Senate debates
Monday, 7 November 2011
Bills
Clean Energy Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Tax Laws Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Fuel Tax Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Customs Tariff Amendment) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Excise Tariff Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011, Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment Bill 2011, Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Unit Shortfall Charge — General) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge — Auctions) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge — Fixed Charge) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (International Unit Surrender Charge) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Charges — Customs) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Charges — Excise) Bill 2011, Clean Energy Regulator Bill 2011, Climate Change Authority Bill 2011; In Committee
10:57 am
Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source
I want to ask a further question in relation to Senator Xenophon's remarks before the minister responds. This issue came up in the joint house inquiry. We heard from the Energy Supply Association, but from further discussions subsequent to that and after thinking about it, I think the difference between the CPRS and this scheme in terms of this particular issue is that the CPRS only had one year of a known price, whereas with this scheme we are going to a fixed price mechanism for three years before going to flexible pricing.
From my point of view, that does make a difference on this issue. As Senator Xenophon said, this is one of the issues that were raised that requires consideration. I went back to the minister's office to raise it with them and to ask whether this is really the issue it is being made out to be, because the government obviously has the benefit of a lot more confidential information than we have in relation to this matter. I am led to believe that the three years does make a substantial difference in the circumstances, so I would appreciate it if the minister, in answering part of what Senator Xenophon raised, could also refer to that matter.
No comments