Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I was actually concluding on that point, but thank you for emphasising it, Mr Acting Deputy President, because I think history will demonstrate what occurred. Mr Abbott's position changed because he understood the numbers inside the coalition party room. Others in the Liberal Party have commented many times on Mr Abbott's changeable position on this issue.

I would also reflect on the role of the Australians Greens. The reason the Senate did not pass the CPRS in 2009 was that the Greens voted with the coalition to block the legislation. We saw two coalition senators cross the floor to vote with the Australian Labor Party. I believe this was an instance of the perfect being the enemy of the good, because, if we had passed the legislation on that occasion, carbon pricing would have started in 2011; it would have been, by now, entrenched. This did not happen, because those in the Australian Greens refused to support a sensible carbon pricing scheme which got the balance right. Two years later, they did vote in favour of the Labor government's Clean Energy Future package, but I would make this point: there were substantial similarities between the Clean Energy Future package and the CPRS. One of the reasons given by the Australian Greens for voting against the CPRS in 2009 was that it provided free permits to the emissions-intensive trade-exposed industries and to coal fired electricity generation; so too did the Clean Energy Future package. They voted against the CPRS in 2009 because they wanted larger emissions reduction targets, but in 2011 they voted in favour of the Clean Energy Future package, which did not meet their demands on targets. What was lost was the opportunity for Australia to build a consensus on climate change, to make carbon pricing a lasting reform and to give community and business the certainty which is needed in this area of policy.

I think the result of the decisions of many people in this chamber—and, in most part, the decision of the opposition to go down the path of a disgraceful scare campaign—has been damage to community support for the principle of carbon pricing at key times. I think carbon pricing is an occasion where politicians should do the right thing not for short-term politics, not for political opportunism, but for the future generations of Australians.

In the time remaining for me to speak, I make two points. The government want to repeal carbon pricing before providing any details on how Direct Action will work. The reason they want to do that is that they know Direct Action will not work. It will not work. The repeal bills before the chamber will remove the caps on Australia's emissions, which are legislated under the Clean Energy Act, and what that will mean is that Direct Action has no way of ensuring Australia's emissions reduction targets are met and it will be less environmentally effective; and, rather than using the market to drive the cheapest cuts to emissions, the lowest cost to the economy, Direct Action will instead pay massive subsidies—taxpayer subsidies—to polluters. The age of entitlement has not ended when it comes to Australia's polluting industries. They are onto a whole new gravy train when it comes to entitlement, and that will cost taxpayers billions and billions of dollars. I refer to what former Treasury secretary Dr Ken Henry said last week:

If we are … going to commit to reducing Australia's carbon emissions below some business-as-usual baseline level ... then tackling that issue through any mechanism other than an emissions trading scheme will necessarily be more damaging on the Australian economy—

will necessarily be more damaging on the Australian economy. So those opposite, who claim they are the party of economic management, are introducing a policy that a well-respected former head of Treasury has said will necessarily inflict more damage on our economy, and they are doing so entirely for political reasons.

Labor are committed to tackling climate change in the most cost-effective way. We support moving from the fixed price on carbon to an emissions trading scheme from July this year—an emissions trading scheme that puts a cap on carbon pollution and lets business work out the cheapest way to reduce emissions. This is an important environmental reform, at the lowest cost to the economy, and is the policy we took to the last election. It is consistent with Labor policies on climate change for the last two decades and it reflects the fundamental values of the Australian Labor Party: our determination to protect the natural environment; our commitment to creating jobs and securing economic growth; and our pursuit of a fair society, including fairness across generations. For these reasons, Labor will seek to amend these bills in the committee stages and, if those amendments are not supported, we will oppose these bills.