Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

No, I have much more and I am coming to it. We also heard from Senator Ludlam how their campaign against the carbon tax was so well demonstrated by the WA by-election. Let us remind Senator Ludlam of the results in WA. Five out of the six senators—that is right, five out of the six senators—elected at the WA by-election promised to repeal the carbon tax. Senator Ludlam, you are right. You were the one out of six and you got one Senate seat. There were three Liberals promising to repeal the carbon tax, there was the Palmer United Party promising to repeal the carbon tax, and there was the Labor Party at that time promising to repeal the carbon tax. The ALP have subsequently reneged on their promise, but they were promising it at the election. If you were voting at the WA Senate re-run and you were taking the parties at their word, you would have voted for the five senators who said they wanted to repeal the carbon tax and who were subsequently elected. Not only did people vote for it at the election last year, they had a chance to do it again in WA—and they voted for it again. They gave the pro-carbon-tax position one Senate seat and they gave the anti-carbon-tax position five Senate seats. This is the kind of ridiculous logic we often hear from the Greens. Because they got elected we can forget about all the other votes. We can forget about the other 85 per cent of people who voted against the Greens in WA and take it that those 15 per cent must represent the will of the people. They do not; they represent 15 per cent. The rest voted for something quite different.

We are on the cusp of a very important moment for our nation—the repeal of the carbon tax. That is a wonderful thing. But we are also seeing another, important, shift in our political life. Senator Ludlam's tantrum was about the fact that the Greens are no longer in charge. We saw over the last six years under the Labor-Greens government that the Greens were in charge. We saw that the Greens position on things such as climate change became the government's position—it became the legislated position. That is what we are seeking to undo with the legislation we are debating tonight.

There is the Greens view, which is supported normally by around eight per cent, sometimes a little more. I accept that there are around eight to 10 per cent of people who support the Greens view of the world. You cannot fault the fact that they are fairly consistent on these things, although they have a mixed record. They are fairly consistent in taking a fairly extreme view when it comes to the issue of climate change: we are all going to be ruined tomorrow; every cyclone, every flood, every heatwave, every cold snap is a result of climate change; and, further, if only we had a carbon tax none of those things would ever have happened. That is one view of the world. Then there is the mainstream Australian view, which is that people see that the climate is changing. They see that mankind makes a contribution to that and that we should do something to try and mitigate that. I think that is the mainstream view in Australia. They do not buy the doomsday scenario that we are about to be inundated, to be flooded out of our homes, and that every weather event is the result of carbon emissions and could be fixed if only we had a carbon tax, if only we had a bigger carbon tax, if only we took that prescription. That is not the mainstream view and that is not what people have voted for. The overwhelming majority of Australians do not believe that. They do believe climate change is happening, they do believe we are making a contribution, they do believe we need to act—and the coalition agrees with that position.

So we have the Greens on the one hand who unfortunately have been in charge when it comes to the Labor Party's position on this for a long time. And it is shameful that the Labor Party are still voting to keep the carbon tax today. We have heard from various Labor senators claiming something different, that they are actually voting against the carbon tax. Well, let the record reflect very clearly that Labor senators, as their House of Representatives colleagues did, as Bill Shorten did, are voting to keep the carbon tax. That is their position. That is how they are intending to vote. That is what they have signalled in the debate. If this legislation passes, as we certainly hope it will, that will be despite the opposition of the Labor Party and despite the opposition of the Greens.

I want to go to where the Labor Party has lost its way when it comes to dealing with climate change and issues around the carbon tax. We talked about the Greens being in charge, and nothing could be clearer than what we saw in the period between 2010 and 2013. At the 2010 election, 149 of the 150 members who were elected to the House of Representatives had a position going into that election of no carbon tax. I heard Senator Di Natale earlier saying, 'You don't have a mandate for this and that and we've got a mandate to do this.' Well, we have had an election. Going back to the 2010 election, the coalition has a position opposing a carbon tax, the Labor Party had an explicit position opposing a carbon tax and most of the crossbench had a position opposing the carbon tax. In the Senate an overwhelming majority went to the election promising no carbon tax and opposing a carbon tax. Yet, because there was one Green in the House of Representatives, the Labor Party allowed their policy position to be determined by that one Green. This is where they lost their way.

Former Prime Minister Gillard often said, 'Yes, I did promise no carbon tax but I've always supported a price on carbon.' Well, that is not true either. Going into that election, Prime Minister Gillard not only promised unequivocally no carbon tax; she also said when it came to action on climate change she would seek a deep and lasting consensus through a citizens' assembly and through other measures. That was the Labor Party position. It was not: 'We will put a price on carbon but not a carbon tax.' It was: 'There will be no carbon tax and any action we take is going to come after deep consultation with the community through a citizens' assembly.' That was then scrapped. And what did they do? One Green says to them: 'I want a carbon tax. If you want my vote you need to give me a carbon tax.' Of course, the Greens were always going to back the Labor Party into office. There was never a question that Adam Bandt was going to do anything other than support the Labor Party into office in 2010, but they prostituted themselves politically and gave away their policy position to a minority party. That is how they have got into this position and that is fundamentally what we are seeking to reverse here tonight.

We are seeking to reverse the position where a party which gets about eight to 10 per cent of the vote is able to dictate terms and go against the will of parties who, between them, have received between 80 and 90 per cent of the vote. So 80 to 90 per cent of voters have voted for one thing but the Greens have dictated to the Labor Party the opposite. This is the fundamental problem with the position of the Labor Party.

The Labor Party of course did say they were going to abolish the carbon tax, but now they are voting not to do that. They went not only to the 2010 election but also to the 2013 election promising to abolish it. Today or tomorrow, when it comes to a vote, they are again going to vote for higher prices, for higher electricity prices, for higher gas prices. The Labor Party will side with the Greens again—the Greens who politically have done them so much damage, who have dragged them away from the mainstream on the issue of climate change towards the highest and most aggressive carbon tax across the world. They are going to do it again, to vote in the Senate to keep that carbon tax.

What are the Labor Party and the Greens voting for? What are they voting to protect? They are voting to keep higher prices. We have heard it said that 'well, prices may not come down', but the evidence is in: when the carbon tax repeal goes through, we will see electricity prices come down, we will see gas prices come down and we will see that with some of the costs that flow from higher electricity and gas prices. So not only will we see a great impact when it comes to supporting business; we will see a great impact when it comes to supporting households. A number of pieces of evidence are already coming in to suggest that we will see reductions as a result of this repeal. This is what those opposite will be voting against. In New South Wales, IPART has said gas prices would be about 9.2 per cent lower. Queensland senators will be voting against an 8½ per cent fall in typical household electricity bills, and that comes from the Queensland Competition Authority's media release. Tasmanian senators will be voting against a 7.8 per cent real fall in electricity prices, and that comes from the Office of the Tasmanian Economic Regulator.

In the ACT—and I think that Senator Lundy may be speaking next—they will be voting against an 11.6 per cent fall in electricity prices. The source of that is the ICRC, the Independent Competition and Regulatory Commission in the ACT. So ACT senators will be voting against that.

Across the country we will see those kinds of reductions in household costs. We read today in The Canberra Times that repealing the carbon tax will save the average Canberra household $228 a year just in electricity costs. I heard the comments from Senator Lazarus earlier about the Canberra family forced to house-sit in Queanbeyan because they could not afford the electricity prices in winter. Hopefully, we can give them some relief. We can give families like them some relief from this tax which has had such a negative impact on our economy and on households.

Business does not need convincing. I know that the Greens position in the world is that business cannot be trusted and that we should not listen to it. We do respect the contribution that business makes to our economy and to our community through creating jobs. We have it here from the Australian Aluminium Council: it supports the government's intention. ACCI has long called for the abolition of the carbon tax. AMEC—the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies—said:

… the implementation of the repeal of the MRRT combined with other initiatives contained in the Coalition Government’s various policy documents will provide much needed stimulus to the Australian mining industry.

The Cement Industry Federation, the BCA—the Business Council of Australia—the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries and the Master Builders of Australia all welcome the announcement by the Abbott government that it will repeal the carbon tax and associated laws and regulations.

The decision by the previous Rudd and Gillard governments to impose a carbon tax on Australian businesses and householders only served to add to the cost of living and home building, having little, if any, impact on global greenhouse gas emissions. The carbon tax also served to exacerbate difficult trading conditions in the building and construction industry. The carbon tax added further to the cost of living for households and to house affordability pressures, which were already acute.

It goes on and on. Business understands that, if you get rid of this multibillion dollar handbrake on the Australian economy, it will be good for households, it will be good for job creation and it will be good for business.

I must say that the gullibility of some of those who still argue in favour of this carbon tax is extraordinary. They tell us about the actions that are going on around the world; they tell us we are falling behind. But let us just put some facts on the table. The Productivity Commission report says:

… no country currently imposes an economy-wide tax on greenhouse gas emissions or has in place an economy-wide ETS.

So we have Australia's carbon tax of $25.40 per tonne covering around 370 liable entities across 60 per cent of total emissions. And yet the European Union's ETS, which is often put up as the model, covers 45 per cent of emissions—but not at $25 a tonne. It is around $8 a tonne. The New Zealand ETS covers 50 per cent of total emissions at around $4 per tonne. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, in which nine states on the US East Coast take part, covers the electricity sector only at around $5 per tonne.

The coalition wants to see this tax repealed not because of any blind ideology but because it is good for Australian households, because it is good for Australian business and because the people of Australia have consistently expressed a desire to get rid of this tax. They have expressed it in their vote, they have expressed it in numerous opinion polls and, most importantly, they have expressed it at the ballot box. When it has been clearly put to them, 'Do you want to support a party that is going to repeal the carbon tax?' they supported that party. Even in the Senate rerun in WA, five of the six senators had a position of getting rid of the carbon tax.

We want to move away from a situation where the Greens run the show. Hopefully, that is what is starting to happen through the passage of this bill. The situation where a party that gets only eight to 10 per cent of the vote is able to dictate terms to the community and to the parliament is undemocratic. It has led to poor policy. It has not been good for our economy and it has not been good for our households. We see the absurd— (Time expired)