Mark Butler (Port Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Given that the Prime Minister just conceded that his policy involves trading around carbon abatement obligations, will the Prime Minister now confirm that this creates a price on carbon?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The trading is trading of physical energy. It's trading of electricity. It's not trading of permits. There are no certificates. There are no permits. It is trading of physical energy, which, as the honourable member should be very well aware, happens all the time—millions of dollars being traded every hour of the day. That has always been the case. But, as John Pierce, chair of the Australian Energy Market Commission, which is the rules-maker, and a member of the Energy Security Board, said today:

There are no subsidies or certificates involved in this guarantee and in this sense it does not involve a price or tax on carbon.

We are not pricing carbon. What we are pricing is reliability …

The honourable member may yearn for the subsidy. This is the part of the Labor Party's position that I find most baffling. The Leader of the Opposition goes to a solar farm at Mildura and he stands there and he says, 'This is fantastic'. He's blinded by the light. He says, 'This is cheaper than new coal; it is so good.' Then he says, 'But that's why we have to subsidise it.' Talk about science fiction! What Australians deserve is affordable, reliable energy. What Labor has delivered is unaffordable and unreliable energy. Their policies make no sense. They try to defy the laws of physics. The Energy Market Operator, Audrey Zibelman, was asked about the reliability requirement, where she's having to intervene in the honourable member's state constantly to maintain stability, and she said, 'Well, you have to comply with the laws of physics.' That's true, but not if you're in the Labor Party, apparently. They think windmills will turn when there's no wind. They think solar panels will generate in the middle of the night. Perhaps that is from moonshine—that is, moonbeams. But, worst of all, what this recklessness does is impose higher costs and less reliable power. Australians know Labor does not have the management or the business sense to deliver affordable and reliable power. Energy will always be unreliable and more expensive under Labor.

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

My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Will the minister update the House on the government's responsible Paris agreement targets? How do these compare to alternative approaches?

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Swan for his question and for his interest in ensuring that Australians can receive affordable and reliable electricity. The Turnbull government's responsible plan to deliver affordable and reliable energy is based on a belief that Australian household budgets must be relieved of the pressure on them, and so must businesses, and that we must drive jobs growth, as we've seen with the figures released today. The plan we have announced through the National Energy Guarantee will also enable us to meet our international obligations, and our Paris Agreement target will see emissions reductions of 26 to 28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030.

This is reasonable and achievable. It means that emissions per person will halve, and already emissions per capita in Australia are the lowest they've been in 27 years, because we have met—indeed exceeded—the first Kyoto target by 128 million tonnes. We are on track to meet—indeed exceed—the second Kyoto target by 2020. Our Paris Agreement targets are reasonable, and they compare well with those of other developed countries. For example, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and the EU all have a target range of between 25 and 35 per cent by 2030.

Mr Falinski interjecting—

Mr Giles interjecting—

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

The member for Mackellar and the member for Scullin.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In contrast to the Turnbull government's reasonable plan, Labor have embraced the reckless policies of the Greens: a 45 per cent emissions reduction target, way beyond that of any comparable economy—a 50 per cent renewable energy target that will drive power prices through the roof and will see an increase in blackouts, as we've seen in South Australia. The Labor-Greens policy wants to close down coal-fired power stations. Our plan does not involve subsidies. Labor and the Greens want to spend $66 billion on subsidising renewable energy. That will drive costs through the roof, because the subsidy will be passed on to consumers, and they will bear the cost of Labor's reckless policies. The Labor-Greens policy on energy will hit the economy hard, will undermine jobs growth and will drive up unemployment. The choice is clear. Labor stands for higher power costs; the coalition stands for affordable and reliable electricity.

Mark Butler (Port Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is, again, to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that the head of the Energy Council, the peak body for energy companies in Australia, yesterday confirmed that the Prime Minister's latest energy policy was, 'Of course, a price on carbon'? Will the Prime Minister now confirm that at the heart of his latest energy policy is a price on carbon?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The price the honourable member should be focused on is the high price families in South Australia are paying because of the reckless and incompetent management of the electricity system in that state, where the Energy Market Operator has to intervene weekend after weekend to keep the grid going in South Australia, at enormous cost to Australian families. As John Pierce also said at the Press Club this morning:

I think it would be very hard to actually identify and say 'this is a carbon price'—there isn't one.

There you have it, from John Pierce.

Turning to interesting utterances on energy, my attention was drawn to this extraordinary rant from the Leader of the Opposition this morning. It was just a jumble of inconsistencies. He said, 'We're not interested in trashing the renewable energy industry in this country.' This is the renewable energy industry that he says is already cheaper than coal and gas. So, presumably the fact that they're already cheaper means that taxpayers and consumers have to subsidise them to make them even cheaper. That's very interesting. Then he said, 'What we're interested in is lower prices.' Lower prices for whom? Not for Australian families. He wants to put a $66 billion tax on Australian families to 2050. He wants us to cut our emissions by twice as much as we undertook in Paris to do. Why would any nation do that? Why would you unilaterally cut your emissions by more than you'd agreed to in concert with others? He was asked again and again. He's had this proposal for years. Has he done any modelling on it? None at all. He has no idea what it will cost. Has anybody credible proposed it? No, they haven't.

Mr Bowen interjecting—

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

The member for McMahon will cease interjecting.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The science fiction of which the Leader of the Opposition spoke is surely his own approach to energy: solar panels that work at night, windmills that blow when the wind drops and the ability to force feed unbacked up renewable energy into the grid without creating unreliability. We know how that movie ends. It's South Australia; it's blackouts. It's unreliable and the most expensive electricity in Australia. Australians deserve better. That's why we're relying on the Energy Security Board and the prospect they have delivered of a clear energy policy with lower prices, affordability, reliability and responsibility.