Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Universities and Research) Share this | Hansard source

I rarely get the opportunity to speak on procedural matters, procedure not being one of my strong points. But there is a particular reason why this shabby suspension motion, this shabby legislation, is being pushed through. And Senator Fifield is quite right—it is in fact to cook the books, to bring forward expenditure to this financial year so that the money is not spent next financial year, which would upset the government's surplus. That is very naughty. But it reflects the sleight of hand, the soft-shoe shuffle, which underlies the entire budget—the dodgy figures that speak for the government and for the surplus.

Secondly, and even more importantly, the reason for this legislation is to distract families, to distract schoolchildren in particular, from the elephant in the room, the elephant in the Senate, the elephant in the budget lock-up, the elephant in the parliament—that is, the carbon tax. I cannot recall Mr Swan talking about the carbon tax last night. Or did he just once mention carbon pricing in passing? He mentioned it just once. That is the elephant in the room. What the government wants to do is this: it wants to say, 'Oh, look at that cute little possum up there in the tree'. While you are looking at that cute little possum up in the tree, you will be run over by a bus—a carbon tax bus. What is the government's answer to the cost-of-living increases that will certainly come with a carbon tax? A schoolkids bonus. That is the government's answer to the cost-of-living increases brought on by the carbon tax—and this parliament is supposed to take that seriously, this suspension order seriously, this potential guillotine seriously? That is their public policy answer to the introduction of a carbon tax?

I am not very good at budget papers, but I had a look at them before I came down. Based on Budget Paper No. 1, statement 3 on page 13, the government's own figures, there is a $25 billion tax over the forward estimates. To address the $25 billion slug there will be this sugar hit; a bit of a cash bonus before the end of the financial year. It will not come anywhere near addressing the issues facing schoolchildren or facing working families, who have experienced a 60 per cent increase in the price of electricity over the last five years. This is just a pathetic sugar hit.

Mr Deputy President, you have heard me many times on the subject and you heard the same thing with Senator Sinodinos's question to Senator Wong. There is an enormous instability in the world at the moment, particularly in Western Europe but also, to some degree, in the United States. This government wants to introduce carbon pricing into Australia, which has a comparative advantage in exporting energy, to make our economy less competitive at a time when Western Europe is in turmoil. Isn't that good timing? Even Senator Wong conceded that Western economies are struggling and, despite the fact that this will be an impost of $25 billion over the forward estimates, this lot want to unilaterally bring in carbon pricing. My colleagues often say the greatest criticism is that the Prime Minister did not tell the truth on this. I disagree with my colleagues. I think the great criticism is that this lot is the only political party in the world, along with the Greens, that believes that the unilateral imposition of carbon pricing is in Australia's national interest. Irrespective of what any other nation on earth does, this lot believes, in a country that is an energy exporter, that is trade exposed, that it is in our national interest to unilaterally bring on the world's largest carbon tax. No other party on earth believes that, certainly no other government—and to bring in a schoolkids bonus! How pathetic. (Time expired)