. That will drive innovation and change. Then the money raised through that will be used to compensate households.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order on relevance. My question was whether the Prime Minister would guarantee that not one Australian job will be lost overseas.

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Health Services and Indigenous Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Laming interjecting

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

I assume that the member for Bowman is having a discussion with himself. The point of order raised was whether the Prime Minister is being directly relevant, but it was supported by a case that could be characterised as seeking a direct answer. The standing orders were not changed to require that; so, to the extent that precedent exists, I am using that precedent. There is no way that the chair can dictate how the question is answered, as long as the material is directly relevant. I am listening closely to the Prime Minister’s response but, at this stage, I believe it to be directly relevant.

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

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I was making a point about the use of the revenue raised by putting a price on pollution, paid by the biggest polluters. We have already canvassed in question time today the use of that revenue, and it will be our single highest priority to assist Australian households. That is the assistance that the opposition is opposed to and would take away.

The second use of that revenue will be to assist Australian industry. We understand that there is a transition that needs to be made here, and we will be supporting Australian industry in that transition. That is because I believe that we need to act to make sure that our economy has prosperity in the future. We want to protect Australian jobs. We want to make sure Australia has the clean-energy jobs of the future. That is why we need to price carbon.

The third use of the revenue raised by putting a price on pollution, which will cut pollution, will be to fund programs to tackle climate change. On the direct engagement of BlueScope, can I say to the member who has asked the question: I referred a little earlier in my answer to the business round table that is continuing to meet and provide feedback to government. BlueScope is represented on that round table. Paul O’Malley was in attendance when the round table met in November and in February. We will continue to have that round table meet to provide assistance to government in the further design of the carbon pricing scheme.