David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Climate Change and Water (Senator Wong) to questions without notice asked by Senators Johnston, Birmingham and Cameron today relating to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

During question time, the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Wong, accused the opposition of talking down the economy. After the first six months of the current government, the Treasurer declared that the genie of inflation was out of the bottle, so I find it quite ironic and indeed rather fatuous that the minister would shout across the chamber that we in the opposition are talking down the Australian economy while she is seeking, through the premature introduction of an emissions trading scheme, to physically demolish the economy of this country. She also said across the chamber—and, quite interestingly, further disclosing her attitude—that she is going to hold the opposition to account on various matters. In relation to an emissions trading scheme, there is only one person who needs to be held to account here, and that is of course the minister. Throughout the formulation of this policy, and indeed during all of the negotiations leading up to this point, the minister has been completely arrogant and dismissive of the needs and concerns of business. Today—and I refer to the questions that I asked her—we have seen some 1,500 casual construction jobs and 150 permanent jobs with Alcoa in Western Australia being declared as abandoned by the Australian Workers Union. This must be a concern for any politician, in particular any senator giving reasonable and decent consideration to public policy in this place, yet the minister is completely oblivious to it. She seems to give no heed to or show concern about any of these such matters.

I have also tabled the Nyrstar press release which sets out that Nyrstar, as a zinc smelter in both Port Pirie, in the great state of South Australia, and in Hobart, in the great state of Tasmania, employs approximately 3½ thousand people. The minister gives not a jot for those people. She is ideologically predisposed, and transfixed in her timing of the implementation of this policy. The opposition believes that Australia must be part of a global response to reduce emissions. The coalition considers that an emissions trading scheme should commence when it is ready and in an orderly, methodical and responsible manner. It should enjoy the broad support of Australian industry and it should protect vulnerable Australian households. It should commence not before 2011, and probably by 2012. The design detail of an Australian emissions trading scheme must be informed by the outcome of the Copenhagen meeting at the end of 2009. There is no point in us castigating ourselves economically, particularly in the face of this global financial crisis, if the rest of the world is not with us. If no action is under way, Australia must start its emissions trading scheme with a very low price and it should proceed with a very slow trajectory. That is the opposition’s position.

Mr Rudd and his government need to be, and are, upon notice that we will sign no blank checks on Australia’s future and that we will not support a scheme that will disadvantage Australia’s national interest and competitive advantage. Nyrstar puts out exports into the world zinc market worth $2 billion and today, when penalised—and they used the word ‘threatened’—they have been forced to come out, put their head above the trench in the face of this government’s ideological predisposition, and say, ‘We will not survive if this is done incorrectly.’ Everything we have seen to this point tells us that this scheme is not going to be put into action in a responsible manner.

Our position is clearly supported by Heather Ridout. She describes the modelling as a Doctor Who, Tardis arrangement. She said:

For example, if the US does not become part of a scheme, it doesn’t model the adjustment costs …

It’s like a Dr Who, Tardis arrangement where you get in at 2010 and come in a 2020 with the nirvana of a whole lot of new industries established.

Companies and individuals don’t just move around like that. The costs are painful, they’re quite substantial.

That article went on to say, ‘The Treasury modelling showed that some coal-fired power stations would be forced to close.’ Yet the minister does not listen and does not care about these jobs. This policy is, potentially, in a shambolic state under her stewardship.