Senate debates
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Australian Climate Change Regulatory Authority Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — Customs) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — Excise) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — General) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Excise Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Customs Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Amendment (Household Assistance) Bill 2009 [No. 2]
In Committee
9:08 pm
Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Hansard source
So the Garnaut model is predicated on, as you state, deeper action and, therefore, a more advanced permit system. The MYEFO is now predicated on less action and that has an effect on the price. Therefore, the deepness of action, to use a clumsy phrase, correlates to price. Yet we do not seem to be able to get to a clear and decisive statement about what extent of action the current price is actually predicated on. You have now clearly elucidated for the chamber that variations in action produce variations in prices. The range of actions that were predicated in 2008 are obviously different to where the world is now. What is the state of action that we are now at? Is it in line with what was predicated in 2008?
No comments