Peter Slipper (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received letters from the honourable the Leader of the Nationals and the honourable member for Blair proposing that definite matters of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion today. As required by standing order 46, I have selected the matter which, in my opinion, is the most urgent and important; that is, that proposed by the honourable the Leader of the Nationals, namely:

The massive impact of the carbon tax on mining and mineral processing communities in Queensland.

I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, as a fellow Queenslander, you would realise the importance of this particular matter, especially at this time of the Queensland electoral cycle. During question time today, we heard again and again about the impact of Labor's carbon tax on Australians—on Australians in business, on Australians at play, on Australians at home. Everywhere, this pervasive tax is going to impact upon their lives.

The passage of the carbon tax through the House of Representatives has certainly been one of the most bizarre events in Australian political history. A government bereft of legitimacy, cobbled together out of expediency and self-interest, without a mandate, imposed the will of a very few on the entire nation. After that we saw the government congratulating itself for imposing this tax on the businesses and families of Australia. Today again we see them congratulating themselves on imposing upon Australia's great mining industry another round of new taxes. Labor seemingly only take pleasure out of new taxes, out of inflicting pain. They have done it at least 20 times since elected to office—20 new taxes imposed upon the Australian economy. They have done all this, congratulating themselves with great hubris. As the carbon tax went through the Australian parliament we even saw the Prime Minister hugging the member for Griffith. How bizarre was this tax that brought those two people together in a rare display of harmony?

There was no thought in all this rejoicing about the deception and betrayal of the Australian people through this legislation. There was not a sombre thought for the mums and dads in living rooms across the country who are worried about the impact of this extra cost on everything they are going to buy. There was no concern demonstrated for the Australian jobs that were placed in real jeopardy—thousands of Australian jobs—because this tax makes Australian industry so much less competitive. There was no concern about the risk to jobs in Queensland, such as jobs in the mining industry—which have now been put at even greater risk as a result of the imposition of the mining tax—along with jobs in the minerals processing sector, jobs in the foundries, as we heard in answer to a question in question time today, jobs in the tourism and hospitality industry and jobs in agriculture. These are the economic pillars of Queensland, and they are all under assault by this government's carbon tax and by its lack of concern about the people who work in those industries and the important and vital role they play in building a strong Queensland and a strong Australia.

This was no ordinary carbon tax. This was no carbon tax in keeping with things happening in the rest of the world. This is by far the world's biggest carbon tax. There is nothing in its league anywhere else in the world. The Australian carbon tax will raise more money in its first three months than the Europeans have raised since they started their tax six years ago. Australia is responsible for about 1.3 per cent of global emissions and the Europeans for 14 per cent. Yet our tax, in just three months, will collect as much money as the Europeans have collected in six years. It will keep going up and up and up from then on. The European price keeps going down and down and down. The legislation which this government is boasting about, which it so gleefully celebrated in this place and in the other chamber just a few months ago, guarantees that the Australian carbon price will go up, up, up, even though the global price is going down, down, down. That indicates this government's comprehension of economics and the impact that has on ordinary Australians.

The people resent the unseemly hooting, hollering and high fives in the House of Representatives at that time. It just shows how out of touch Labor really is with the households of Australia. On Saturday the people of Queensland will have an opportunity to pass judgment, and they can do it quietly at the ballot box. I have got no doubt that they will be sending a message of judgment not just to the Queensland government—which have been willing supporters of this tax, in spite of the fact that they know something of its impact on the Australian economy—but also to Labor federally. They do not want the carbon tax any more than the people of New South Wales want this tax. When there is retribution passed on the government in Queensland, that will be a message not just to Labor and its failures in that state but to the federal government that the people of Queensland do not want this tax.

There is more. Today, electricity generators exposed the government's carbon tax attempts to gouge funds to prop up this year's budget, lumping industries and consumers with upfront costs. Matthew Warren at the Energy Supply Association belled the cat when he said:

… industry is deeply concerned that the design features of the carbon pricing mechanism are being influenced by Budget revenue considerations. They should not be.

He went on to say:

… as the carbon price is a mechanism to reduce emissions – not raise revenue – its design should not be compromised by revenue considerations.It would be especially unfortunate if such considerations imposed extra costs on the energy industry and ultimately energy consumers.

But that is exactly what this government is proposing to do. They want to fill up some of their budget black hole by forcing the electricity industry to buy carbon permits early, in 2012-13. They want this money to be brought forward so that they can deliver a wafer-thin budget surplus, theoretically, in just a couple of months time. So there will be more than just the 10 per cent hike for families in the first year of the tax; it will be 10 per cent plus, because the government are insisting that the electricity industry buy some of these permits early.

Let us also have a bit of a look at what is going to happen in Queensland. It is perhaps a little curious that the Queensland Competition Authority, which sets electricity price increases in the state, will release its next recommendations on 30 March, after the Queensland election. I wonder whether Anna Bligh chose her election date so that she would not have to deal with the news associated with what the Queensland Competition Authority is going to say about electricity prices. Following the experience of New South Wales, we can expect increases of 10 per cent or more from 1 July—but it will be more than that, as a result of the impact of the carbon tax and the fact that the federal government is bringing forward their obligations.

Once upon a time Queensland boasted about its low-cost and abundant electricity. It was one of the major advantages that Queensland had in attracting industry from around the world—low-cost and abundant electricity. But, under Labor, electricity prices in Queensland have soared by almost 60 per cent in the last five years. That is only a taste of what we are going to get in the future as the carbon tax starts to bite. One of Queensland's natural advantages will be destroyed by a Labor government determined to tax the coal industry, electricity generation industry and then, of course, every element of transport, consumption and manufacturing in the state. You do not need to be a mathematical genius to be able to figure out what this government is up to. It is desperate to deliver a wafer-thin budget surplus in a few months time, and it has not got the money.

Labor's carbon tax is a job killer. It is affecting every community and causing grave concern across the nation. Families will still be reaping the cost that it imposes on Australian households way after the memories of compensation have gone. Incidentally, the compensation will be made this financial year—early, so that it also does not have an impact on next year's budget figures. The artificial, dodgy surplus that Labor is seeking to conspire has simply been dreamed up with absolutely no real benefit whatsoever.

This tax will have a particular impact on Queenslanders. We already know that local government has said that the carbon tax will add around $200 million to the cost of garbage disposal every year. Electricity bills will increase the cost of education by $57 a student and the costs for hospitals will increase by $100 million a year. Queensland Rail reports that the carbon tax will add $5 million to its costs and so add to rail fares. Of course, grocery costs will be up by five per cent. The 7-Eleven stores say that it will wipe five per cent off their gross profits. Westfield are already including a carbon or greenhouse gas emission charge in their leases. These are costs that Queenslanders will have to bear. So it is not just the minerals and the minerals processing sector that will suffer, although we have heard the leaders of the aluminium industry, in particular, say that Queensland will have the most taxed aluminium industry in the world. We have heard them talk about their inability to compete with industries in other parts of the world because of the ever-present and increasing cost that Labor is determined to impose upon them.

But it is not just these industries alone which will be affected. The Queensland tourism industry will pay a hefty toll. It has been tough enough for people to make a go of tourism in Australia over recent times. But Labor's carbon tax will be felt particularly hard by the Australian tourism industry. If someone wants to have a holiday in Cairns, the Gold Coast, the Whitsundays or the Sunshine Coast, they will have to pay the carbon tax on their air fares, their bus fares and their train fares. Labor will be imposing this tax on the domestic tourism industry. However, if you choose to have your holiday in Bali, Phuket, Fiji or Honolulu, you will not have to pay the carbon tax, even though, obviously, a trip to Bali or Honolulu will have a much higher carbon footprint than a trip to Cairns or the Gold Coast. So this carbon tax is just that—a tax. It has nothing to do with climate reform, let alone being climate friendly; it is just another Labor Party tax.

What about the agriculture sector? It is another area that is a pillar of the Queensland economy. Let us look at abattoirs. They say that they will have an increased cost of $60 million, which will be required for investment in order to meet the carbon tax requirements. Australia's biggest abattoir at Dinmore will be slugged $3.3 million a year when the carbon tax is introduced. There was a report in the paper at the beginning of the year which said that abattoirs around Australia, but particularly in Queensland, were likely to close for several weeks a year so that they can stay under the 25,000-tonne carbon tax trigger. Is it any wonder that the people of Dinmore, around Ipswich, are starting to question why they have been voting Labor all these years? Is it any wonder that they are wondering why the party that was supposed to be for the workers is now so much against the workers and is putting their jobs at risk?

Labor keep telling us that we do not have to worry about any of this because only the 500 biggest companies are going to pay. Labor will never give us a list of these 500 companies. Where are they? Who are they? That is not information that the Labor Party are prepared to share with the Australian people. But the facts are that that statement is simply untrue. At least 100,000 companies are going to pay higher fuel taxes. Every business in Australia will have higher costs as a result of the impacts of this tax being passed on. This is going to have a particular impact on regional communities, where most of the mines exist and the mineral processing is actually occurring. But that does not worry the Labor government. In fact, it is of even less concern to the Greens. The Greens' Senator Sarah Hanson-Young dismissed all the people who are going to lose their jobs in regional communities. She said:

… small towns that are based on fossil fuels probably won't exist.

That is the amount of sympathy they get from the Greens, and we all know that the Greens run this agenda and that Labor is just trotting along. It does not worry her that there will be no coalmining towns, no mineral processing, no jobs and no royalties to pay for the environmental programs and other things that the Greens want so much. She does not care. As we know, the Greens rule in this country and Labor simply follows.

An outcry will ring out across Queensland on Saturday. Take a whiff of the winds of change. Labor is simply on the nose. History will damn this generation of Labor governments, both federal and state, and there will be a special place in the annals for this Prime Minister, who is condemned by her own words. The people will savour their day of judgment. (Time expired)

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On issues of the impact of carbon pricing or the MRRT on business investment decisions, listen not to what the coalition says but look at what investors are doing. The projections in the MYEFO, the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, suggest that the pipeline of resources investment in Australia is continuing to grow since the budget to more than $450 billion. It says:

Following growth of 34 per cent in resources investment in 2010-11, resources companies expect to increase their capital expenditure by a further 74 per cent in 2011-12 …

Indeed, the Reserve Bank's most recent statement on monetary policy predicts that investment, as a share of GDP, will hit its highest level in half a century. That is why I say: listen not to what the coalition says in its fear campaign but look where investors are putting their dollars.

Modelling has been done on the impact on the economy of Queensland of putting a price on carbon. That modelling suggests the following: the growth of the Queensland economy is expected to be strong, with average annual gross state product growth, in real terms, of 3.5 per cent per annum to 2019-20. That is Queensland Treasury modelling and it indicates very strong growth. In fact, the modelling report goes on to say:

… average annual growth in Queensland’s real GSP to 2019-20 will be 3.5 per cent both with and without carbon pricing …

This is the crucial point: there will be strong growth of 3½ per cent with or without carbon pricing. Yet we have the Leader of the Nationals coming into the parliament seeking to convey a belief, an impression, that the carbon price is going to have an adverse effect—some sort of devastating effect—on our mineral and mineral-processing industries in Queensland. Indeed, the same report from Queensland Treasury says:

… employment is forecast to grow at 2.0 per cent per annum both with and without carbon pricing, with an extra 474,000 jobs expected over the period to 2019-20 …

Those are the dispassionate forecasts done by the Queensland Treasury, but we hear not a word of that from the Leader of the Nationals and would-be Deputy Prime Minister of Australia.

Very soon after the announcement by the Gillard government of the carbon-pricing mechanism, Peabody, the largest coalmining company in the world, made a $4½ billion bid for Macarthur Coal. That is a major investor voting with its wallet. Indeed, I have a list here of major mining projects that have been approved and announced, including: BHP Billiton's Caval Ridge Mine project development; BHP Billiton again with the Goonyella to Abbot Point rail line, employing 2,000 people directly; QR National's Wiggins Island rail project, employing 3,000 people directly and indirectly. Origin Energy, ConocoPhilips and Sinopec—this is coal seam gas, which obviously the coalition is opposed to both up in Queensland and here federally, as they never stop attacking the coal seam gas industry—are employing 6,000 people in construction and 1,000 people in operations. Xstrata has the Lady Loretta zinc construction project. BHP Billiton is the lead company for the Bowen Basin metallurgical coal project—that is a $5 billion investment. And there is the Lake Vermont expansion of the coal-handling and preparation plant near Dysart in Central Queensland. Those are just a few of the examples of the projects that are going ahead under the carbon price that has been announced by the Gillard government.

The problem is that the coalition is speaking out of both sides of its mouth. When the Leader of the Nationals is up in regional Queensland he is very fond of attacking the mining industry. At the beginning of the matter of public importance he said the mining and processing industries are the 'economic pillars of Queensland'. That is what he says when he comes to Canberra, but when he is up in Queensland he says:

I share the disappointment about how few mining companies contribute to the areas they invade …

So we have the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in Queensland accusing mining companies of invading areas, yet when he comes to Canberra he says they are the pillars of the economy of Queensland. That is the sort of approach we get from the coalition: saying one thing to one audience and another thing to another audience.

It is not just mining companies who are voting with their wallets; it is members of the opposition who are voting with their wallets. I will go through the members of the coalition who have invested and continue to invest their money in mining companies: the member for Goldstein, the member for Durack, the member for Maranoa, the member for Canning—

Ian Macfarlane (Groom, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy and Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I am very reluctant to rise to my feet to call a point of order on relevance, but I remind the minister that the MPI—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Groom will resume his seat. This is a matter of public importance. All these debates are far ranging. The MPI refers to the 'massive impact of the carbon tax on mining and mineral processing'. The member for Groom needs to be aware that when you offer up an MPI that allows—a bit like a question—wriggle room people are going to take it. The minister has the call.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point I am making is that in one breath coalition MPs are saying that putting a price on carbon will devastate the mining industry in Queensland and in Australia. That is what they say, but what do they do? They actually lodged a vote of confidence in the future of the mining industry of Queensland and Australia through their wallets, just like the major mining companies such as Peabody, Rio Tinto, BHP and Xstrata are doing. That is why the member for Ryan, the member for Bennelong and the member for McPherson have mining shares. I have no problem with that. It is just that they should not be going around saying that the mining industry faces a bleak future. Then there are the members for Moore, Bradfield, Dickson, Grey, Swan, Fadden and Brisbane. In fact, two MPs—the member for Stirling and the member for Flynn—acquired their shares after the implementation of a price on carbon.

So, when it comes to their wallets, when it is in their kick, when it really comes down to the basic motivations of MPs, they are in there investing in the future of mining in Australia. I do not have a problem with that. What I have a problem with is when they come into this chamber and say, 'Mining is going to be wiped out.' The member for Flynn is here and I think he might be one of these investors. Maybe he could tell us later. Yes, I see that he is. He showed his vote of confidence by investing after the implementation of this measure.

So let us not have in this chamber—I know we cannot use the word 'hypocrisy', so I will not—the double standards of people coming in here and pretending they have great concern for the future of the mining industry when in fact they do not. Indeed, the implementation of the mining tax, the MRRT, which is designed to share the benefits to the very communities to which the Leader of the Nationals has referred, could and would do that. In fact, $5.6 billion of the $6 billion in the Regional Infrastructure Fund is being funded by the minerals resource rent tax, and to what purposes is this infrastructure fund being put in Queensland alone? The Blacksoil Interchange project, with up to $54 million in the electorate of Blair, the Townsville Ring Road project, with up to $160 million in the seat of Herbert, and the Peak Downs Highway project, with $120 million in the seat of Capricornia. The member for Capricornia supports it and supports the raising of the revenue that would fund this investment, but it is opposed by the Leader of the National Party and would-be Deputy Prime Minister.

In addition there is the upgrade of the intersection of the Bruce and Capricornia highways for up to $40 million. Again, it is strongly supported by the member for Capricornia and strongly opposed by the Leader of the Nationals because the Leader of the Nationals opposes the minerals resource rent tax. He wants to give that money back to Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart because he, along with the Leader of the Opposition, believes that Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart pay too much tax and that these communities do not deserve the benefits of this infrastructure investment.

The Mackay Ring Road study of up to $10 million is also being funded out of this infrastructure fund which is overwhelmingly being funded by the minerals resource rent tax. So where is the true allegiance of members of the coalition? It is not with the Queensland economy and not with the mining communities of Queensland but with Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart, because the opposition believes they are paying too much tax.

I never thought I would see the day when coalition MPs came in here and voted against a reduction in company tax and against a small business tax break allowing small businesses to write off instantly any and all assets valued at up to $6,500. I see the member for Higgins and I wonder if she would agree with her predecessor, who said that when it comes to cutting the company tax rate this is a reform that is in the national interest. He called upon Labor to support that reform in the national interest. When the coalition reduced the company tax rate, funded by some base-broadening measures, the former member for Higgins said that it was incumbent upon the Labor opposition to support these measures in the national interest. And what did Labor do? We supported them in the national interest. We supported the implementation of the business tax reform measures that were the outcome of the Ralph review. We had the former member for Higgins saying that we must because there was an obligation on oppositions to vote in the national interest.

They were the good old days as far as opposition parties voting in the national interest are concerned, because this political party, the coalition, will not vote in favour of a reduction in company tax which would support mining communities and would give a tax break to all of the 2.7 million small businesses in Australia—all of the contractors, not just the 30 per cent who are companies.

We had the embarrassment of the member for Goldstein coming in here and saying, 'But the company tax rate only applies to incorporated entities, which is only 30 per cent of them, so the rest of the small business community gets nothing.' He must be the only guy in Australia who does not understand the $6,500 instant asset write-off. In a debate late last week, when we were discussing the instant asset write-off, the member for Goldstein made exactly the same point. Learn nothing, forget nothing. It was exactly the same point. I said—predictably—in response that, of course, all small businesses get the benefit of the instant asset write-off. And he said to me, unbelievably, 'But you've got to spend $22,000 to get the $6,500 write-off.' I explained to him that you do not; you spend $6,500 or less to get the $6,500 write-off. He thought you had to spend three times that amount. He multiplied something by 30 per cent—one over 0.3—and got this figure in his head. I explained all this. Learn nothing, forget nothing. He comes into the parliament and asks the same question.

The reason he is not voting for it is that he does not understand it. The reason the Leader of the Opposition is not voting for it is that he wants to increase tax to pay for his paid parental leave scheme with a great big new tax on everything you buy. He wants to increase tax by 1½ percentage points. The true high-taxing champions in Australia are the Liberal Party. If you want to look for tax relief, if you want to look for incentive and if you want to look for small business support, then always look to the Australian Labor Party.

Ian Macfarlane (Groom, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy and Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the standout in the performance of the Minister for Trade and Competitiveness just then was that he could barely bring himself to mention the carbon tax. But he raised a question: if you want to know the response of the investment community to the carbon tax and the mining tax, which he spent most of his time talking about, look where they are investing. I am very happy to do that. According to the research firm Intira, investment in Australia remains about flat compared with—

Dr Emerson interjecting—

I have the numbers here—it is for 2008 to 2011. In the same period—

Dr Emerson interjecting—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister for trade had his opportunity. The member for Groom has the call.

Ian Macfarlane (Groom, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy and Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister raises the issue of Treasury. If we are to rely on Treasury figures, they originally predicted a budget deficit in the current year of $10 billion. I think the latest estimate is $50 billion. So while investment in Australia remained flat between 2008 and 2011—which are the years of the Labor government—in Africa we saw a rise of 26 per cent, in Canada we saw a rise of 31 per cent, in South America we saw a rise of 54 per cent and in the rest of the world we saw a rise of 78 per cent. I guess that says that the investment community is putting its money where it thinks it is going to get the return. Unfortunately, we are missing out on the increase.

This MPI is about the impact of the carbon tax on mining and resources communities. This carbon tax is an absolute assault on those communities. We are seeing that this government is always about putting in place new taxes that affect jobs and investment in Australia. Just yesterday we saw the implementation of the MRRT—the minerals resource rent tax—which will disadvantage Australian miners in comparison with the rest of the world and drive investment overseas. That, coupled with the carbon tax, is going to raise an enormous number of issues, particularly in regional Queensland. It is not just an issue of jobs in Mount Isa as a result of the carbon tax that is going to be imposed on Xstrata's smelter there. It is not just about jobs in Townsville, where a carbon tax is going to be invoked on the nickel refinery. It is about the impact of the carbon tax on one of the most decentralised states in Australia where people live outside the capital cities and rely on electricity that is being transmitted long distances on wires and generated in coal fired power stations, which are going to face a huge hit as a result of this tax.

I heard the Leader of the Nationals highlighting the fact that the government is manipulating the rules for forced purchase of carbon credits. Not only are they doing that and forcing electricity supply companies to buy these credits in advance but also they are imposing a floor in the market that holds the price above the international price. The international price is currently less than $10 per tonne of carbon, and that is in the European market. This government is going to make sure that every regional Queenslander pays more for their electricity by making the minimum carbon price even higher than that by at least $5—and probably by about $8, based on current projections of the carbon price in Europe—putting an unrealistic floor of $15 in the market. Every Queenslander will pay more for their electricity as a result of this and regional Queenslanders will pay even more than those Queenslanders who live in capital cities.

We need to be clear on one thing in relation to this carbon tax. This is the carbon tax that the Prime Minister of Australia promised the electorate there would not be under a government she led. This is the carbon tax. But rest assured of one thing: when Queenslanders this weekend get their opportunity to vote on whether or not a Labor government can impose a carbon tax, wait and see what happens. Just as they did in New South Wales and just as they did in Victoria, the people of Queensland are going to reject this carbon tax at this ballot and at the next one—the federal one.

Queenslanders will understand that this carbon tax is bad for them. It is bad for their job opportunities, it is bad for their cost of living, it is bad for the cost of educating their children, it is bad for the prospects of their children and it is so full of anomalies. If a person in Brisbane decides to catch a bus to work, they pay the carbon tax, but if they decide to drive themselves—one person in a car—they do not pay the carbon tax. People in Queensland are far more practical than that. They do not want to see their jobs disappear. They do not want to see their coal industry constantly put under attack by the Gillard government. They want a future. They do not need another tax. They do not understand why Australians are being asked to pay a tax that is far higher than any tax anywhere else in the world and covering far more of the economy than any tax anywhere else in the world, and they do not understand why they have to pay a tax when much of the rest of the world does not. We are not seeing a carbon tax in the United States of America, we are not seeing a carbon tax in Canada, we are not seeing a carbon tax in South America, we are not seeing a carbon tax in China, we are not seeing a carbon tax in Japan, we are not seeing a carbon tax in Korea, we are not seeing a carbon tax in India, we are not seeing a carbon tax in Africa and we are not seeing a carbon tax in the Middle East. Yet those who sit opposite think that this is going to make a huge difference.

What will make a huge difference to climate in the world is a combined action right around the world. All this carbon tax will do is destroy jobs in Queensland. All it will do is reduce the competitiveness of one of the biggest industries in Queensland, the coal-mining industry. All this tax will do is make it more expensive for Queenslanders to live. I think it is fair to say that people in Queensland have had enough. They want the opportunity to vote on this tax. They will take the opportunity to vote on the tax this weekend—and I think the Labor government will reap the reward it deserves.

Queenslanders do not want to see industries that sustain regional Queensland destroyed by this tax. The Greens seems to think it is fair enough that small towns like Duaringa and Capella just disappear off the face of the earth because we should not have a coal industry—because we have a carbon tax. The Labor Party support that because they use the Greens every day to get legislation through. If that is the position of the Labor Party and the Greens then I think Queenslanders will seek retribution on the basis of that.

I grew up in regional Queensland. I know how hard those people work. They do not want to see their life savings, their future and the future of their children's jobs taken away by this tax. They want to see industries that get out there and have a go and succeed, because they understand that that is where the jobs come from. They understand that you have to be internationally competitive if you are going to have jobs. They will not be internationally competitive if they have a carbon tax and a mining tax. Who knows, next year the Labor Party will have to think up another tax—because every year they come up with a new tax. Every year they show that they are the spend, waste and tax party of this parliament.

People in Queensland will not accept that. They want to see industries prosper. They want to see jobs for their children. They want to have a cost of living that is compatible with the rest of the world. They do not want to be paying more for their electricity or paying more for their goods that are transported in trucks across the vast state of Queensland, simply because the Labor Party had to do a dirty deal with the green movement to maintain power.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You negotiated a carbon price!

Ian Macfarlane (Groom, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy and Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I did not negotiate a carbon price, I negotiated a carbon trading scheme, locked in with the rest of the world. This is not a carbon trading scheme. It starts off as a tax. It then reverts to a scheme with a false floor in its price. This weekend the people of Queensland, for the first time—because the Prime Minister misled them by saying she would not have a carbon tax under a government she led—will have a chance to vote on a carbon tax. I am looking forward to the result.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Two things make the MPI introduced by the member for Wide Bay rather extraordinary. The first is that they made it Queensland specific. Why would they do that, Madam Deputy Speaker? Is it because they do not care about the mining industry in New South Wales? Is it because they do not care about the mining industry in WA or South Australia? I hope not. I will let them speak for themselves, but I think we secured the answer through the contributions of both the member for Wide Bay and the member for Groom.

This MPI is not about concern for the mining industry or the minerals processing industries, it is about Saturday's Queensland election. How sad it is that they are putting their own political interests ahead of the interests of the mining sector and all those who rely upon it. I will say a startling thing: I think the Labor Party will lose in Queensland on Saturday. That is more than likely, after so many years in office, as a natural political cycle. But how sad it is that the Leader of the Opposition and all of his senior shadow ministers have this week spent so much time trying to grab some ownership of that victory. They have nothing to say down here whatsoever. In question time they fail to ask any significant questions on policy. It is all about smear and innuendo and trying to trip someone up about an incident or two. There are never any health questions, never any real transport questions and never any real MRRT questions. It is carbon, carbon, carbon—because they think it is a winner. How sad it is that the only thing they have going for them, the only hope Tony Abbott has to shore up his position in the party room, is to grab hold of what might be an imminent victory in the Queensland election. It is very sad, but it says something about the standards on the other side.

The second thing that makes the MPI extraordinary is that it is about carbon and its impact on the mining industry and comes just a day after the Senate finally passed the MRRT, the mining tax. Would you not think that the day after the passage into law of a new mining tax that they have been so critical of this MPI might have been about the MRRT? No. It is their view that carbon is a winner for them. And they are going to stick to carbon. It leaves unanswered questions about what they really think of the MRRT and whether they are serious about repealing it and giving up all the tax and superannuation benefits that will flow to Australians as a result. We might be seeing a development here: the subtle shift away from their opposition to the MRRT and a focus back on what they think is a sure winner—that is the carbon price.

I heard some of them on the other side criticising the minister for talking as much about the MRRT as about carbon, but you cannot talk about one without talking about the other. This is resources policy and you cannot pick it apart. These things all go together. The reality is—and I represent a mining community—we have an economy with multiple speeds both throughout regions and throughout sectors. This combination of policies will not only get the taxation balance right, it will bring some form of equilibrium back to our economy. It will make sure, for example, that those who have waste as a result of their business, including carbon waste, pay for the cost of production—so the playing field will be levelled. The mining tax will make sure that those who exploit the resources owned by the Australian community pay the true taxation cost involved and are not taking economic rent.

Those things will have an effect on the speed of the mining sector. But guess what? My people want the mining sector to slow down. So do those in non-mining sectors who cannot find the employees they need to fill their available positions. In the Hunter Valley our unemployment rate is around three per cent, yet businesses in the services sector and the manufacturing sector cannot find the people they need to fill jobs. That of course is having an inflationary effect.

The people in my community are also concerned about air and water quality. They are worried about the car parks, the highways they encounter every day, housing prices, rental prices and the fact that they cannot get childcare places. All of these things flow from an overheated regional economy. Many on the other side represent communities in the slow lane. They have small businesses that are struggling, yet they come in here to deny this very important opportunity to put back into equilibrium some of the problems we have between sectors and to ensure that the great wealth that is flowing from the minerals industry and the mining sector is evenly shared by all Australians. That is a basic proposition that, surely, no-one on that side can reject.

Aluminium has been mentioned. I will talk about aluminium, because you could argue that, in many ways, it is part of the minerals-processing industry. The aluminium industry around the world is in trouble. Why is it in trouble? Because it got itself into a position of oversupply and consequently prices have been falling. It is worse here in Australia because the Australian dollar is so high and because input costs are high as well. People in this country, including those who sit opposite, are blaming the carbon price for some job losses in the aluminium sector, notwithstanding the fact that we do not have a carbon price yet. The most extraordinary thing I have heard is that our carbon price proposals here are causing aluminium smelter closures elsewhere around the globe. Of course they are not; it is common sense that they are not. I do not know how those opposite can put out this rubbish without any form of embarrassment, although I am sure there are some over there—some of them might be looking at me right now—who are embarrassed about some of the arguments that are being run by the people who sit on the opposition front bench and who obviously do not have a clue. By the way, those of them who are from New South Wales might pick up the phone to their state counterparts, the New South Wales government, and say: 'Give Hydro aluminium in the Hunter a power contract.' That is the way they could make a contribution to helping the aluminium industry in this country. Certainty, with a fairly priced power contract, has the potential to save 350 jobs in my electorate. It is about time some on that side thought about picking up the phone to Barry O'Farrell to say: 'Please give Hydro aluminium in Kurri Kurri a power contract.' We cannot do much about the Australian dollar and we cannot do much about the global price of aluminium, but we can certainly do something about a power contract for Hydro aluminium.

There have been lots of stories about job losses in the mining industry. I have a list of all the recent proposed investments just in Queensland—I will not read them out. Since we announced and passed the carbon price and since we first announced the MRRT mining investment in Queensland has been booming, which is counter to everything those on the other side have been saying. I loved seeing, the day after the Prime Minister announced the detail of our carbon price, Tony Abbott getting his fluoro vest and hard hat straight on and running to Peabody's Wambo mine in my electorate. He took Barnaby Joyce with him, because the Leader of the Opposition has to be a bit statesmanlike: he can let Senator Joyce say some things he feels he cannot say—and they certainly said some things that day about the future of the mining industry in the Hunter. But also on that day Peabody was involved in a $4.5 billion power play. Such was its concern about the coming carbon price and its impact on the mining industry, particularly on the mining industry in the Hunter.

Anyone outside this place listening to this debate this afternoon, particularly if they are not from Queensland, should be saying: 'Why aren't they talking about my state? Why aren't they talking about mining in New South Wales? Why aren't they talking about it in Western Australia and South Australia? Why would they be talking only about Queensland?' As I said, those opposite are trying to take some credit for what might happen in the Queensland election on Saturday. More importantly, they should ask themselves why the opposition keeps running arguments that simply do not stack up to the facts. It is simple: it is all about political opportunism. (Time expired)

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This carbon tax is a strong betrayal of everything the ALP stands for. It is a betrayal of the workers of Australia. It is a betrayal of honesty in government. This is a government so obsessed with winning, spin and the PM's willingness to 'do whatever it takes' that it has forgotten the people of Australia. It is the people of Australia and Queensland who will bear the pain of lost jobs and increased prices. It is the people of Australia and Queensland who will be watching electricity bills rise relentlessly—caused by this government's obsession with focus groups and opinion polls.

Do not accept the deception that the carbon tax has anything to do with principle. According to a Galaxy poll conducted for the Institute of Public Affairs, more Australians are worried about price rises on electricity than on other major household expenses. Those not yet worried about the impact of skyrocketing electricity price rises certainly will be when the impacts of the carbon tax start flowing through in just three months. Thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of investment in coal mines and related businesses are at risk from the carbon tax, according to the Australian Coal Association. ACA chairman John Pegler criticised the federal government, saying:

In our view the government has underestimated the impact of the carbon tax …

The $18 billion cost impact of the carbon tax will hit many of Australia's mines making them uncompetitive in international markets.

This occurs at a time when the International Monetary Fund is warning that economic growth in our major coal export markets in Asia could be slashed by a third.

Nowhere will the carbon tax hurt businesses, communities and residents more than in my home state of Queensland, a state where the Labor government benefited from years of record mining royalties—rivers of gold—and did nothing with it. Even worse, their financial incompetence resulted in the state losing its AAA credit rating. This a state where the Labor government continues to set new records for poor and reckless financial management, nowhere as stark as in the health department where it will cost $220 million to fix the failed payroll system, where a fake Tahitian prince stole $15 million and where they cannot even get the basics right to pay their nurses.

The state Labor government know that the carbon tax will spell disaster for many businesses and thousands of jobs, particularly in the mining sector—but their silence has been deafening. Did the Queensland Labor state government question their federal colleagues? Did the Labor state government stand up for Queenslanders on the insidious carbon tax or mining tax? No. The Queensland state Labor members are too busy distancing themselves from the ALP and pretending to be Independents for this weekend's election.

What compounds the failure of the state Labor government to stand up for mining and mineral-processing communities in Queensland is that last year the Bligh Labor government commissioned a report from Deloitte Access Economics regarding the carbon tax impact on my home state of Queensland. Keep in mind that this was a report commissioned by a state Labor government and a Labor premier who is also the Labor Party's past national president. This report found that Queensland's gross state product would be 2.76 per cent lower by 2020 and 4.11 per cent lower in 2050 with a carbon tax compared to without one. That is a five per cent reduction in Queensland's gross state product under a carbon tax and will result in a predicted 21,000 jobs lost in Queensland alone. On top of this, the Queensland Treasury has estimated a loss in economic value of the state's generation companies of $640 million, which undoubtedly will be passed on to consumers. Yesterday, during the leaders' debate, Labor Premier Anna Bligh boasted that her government would be leaving Queensland better off than when her very old and tired government first came to power. Assisted by her federal colleagues, and on the evidence of her own report, this is clearly not the case.

Frighteningly, this $640 million in Queensland pales in comparison to the $40 billion cost the National Generators Forum estimates the generation sector will incur across the country. However, as in Queensland, it is likely that nearly all of this cost will be passed on to consumers. Part of this high cost is due to the starting price of $23 per tonne being far higher than carbon prices elsewhere in the world, and it has put Australia at a considerable disadvantage compared to other countries. Without a carbon tax, the Productivity Commission puts Australia in the middle of the pack with regard to tackling climate change. So by waiting for international action for the sake of our economy, and particularly our manufacturers, we would by no means be dragging our feet. It is a matter of plain common sense.

The Gillard government should be embarrassed and ashamed about introducing a carbon tax and the hurt it will inflict on families and communities across Australia. And yet the scene in this chamber when this tax was passed—similar to the scenes in the Senate last night when the mining tax was carried—was one of celebration and jubilation. What sort of government celebrates inflicting hardship on the people and communities of Australia?

On 20 August 2010, the day before the last federal election, the Prime Minister categorically stated, 'I rule out a carbon tax.' This morning in a press conference she boasted, 'Guess what? We now have a carbon tax.' She should hang her head in shame for that duplicity. This is not only yet another tax but also a bad tax. It is as simple as that. Taxes affect prices, and prices change behaviour; but this tax is different from a consumption tax such as the GST, which, I remind the House, was taken to an election and won a true mandate before being introduced by the Howard government. This tax is different because it is a tax on producers, which drives up their costs. As I said before, changes in price change behaviour, but with a tax on production rather than consumption the effects are multiplied. Costs rise for producers, so they change their behaviour by reducing their costs through cutting services or laying off staff—no-one wins. Alternatively, they could shut up shop, unable to afford these increased costs, which would mean no services and no jobs—and definitely no winners—or they could pass their increased costs on to the consumer and raise prices.

Consumers react to a change in costs by changing their behaviour as well. But consumers must still buy food and must still buy power, so their cost of living will increase dramatically under this tax—and by much more than any so-called compensation package would cover. The government's own modelling shows that under this tax there will be an immediate 10 per cent increase in electricity prices and a nine percent rise in gas bills. Food costs will increase due to the electricity price rise and increased transportation costs. Be in no doubt that the basic necessities for life will cost more. If families cannot save through not buying necessities, they will buy less—less entertainment, less clothing and less generally from the already struggling retail sector.

The Prime Minister says that this carbon tax, when the so-called tax reform compensation package is taken into account, will cost Australians just a couple of dollars a week, if anything. But that couple of dollars a week will be on top of the 'just a couple of dollars a week' caused by the 18 other new taxes introduced since 2007, and the 'just a couple of dollars per week' not spent by every customer on just one cup of coffee or just one magazine is a big cost to small business. Across the road from my office is a coffee shop. Talk to them about the effects of 200 or more customers buying just one fewer cup of coffee a week. Ask the newsagency next door how his customers buying one fewer magazine a week will affect his margin.

The people and communities of Queensland—indeed, of Australia—need a government they can trust. They need a government that honours its commitments and delivers on its promises, and the Leader of the Opposition has stated categorically:

The carbon tax will be rescinded in its entirety by an incoming Coalition Government. The first order of business for an incoming Coalition Government will be the scrapping of the carbon tax and everything associated with it. Now, this carbon tax is going to impact in every nook and cranny of our economy … Every transaction in this country is going to be impacted by the carbon tax. Everything that people do or buy is going to be impacted by the carbon tax. That's why the best thing we can do to promote certainty and stability is to stop Labor's big new taxes starting with the carbon tax.

Lower, simpler, fairer, fewer taxes—that is what the coalition is on about.

Queensland and Australia need strong action now, not more taxes and not more empty promises and political tricks. A tax cut that is paid for by a tax hike is not a tax cut—it is a tax con. It is time to get Queensland back on track. Queensland needs Campbell Newman as Premier.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This debate has been going on for a very long time now, as you, Madam Deputy Speaker, well know. I thought we had peaked with the overblown rhetoric and hyperbole, but the member for Ryan's opening statement pulled me up once again. Obviously, we have not heard the last of the rhetoric and hyperbole. The member for Ryan said that the carbon price is a betrayal of Australia. I need members opposite to answer: what was the carbon price that John Howard went to the 2007 election with? The carbon price that was legislated in this place halfway through last year was basically the same as the pricing mechanism—

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You lied about it.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Higgins will leave the chamber under the provisions of standing order 94(a).

The member for Higgins then left the chamber.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All of those coalition MPs who were elected to this place in 2007 went to that election pledging and advocating. So if this is a huge betrayal of Australia the question is: what was the identical carbon-pricing scheme that John Howard and the coalition were pledging in 2007? We know that the legislation passed last year is nothing more than a reasonable, moderate and considered response to the internationally acknowledged risk of climate change. The scheme is a policy response that accepts the mainstream science of climate change and it acts on advice from leading economists that the best way of reducing our emissions is to use a market based mechanism and transition to a clean energy future.

What this debate today has shown us yet again is that, when it comes to the opposition, fear will always trump fact. As we go to yet another episode in the scare campaign run by the opposition, the trouble is that the scare campaign keeps getting undermined. They cannot stop it from being undermined. They cannot get anyone to stick to the doomsday script that they keep promoting and peddling. For a start, the resource sector companies continue to invest. We have heard from other members of the record investment that is happening in Australia in our mining sector. As someone who represents a mining region in this place, I know only too well what is happening and what my constituents, many of whom work in the coalmining industry, can see right in front of their eyes.

We have heard of Peabody Energy's $4½ billion bid for Macarthur Coal. I can tell people about the numerous meetings that I have had in the time since the carbon legislation was passed last year, whether it be with Xstrata to tell me about the continued progress on the Wandoan project and the associated infrastructure—railway lines and port facilities in Gladstone—or with BHP on the expansion of their Hay Point coal-loading facilities and the expansion of their Bowen Basin mines, whether it is Caval Ridge or the Dornier mine, and the work that they are doing on a rail line and port facilities at Abbot Point. I met with them in Canberra just two weeks ago on that particular project and they are full steam ahead on that. We are seeing in Queensland the opening up of the Galilee Basin, which is going to be bigger than anything we have seen before. We think the coal industry in Queensland is big now—we ain't seen nothing yet. Adani, Waratah and Hancock are all falling over themselves to get in there and develop those Galilee Basin resources, again with infrastructure of 500 kilometres worth of railway line up to the Abbot Point coal-loading facility, which is being developed at the moment.

All this has happened and continues to happen since the announcement of the carbon price and its passage into legislation. If you look beyond what the companies are doing—and they are the ones who are putting their money where their mouth is on this—their advocates are telling us the same story. If you look at the Queensland Resources Council's Queensland resource sector: state growth outlook study, which dates back to November 2011 and was prepared by Deloitte Access Economics, the opening line states:

All of available evidence points to the Queensland resources sector being on the cusp of unprecedented expansion.

…   …   …

Capital expenditure on resource projects in Queensland in 2011 is expected to be almost double that achieved at any point prior to the Global Financial Crisis.

Again, no-one can stick to the script. The prospects for our resource sector and particularly our coal industry in Queensland are just too good. So the opposition comes in here every day, gets out on the doorstop and paints this doomsday scenario. No-one else is able to stick to the script because the future is just too bright to let anything stand in its way.

I could talk about one of our local regional economic development organisations up in Mackay. In February, the CEO of REDC was quoted as saying that there has been a 32 per cent increase in investment projects in the last six months—this is the last six months of 2011—equating to $107 billion in new projects. That is in the Mackay region in my electorate alone. I am talking about no-one being able to stick to the script. We have heard about all the opposition members who are have continued to invest heavily in resource sector companies despite going out and telling everyone how terrible it is for those same companies. Most telling to me is that Campbell Newman, the leader of the LNP running to be the member for Ashgrove and possibly Premier on Saturday, cannot stick to the script. I can remember all the chest beating last year: this election was going to be all about the carbon tax; it was going to be a referendum on the carbon tax. He was going to teach us a lesson. It was all going to be about the carbon tax. Has anyone heard Campbell Newman talk about the carbon tax? Has anyone seen this campaign on the carbon tax? There has not been one. Quite the opposite—he has not been campaigning about the carbon tax; he has based an awful lot of his campaign, particularly in the regions, on his 'royalties for the regions' concept. In the material he has been putting out, he talks about using the long-term royalty stream from the resource sector to build long-term infrastructure in resource regions. Why would he be saying that if he, like his coalition colleagues, genuinely believed that the future is so grim for coalmining and the resource sector in Queensland and that all is doom and gloom? Why would we be making long-term investments in resource regions for long-term sustainable growth and the long-term flow of royalties out of the resource industry if we thought it was all going to dry up next year or the year after? So Campbell Newman has got a bit of explaining to do. He has sent his coalition colleagues in here today to run the campaign against the carbon tax that he could not be bothered running and that is completely repudiated by the campaign material he is putting out spruiking the long-term stream of royalties from the industries that, according to these guys opposite, are going to shut down in the next six months.

The MPI is on the massive impact on mining communities. If we want to talk about the massive impact on mining communities, it is the growth that they are experiencing and the growth that we are acknowledging here on the government side of this House through the minerals resource rent tax. We acknowledge that the profitability of the resource sector is such that those companies can afford to make a greater contribution towards the infrastructure and support that is needed for industries right across Australia but most particularly in our resource regions. If members opposite want to talk about the impact on resource regions, they need to explain why they are not prepared to back the minerals resource rent tax, which will be providing needed infrastructure and support for those communities. (Time expired)

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Capricornia for her contribution to the matter of public importance this afternoon, but it just goes to the heart of the problem with this Labor government, and that is the fact that everything this Labor government does is entirely focused on the big end of town, the big corporate businesses in this country. Every single benefit from the minerals resource rent tax will accrue to the big corporations—and the member for Capricornia has just spent 10 minutes talking about it. It is the small to medium-sized businesses in our country communities and in our electorates that will suffer from the minerals resource rent tax.

Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am just asking for your assistance. I believe there is a standing order which does not allow irony.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister can resume her seat.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member can resume his seat to give the member for Forde the opportunity to speak on the MPI.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I have a point of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I know the member for Aston wants to have a point of order, but he is going to eat into his own member's time, and I am not going to allow it.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Attorney-General for her contribution, but we have had 4½ years of irony from this government, so today should not be any different.

The carbon tax is based on the false premise that in Australia, a country with 1½ per cent of global emissions, a tax on carbon dioxide—and let us bear in mind that this is a tax not on carbon but on carbon dioxide—is going to make one iota of difference to the global climate. That is the whole premise for the carbon tax in the first place. Now the question is: what damage is it going to do to our economy not only today or tomorrow but also for future generations?

Small business in this country, which I mentioned in my introduction, is going to pay 100 per cent of the costs of the carbon tax because big business will pass on its costs to small and medium-sized businesses. They are the ones that are going to suffer the higher energy costs, higher costs of raw materials and input items and higher costs of transport, and they are the ones that do not have the pricing capacity in our economy to handle those increased costs. What is the flow-on cost? The flow-on cost is that employees are potentially going to lose their jobs. That has a flow-on cost to our local communities because those people then do not have the capacity to spend in their local shops, cafes and newsagents. So it flows all the way down the line.

This is the problem with everything that the government bring to this House. It does not understand the unintended consequences of the legislation it passes. If it did, heaven forbid, it would still introduce ridiculous legislation like the carbon tax. Despite the government's best efforts to assure people all over this nation that the compensation will ease the pain of the new tax, Australian people well understand that the compensation will not cover the costs of the new tax due to the cascading effect of the tax. As the member for Ryan just pointed out, rightly, the tax will impact on every single area of our lives. The carbon tax is built on the deception that corrective taxation will deliver some sort of economic or societal nirvana, but this is a complete fallacy because there is no way that any modelling can take into account all of the external variations that could possibly exist in an economy. It is just not possible. The other thing about the compensation being offered is that only 50 per cent of the revenue being raised is going back to the community in compensation. So in reality people will be worse off as a result, despite government protests to the contrary. The hardworking people in our mineral- and resource-processing communities will often not be eligible for a lot of this compensation because of the incomes they currently receive. So, again, the wealth is being taken and redistributed elsewhere, preventing access to capital to grow and build those communities locally. We already hear many stories of people on high incomes in those communities who are struggling to make ends meet because of high rents and the high cost of living. This carbon tax will only punish some of the hardest-working people in Queensland, and mine workers and their families even more.

A recent report by Deloitte Access Economics for the Queensland government showed that the carbon tax will slash economic growth by 2.76 per cent by 2020 and by 4.11 per cent by 2050. In the same report, Deloitte predicts the loss of 21,000 jobs, while Queensland Treasury modelling predicts the slightly lesser amount of 12,000 jobs lost. The carbon tax will slash jobs in Queensland mining and mineral-processing communities because of the impact on small and medium-sized businesses. But fear not: whilst these jobs are being slashed they will be plentiful in the federal government. So if you are unemployed as a result of the carbon tax come down to Canberra and jump on board one of the new bureaucracies. There are plenty of jobs on offer. For example, the Clean Energy Regulator has engaged some 207 staff to date, with 350 expected to be on board by the 1 July carbon tax start date.

It is worth noting the paper recently put out by the European Central Bank entitled 'Economic productivity and government size'. The paper warns of the negative impact of the size of government on potential economic growth, so while the government continues to increase its size the rest of our country pays for it. It has always been thus because, at the end of the day, governments produce nothing. It is the hardworking people and small businesses in our community that produce the wealth for this nation and it is the government that takes a share of that wealth and redistributes it to its favourite sectors around the economy.

The carbon tax comes as an unwanted gift and will create enormous problems in all sectors. The Energy Supply Association of Australia recently confirmed that the carbon tax is not about the environment but about filling the government's coffers. The ESAA chief, Matthew Warren, wrote in his pre-budget submission:

The industry is deeply concerned that the design features of the carbon tax pricing mechanism are being influenced by budget revenue considerations.

Mr Warren makes the point that this should not be the case. In today's Australian Tim Wilson points out that the problem with the carbon tax is not just that it is set at $23 per tonne and that that is internationally high but that it is also broadly applied. That is not happening in other countries. The government needs to disclose more information on the carbon tax and on the big companies that will supposedly be affected by it.

Another fact that is overlooked is that the hardworking men and women in our small country towns, in our small businesses and throughout the nation are looking to create wealth and prosperity for this nation's future, yet all these increases in the cost of living are making that far more difficult. Even worse is the fact that we as a nation are net importers of capital and once this carbon tax comes into place we will be sending some $3 billion a year of our hard-earned wealth offshore to buy foreign carbon tax credits to meet the carbon tax reduction targets.

Somebody has to stand up for the future generations of people living in mining and mineral-processing towns before they get turned into ghost towns. Someone has to stand up for the people working in small and medium-sized businesses around this country. Small and medium-sized businesses, like many households, are struggling with the higher costs of doing business. At the end of the day we will finish up with a carbon tax, bigger government and no practical on-the-ground environmental solutions. It will be up to a coalition government to restore hope for the future, reward for effort and the opportunity to create a positive inheritance for future generations.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I live in the electorate of Blair, and the main city in the electorate of Blair happens to be Ipswich. It is the oldest city in Queensland and it was built on coalmining. Even now we still have coalmines at Ipswich, Jeebropilly and New Oakleigh which are owned and run by New Hope Coal at Rosewood. The truth is that coalmining built Ipswich. The railway workshops and other industries, and now the RAAF base at Amberley and the woollen mills and other industries, have been integral to the industrial development of Ipswich, so Ipswich has been a mining town for a very long time.

I know the massive impact that government decision making has had on Ipswich. It has been railways and roads, community infrastructure and government assistance, and Ipswich has also been helped with respect to schools, hospitals and the building of the community. It has not been taxation; it has been that sort of initiative. This government has been utterly and completely committed to that type of investment in the mining towns and cities in regional and rural Queensland—places like Ipswich, Rockhampton, Mackay and elsewhere. We have invested, whether through the BER funding, which nearly doubled education funding in the schools in areas where miners and other workers in those communities send their kids, or through regional health and hospitals like Ipswich General Hospital in my community. What we have done in these communities is invest in infrastructure. In Queensland alone we have doubled the funding for road, rail and ports to $8.5 billion. That is double what the previous coalition government did. We have not done it through taxation. The massive impact on these communities comes from infrastructure spending by this government, allied with our colleagues in the state Labor government. We have seen it, whether it be the State Schools of Tomorrow in Ipswich from the Queensland Labor government or the BER in Ipswich from this federal government.

I went to an election in 2007with the carbon pricing mechanism. I remember that my opponent, the incumbent member for Blair, talked about this issue and about the fact that the coalition as well believed in a clean energy future. I do not know how all those people opposite who were candidates in 2007 and who subsequently supported various opposition leaders until the current opposition leader got elected by one vote in a caucus ballot just a year or so ago can sit in this place and criticise us for adopting what the Productivity Commission recommends is the most effective and efficient way to deal with the challenge of climate change—that is, putting a price on carbon. We know that the same Treasury officials who costed the impact of the GST at 2.5 per cent on the households, individuals, businesses and economy of Australia back in the coalition's day, when the coalition sat on the Treasury bench, say the impact of a carbon pricing mechanism will be 0.7 per cent. That is just over a quarter of the impact of the GST.

You would believe the jeremiads of those opposite if you believed in the tooth fairy, the Loch Ness monster, the yeti or other mythical creatures. You would think that Armageddon was coming on 1 July. It is extraordinary. It will be a 'massive impact', the coalition says. The massive impact in regional and rural Queensland and in mining communities has been made by this government with its massive investments in infrastructure, rail, road and community facilities. That is the impact that we have made massively. It has not been made by those opposite, who have simply neglected those areas. Their attitude to the mining towns and towards regional Queensland and Queensland generally has been characterised by inertia, inactivity and idleness. That is what their attitude to Queensland has always been. From the 1970s until we got elected in 2007, the only major investment we saw from a federal government in Ipswich was the Ipswich Civic Centre. It was opened by Gough Whitlam in his day. The coalition neglected Ipswich and its surrounds for ages. It was a coalmining town. They neglected it. Why? Because they felt it would only vote Labor. They have always punished the people of Ipswich—and every mining community, including Rockhampton, in the member for Capricornia's electorate—by not funding them.

I can remember the state member for Ipswich West, Don Livingstone, telling me that when he first got elected—he is now retired; he is a great bloke who did a lot for Ipswich West and the rural parts of Somerset as well—he asked for the road projects that were then made available by the coalition government to other conservative governments in Queensland at the state level. What road funding projects were available? What was the plan for the next five years? He told me there were none—and why should we be surprised? The coalition has always neglected these regions.

I can give you a perfect example from this campaign. A massive impact on my community in Ipswich is the refusal by the LNP opposition in Queensland to commit to the Ipswich Turf Club. We have committed $6 million. The racing authorities in Queensland have committed it. Six million dollars has been committed by the Bligh Labor government for the turf club in Ipswich. There is $110 million on the table for this, according to the coalition opposition in Queensland, but they will not invest in Ipswich. They will not do it, but we will. The most visited regional race in the country is the Ipswich Cup. About 21,000 people went to the Ipswich Cup last year. I go every year. That has a huge impact on the economy of Ipswich—on the retailers, the service stations, and the pubs and clubs in Ipswich. It is important community infrastructure in the mining town of Ipswich, and guess what? Those opposite will not support it. They talk about 'massive impact' in mining areas. What about supporting the Ipswich Turf Club? We get 'no' as an answer from those opposite. And why would they? They have opposed, repeatedly, funding in South-East Queensland and in Queensland.

The big infrastructure funding we have talked about, the 'massive impact' that the Leader of the Nationals talks about in this motion, is being affected and is going to be affected by this government and our regional infrastructure funding. Under the minerals resource rental tax, we are putting about $5.6 billion into railroad and port funding across the country. Two billion dollars has been earmarked for Queensland and $2 billion has been earmarked for Western Australia, the resource-rich states. We are going to benefit. Every single member of the LNP from Queensland who has sat in this place during question time and has stood and made speeches here has opposed the funding for that. That is what will make the massive impact. It will not be the carbon pricing mechanism, for which we will compensate with family tax benefits, tax cuts and assistance through pensions. We will more than compensate many. It is a 'battlers' buffer', the Deputy Prime Minister and the Treasurer always says. The carbon pricing will not make the massive impact, but the regional infrastructure funding and the minerals resource rent tax, the $2 billion, will. In places like Mackay, Gladstone, Rockhampton and Ipswich that will make a 'massive impact'.

The Queensland LNP members opposite really should hang their heads in shame that they have the gall to come into this place and criticise us and say, with these jeremiads: 'The carbon tax will have a massive impact on regional and rural Queensland.' The massive impact, in a positive way, on regional and rural Queensland has been made by this government, in conjunction with the Bligh Labor government, to benefit Queensland. It has always been that. It is interesting that the Leader of the Opposition in Queensland, the putative parliamentarian for Ashgrove, is saying, 'We're going to provide about a billion dollars on the Bruce Highway', but he wants federal government funding for it. He should talk to his LNP colleagues from Queensland, who actually voted against the kind of funding that will assist him if he happens to win on Saturday. The coalition will say one thing when they are here, do one thing and vote against funding for their communities, but back home they will not. Back home they will be great local members and talk about how they want to fight for their constituents, but here they vote against them. The 'massive impact' will be made in my home state of Queensland by the infrastructure spending that this government is undertaking in conjunction with the Labor government of Queensland. I urge the people of Queensland to think about the consequences of their vote next Saturday. Vote for your Labor candidates who will work with this government to make sure we invest in Queensland and that will make the 'massive impact' in Queensland. (Time expired)

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The discussion is now concluded.