Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is directed to Senator Minchin in his capacity representing the Prime Minister. Can the minister confirm that some of Australia’s largest coal producers, like BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, have expressed support for an Australian carbon trading scheme? Is the minister aware that Rio Tinto submitted to the task group on emissions trading: ‘The view that nothing should be done until every nation is ready to take action is unrealistic’? Haven’t Australia’s coal-producing companies acknowledged that failing to address climate change will hurt the economy, their industry and their employees? Minister, isn’t our clever politician Prime Minister Howard just desperately employing yet another scare campaign, this time on coal jobs? Don’t Australian coal communities deserve leadership rather than the Prime Minister playing politics with their futures?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It seems extraordinarily like groundhog day. I cannot tell the difference between the question Senator Evans just asked today and the one he asked me yesterday, which was similarly about business submissions to the government’s task force inquiry into the question of an emissions trading scheme for Australia. The government has indeed set up this inquiry to examine what form an emissions trading scheme might take in relation to Australia and how that might relate to other trading schemes being proposed around the world.

As I said yesterday and I will say again, we are delighted that major corporations and businesses around Australia are putting forward their ideas on how an emissions trading scheme might look and whether that is an appropriate proposal for Australia. Indeed, the Prime Minister today indicated that one of the key issues we do have to address as a nation is the extent, if any, to which a price on carbon is going to be necessary to ensure we moderate greenhouse gas emissions.

But the Labor Party cannot, by this sort of questioning, escape from the fact that the policies they propose, and most particularly the proposal to have a 60 per cent cut in emissions by 2050, would be devastating for Australia’s coal industry. They do have Mr Garrett running around saying that the coal industry should be stopped in its tracks. They cannot escape the opprobrium of that particular comment by their environment spokesman. He is on record as saying that, and the Labor Party are on record as advocating a proposal involving a 60 per cent cut in emissions by 2050.

The widely respected and independent agency ABARE has modelled that particular proposal and found that, at the least, such a proposal would mean that the wholesale price of electricity would double—a 100 per cent increase in the price of electricity. Petrol prices, about which the Labor Party often complains, would go up by 50 per cent. We have the respected economist Dr Peter Brain saying that, with these sorts of cuts, the impact would be most heavily upon the poor in our community. So the Labor Party can run around joining in apocalyptic hysteria, saying we have to make all these cuts. It is easy to go around in opposition and proclaim these sorts of targets—60 per cent cuts in emissions—without facing up to the reality of what those things would mean.

We are approaching this problem of greenhouse gas emissions and their contribution to climate change in a very practical, serious way and an experienced way. We are dealing with issues in a cost-effective manner to see what is appropriate for the Australian economy to do. As Senator Abetz said yesterday, we set up the Australian Greenhouse Office nearly 10 years ago. We spent $2 billion over the last 10 years on programs to stimulate renewables technologies to ensure that Australia does make a contribution to greenhouse gas abatement. We are approaching this issue with the seriousness which it deserves. That is why we have gone and taken the political risk of putting nuclear power on the table, because if you are serious about this issue you cannot rule out the possibility of nuclear power playing a role in Australia’s energy mix. But what do these people do? Run around creating hysteria, but then the only solution for baseload power that is zero emissions they just rule out. So they are not to be believed on this issue.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Senator Minchin refers to creating hysteria. That is exactly what the Prime Minister sought to do yesterday by saying any attack on climate change is a threat to our economy. Aren’t business and others in the community leading the debate, trying to drag the government along behind them, in recognising that it is bad for our economy if we fail to tackle climate change? Why won’t the government show some leadership, catch up with business in the community and seriously tackle these issues rather than trying to spread fear? Isn’t it a fact that unless we take steps to tackle climate change we will suffer economically in the long run?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian people should be scared about the alternative policies put forward by the Labor Party. As Terry McCrann said today:

Kevin Rudd has recommitted a Rudd Labor government to damaging the economy in the short term and destroying it in the longer term.

That would be the consequence of the Labor Party’s policies to cut emissions in this country by 60 per cent over the next 40 years. It would be devastating to the economy. Terry McCrann is dead right; they would be a threat to every Australian.