Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday in question time the Prime Minister said his emissions reduction target was 'the same as the United States'. Given that the United States has announced a target equivalent to around 40 per cent, not 26 per cent, by 2030, will the Prime Minister correct the record and apologise for misleading the parliament?

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Leader of the Opposition knows that he cannot add the part at the end of his question. He needs to withdraw that. If he intends to make such a claim, he needs to do so by substantive motion.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There is nothing in the question that implies the mislead was deliberate—nothing at all.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition has been picked up on this before. I am going to ask him to repeat the question, without the last part. There are other forms of the House he can take.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yesterday in question time the Prime Minister said his emissions reduction target was 'the same as the United States'. Given that the United States has announced a target equivalent to around 40 per cent by 2030, not 26 to 28 per cent, will the Prime Minister correct the record and apologise?

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The assertion by the Leader of the Opposition is simply false. The United States has no target beyond 26 to 28 per cent, and that is our target. What is more, they are proposing to achieve their target with the same sorts of direct action measures that we are proposing. The last thing they are proposing is to clobber the economy with a great big new tax on everything. The last thing they are proposing is to clobber jobs and clobber growth with an $85 billion overbuild of unnecessary turbines. I am very happy to have this debate. I am very happy to have a debate about who has the best policy to deal with climate change, because our target is absolutely four-square comparable with those of our partner economies. It is absolutely comparable with those of advanced economies like ours. Our target is higher than Japan, it is much higher than Korea, it is vastly higher than China, it is a little bit below New Zealand and Canada and it is exactly the same as the United States. When it comes to emissions per head, when it comes to emissions per person, our target at least a 50 per cent reduction, at least a one-half reduction, in emissions by 2030 is the best in the developed world. But there is a big difference. We will achieve our targets without smashing jobs and without smashing growth. We will do it in an economically responsible way. We know that you can protect the environment and preserve and strengthen the economy at the same time. But what does the Leader of the Opposition propose? Labor's targets are the targets of the independent Climate Change Authority. That is what Labor's targets are: 40 to 60 per cent, which will involve a $200-plus a tonne carbon tax. If a $23 a tonne carbon tax cost households $500 a year, that $200 a tonne carbon tax will cost them $5,000 a year. This government will protect people against Labor's economic vandalism.