Senate debates
Monday, 30 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
9:42 pm
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Hansard source
Perhaps I can be very clear. The modelling to which I have referred looked at a range of issues. What we have put here is the model change in asset value. It is the case that there was a very significant variation in the asset value that was modelled. That is all public; it is on the public record. There was never a mechanical link between the modelling and the policy decision. We did not contract out a government policy decision to a few modelling firms. We contracted modelling firms to model and that informed government policy, and that informed the negotiations with the opposition. As I said, I think the best way to say this is that we considered a range of issues. One of them was the modelling which informed our decision but was not determinative of the decision of the government. I cannot speak for the opposition, as to what process they undertook, but we did come to an agreement on what was regarded as a sensible approach.
No comments