Steve Irons (Swan, 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 Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency that, 'The introduction of a carbon price in Australia will not reduce global temperatures over the next five, 10 or 50 years.' With the forgotten families of Australia already struggling with the rising cost of living, why is the Prime Minister introducing a carbon tax that, for them, is all pain and no gain?

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

I thank the member for his quest­ion. I think it is very important that there is a shared and respectful understanding of the science of climate change. Where that shared and respectful understanding of the science of climate change leads us is that we live in a world where, as a result of human activity and the way we live today—the industr­ialised high-energy way we live today—we generate more carbon pollution than at any other time in human history. What that means is that there is a level of damage already done which we cannot unthink or undo. There is a level of damage that lies in front of us and we can make a difference to that—that is, we can act to cut carbon pollution. Rather than saying, as a nation, that we are prepared to just allow whatever the future gives us in terms of levels of carbon pollution with all of the danger that that would create for our nation, we can act to reduce those levels of carbon pollution. I believe in doing that. I believe as a nation which is amongst the 20 biggest polluters in our world, we should be acting to cut carbon pollution.

I am a little bit surprised about this question because I would have to say that, unless there has been a big change in opposition policy, I thought members of the opposition said that they supported cutting carbon pollution too. Maybe I am wrong about that. I know, of course, that climate change scepticism has swept through the Liberal Party and claimed the Leader of the Opposition, so now maybe they reject the need to do anything about carbon pollution and simply deny its existence.

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

Order! The Prime Minister will resume her seat. The member for Swan on a point of order.

Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, my question was about the cost of living in introducing a carbon tax, and relevance.

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

The member for Swan would also acknowledge that there are other elements to the question as well. The Prime Minister is responding.

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

There may have been a change in the opposition because I note that yesterday the Leader of the Opposition in this place referred to so-called carbon pollution, so maybe climate change sceptic­ism is now ruling entirely. They reject the science out of hand and they reject the existence of carbon pollution out of hand. But we, on this side of the parliament, accept the science. We believe we should act to reduce carbon pollution. We accept the economic advice that the best way to do that is by pricing carbon. Then, of course, because we want as a Labor government to look after those in our community who need the most assistance, we will ensure that the money polluters pay funds tax cuts and payment increases for nine out of 10 households.

The member in his point of order said that he was concerned about cost of living. He needs to make a comparison between tax cuts and payment increases for nine out of 10 households versus the plan of the Leader of the Opposition to charge households an extra $720 per year in tax, something that would impact on people's cost of living.

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

That is simply untrue.

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

Order!I simply say to the member for Flinders I have two options in dealing with him. He will leave the chamber for one hour under 94(a), the lesser of the two evils.

The member for Flinders then left the chamber .

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

On the question of cost of living, the member who asked the question may want to refer to the policy of his own political party, particularly page 14—that is the plan to put penalties on businesses, businesses in his electorate. I do not know how many businesses in his electorate would get which size penalty. He may have to ask the Leader of the Opposition about that and how many of them it would drive out of business. I cannot help him with that; it is the plan of the Leader of the Opposition. But, of course, the penalty put on businesses would flow through presumably to the prices that they charge and into cost of living pressures. He may ask the Leader of the Opposition to come clean about that as well because the Leader of the Opposition wants to make a charge of $720 per family. He has this plan for penalties, rising cost-of-living pressures and he is planning no assistance. In fact he is planning to take back the tax cuts and pension increases that this government will provide.

Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table a letter from the Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency which states, 'The introduction of a carbon price in Australia will not reduce global temperatures.'

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

Leave is not granted.

Opposition members interjecting—

Order! The member for Flinders might feel aggrieved if I allow this to go on for too long.