Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Environment. I refer to figures released by the Clean Energy Regulator that show the carbon tax has hit Western Australia with at least $627 million in higher costs in the last financial year. How will repealing the carbon tax assist families in Western Australia and elsewhere and why has it not been repealed?

Mr Conroy interjecting—

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are a genius—just a genius. We have a new Mensa!

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Charlton will leave under 94(a).

The member for Charlton then left the chamber.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can understand why the member for O'Connor would want to know why a $550-a-year hit on Australian families has not been repealed and why the opposition would stand in the way of repealing something which they themselves have said they would want to terminate. It is a very interesting story this, because on the weekend, on Sunday morning, I was watching one of Labor's luminaries and guiding lights being interviewed. Here is what the interviewer said to this luminary: 'Explain this: I just cannot understand why Bill Shorten would defend a carbon tax for which Labor had no mandate and which it promised to get rid of. Why would you do something that idiotic?' 'Well,' says Bruce Hawker, 'it defeats me somewhat. I think one of the very few decent things about losing an election is you can say: "All right, that's over. The electorate got it right and now we're focusing on the future." I am lost for words as to why we'd do it.'

Ms Butler interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith will leave under 94(a).

The member for Griffith then left the chamber.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just to repeat Bruce Hawker: 'I am lost for words as to why we'd do it.' But why do they do it? The answer is very simple. They said one thing before the election—they said they would terminate the carbon tax—and did the other thing afterwards. Interestingly, Prime Minister, they said one thing in Western Australia only last Thursday—their leading Senate candidate said they were going to scrap the carbon tax—and did another thing in Canberra four hours later.

In terms of what they said before the election, let us remember that Kevin Rudd said, 'We will terminate the carbon tax.' He was flanked by the member for Port Adelaide, who went on to say, 'Labor supports terminating the carbon tax.' But they did not. He was flanked by the member for McMahon, who, very interestingly, on the cost of living said, 'We think this is an appropriate thing to do in the face of cost-of-living pressures faced by the Australian people'—and he was right. A $550 a year cost-of-living pressure, a nine per cent decrease in electricity prices, a seven per cent decrease in tax, a decrease in refrigerant costs—these are the things which will come from repealing the carbon tax.

In terms of Western Australia, what is very interesting is that the Western Australian Senate candidate Louise Pratt said in the Senate, 'We are committed to scrapping the carbon tax,' and then they voted to keep the carbon tax. We have had Joe Bullock, their leading Senate candidate, make the statement only last Thursday that Labor is scrapping the carbon tax. So they say one thing in Western Australia in the morning, and four hours later they do the other thing here in Canberra. When it comes to the carbon tax, you cannot trust Labor, but you can trust the coalition.