Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, I am aware of the work that the BCA has done. We have had quite a number of discussions with the Business Council as well as with other industry groups, and that is as it should be. We are very conscious as a government of the importance of striking the right balance when it comes to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme and that is why we are taking a very careful and methodical approach to its design. I do want to make this point, and I hope those opposite at some point get beyond their current confusion on this issue: this is an extremely important issue in terms of preparing this nation for future challenges and it is not an easy policy debate. It certainly requires consideration of a range of factors. Ultimately what government will have to do is to find the right balance, to strike the right balance, in terms of the contribution to reducing emissions and tackling climate change. We need to strike the right balance and we need to ensure that that effort is spread fairly across the economy.

In February I spoke about the need to ensure that we recognise the competitiveness issues associated with introducing such a scheme for our trade exposed emissions intensive industries, and we have had a significant amount of discussion with business on this issue. We recognise that there are important competitiveness issues which arise from introducing this scheme prior to there being a global carbon price. That is why in the green paper we proposed that 30 per cent of all permits to be issued be given free to emissions intensive trade exposed industries in recognition of their need for support. In addition, the government also outlined in the green paper the intention to establish a Climate Change Action Fund to again assist business to make the transition to a lower carbon economy.

There are obviously a range of views across different sectors of the economy and different industries about the best way to develop and to structure that assistance to the emissions intensive trade exposed industries. We will continue to have a constructive dialogue with business on this issue. I hope down the track we can also have a constructive engagement by the opposition with this issue, an issue which is critical to Australia’s future in terms of both the environmental challenge and also the economic challenge that climate change presents. So we are very conscious as a government of the issues affecting the emissions intensive trade exposed businesses, just as we are also conscious of the need to ensure that the costs of this transition are fairly spread across the economy.

Of course, what Senator Johnston fails to acknowledge in the way he poses the question is that there is no menu of easy options when it comes to tackling climate change. The reality is the more sectors of the economy you shield, the higher the cost, potentially, for the rest of the economy. That is the public policy issue here. We will work very closely with industry to find the best outcome. The whole purpose of putting out the green paper was to enable this sort of detailed consultation. As I said, I have certainly had discussions with the Business Council, as with other business groups, and we will continue to do so as we look to work through the issues which have been put forward.