David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise on the motion to take note of Senator Wong's answer. I was listening with great interest to Senator Feeney, particularly where he said that both parties have the same emissions reduction target of five per cent by 2020, and that given this it would be nice if there could be bipartisan accord. Can I say that there is a bipartisan accord on the way to deal with this and it is not the one Senator Feeney was referring to. In fact, the bipartisan accord came into existence exactly one year ago today when the Prime Minister put a hand on her heart and solemnly said to the people of Australia, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.' From that day on there was a bipartisan approach to dealing with emissions reduction, based on the fact that neither major party would introduce a carbon tax. Earlier this year, the bipartisan approach to emissions abatement which Senator Feeney longs for evaporated when the Prime Minister broke her solemn promise to the Australian people.

So here we are on the first anniversary of her statement that—and I repeat her very clear statement—'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.' On this anniversary of her solemn statement to the Australian people the Prime Minister should apologise. Today thousands of people have been out the front of Parliament House, all of them incensed by the fact that the Prime Minister managed to achieve a victory at the last election based, at least in significant part, on the fact that she had made that promise to the Australian people. We all know there is no doubt that there are seats around the country which Labor would not have won had she not done that.

The Prime Minister now says, 'Things changed after the election and we had to go with the circumstances we faced at that point.' When Tony Abbott, as Leader of the Opposition, was challenging the Prime Minister prior to the election, there was absolutely no doubt as to the circumstances he was talking about. When he said to the Prime Minister, 'Will you rule out introducing a carbon tax after the next election?' it was in the full knowledge that the Greens had an excellent chance of winning the balance of power in the Senate and that the Prime Minister would need to deal with the Greens. It was in the full knowledge that the election was going to be tight and that there could be a need to deal with Independents in the post-election environment. The Leader of the Opposition put that challenge to the Prime Minister knowing full well that that was the case and the Prime Minister, in making her response, knew full well that those were the circumstances in which that challenge was being put to her. Yet she still stood up and said, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.'

So after the election, when what was likely to occur did occur, the government, for what can only be considered grubby personal reasons of wanting to hang on to power, did a deal with the Greens. As a result the Prime Minister had to renege on her promise to the Australian people and, as we all know, is now seeking to introduce this carbon tax.

I say again, the argument we have in this place when talking about the government's carbon tax is not whether Australia should take action to reduce emissions. That is accepted by both major parties. Senator Feeney acknowledged that just a few minutes ago. The argument is: what is the best way to do this? This is despite the fact that government senators—Senator Feeney excluded on this particular occasion—continue to paint themselves as the only major party committed to this outcome. It is disingenuous and dishonest to do that because clearly both major parties have a plan to reduce emissions. The government's plan is far more about being seen to be doing something than actually addressing the problem. Their toxic new carbon tax may help them to feel warm and fuzzy and may even help them sleep better at night—because they feel they have done something for the environment—but their tax will not help reduce global emissions and will not address the challenge of climate change.

In answering a question from Senator Abetz, Minister Wong spoke about China's renewable energy production but failed to look at the relativities, to mention the percentage of renewables of the total economy which that represented. This is massive compared with Australia's energy production. (Time expired)