Grant Chapman (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I direct my question to the Minister for Climate Change and Water. Can the minister confirm that the cabinet met, without officials, last week and decided not to include petrol in the emissions-trading scheme, at least until 2012?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Obviously, we do not discuss what may or may not occur in a cabinet context. But I am very happy to address the issue of coverage of the ETS, because what we do know is that those on the other side simply do not know if they are Arthur or Martha when it comes to climate change.

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Resources and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Johnston interjecting—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is interesting that Senator Johnston interjects. I note that he was reported today as having said:

We think the Government’s 2010 timetable is completely unrealistic and 2012 is also looking that way ...

My recollection is that previously Senator Johnston has said that 2012, the previous government’s timetable, was appropriate. So which is it that Senator Johnston supports? But this is not the only inconsistency we see from the former government when it comes to the issue of climate change. We know that those on the other side are completely divided on this issue. We know that Senators Minchin and Bernardi are amongst those who are still climate change sceptics. And we know that the moderates, Mr Turnbull and Mr Hunt, are attempting to put forward a policy which attempts to grapple, at least in some small part, with the issue of climate change. But the fact is that the opposition is simply not up to the task.

Grant Chapman (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The minister has now been answering this question for some 1½ minutes. The question I asked was very straightforward and very simple. The minister is dissembling. Could you please ask the minister to answer the quite specific question that I asked?

Alan Ferguson (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, I would remind you of the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I actually addressed the specific issue asked in the first sentence of my answer. If that is all Senator Chapman wants to discuss on this, I can understand why he feels embarrassed at the division and inconsistency on his side of politics. It is quite clear that those on the other side are simply not up to the task when it comes to the economic challenge of climate change. In government they squibbed it—

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. There were two elements to the question: did a meeting occur and was a decision made? It may be that, as to the second of those two questions, what Senator Wong said in the first sentence of her answer was correct. But it does not address the question: was a meeting held? It has always been the practice of the Senate, both in the chamber and in committees, that a question as to whether a meeting was held is a proper question and deserves a direct answer.

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

On the point of order, Mr President: Senator Brandis QC seeks to make some sort of fine legal arguments—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It’s SC.

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

I chose that deliberately, Senator Abetz. I won’t tell you how I interpret QC, but anyway.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It’s SC. You know his name; you’re a donkey!

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

Senator Macdonald, are you all right there?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You’re such a donkey! You know his name; get it correct.

Alan Ferguson (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Evans, resume your seat. Senator Macdonald, you will withdraw that comment.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

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

That is the sort of intellectual contribution we are getting from the opposition. But this is important. The senator asked a question of Senator Wong about petrol and climate change and she is answering that. She made it clear in the first part of her answer that she will not be discussing what cabinet discusses. But it is in order for her to answer the question in the broad, because those were the issues referred to. She is perfectly in order in answering the question in the way she has been.

Alan Ferguson (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Brandis, I cannot direct the minister to answer the question. It is her choice as to how she answers the question, as long as she remains relevant. I have reminded her of the question, and I do so again.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. As I was saying, those opposite simply are not capable, it appears, of confronting the economic challenge that is presented by climate change. It really exemplifies that they are the party of the past. Just as they squibbed it when they were in government on issues such as skills and infrastructure, just as they squibbed it on investing in the nation’s future, so too are they now squibbing it when it comes to the economically responsible task of responding to climate change. We have made our timetable for decision making quite clear. We have said we will receive the Garnaut report, which is also what you say you are waiting for in terms of a decision. We have said we will issue a green paper which will go to issues of ETS design, including coverage. It will go to those issues as well. But when we make our decisions we will do so with a very clear eye on securing the nation’s prosperity into the future and with a very clear understanding of the consequences of variously designed decisions.

What the opposition is failing to respond to, is failing to deal with, is what happens if you leave certain sectors of the economy out. You will have to come clean with the Australian people that, if you leave parts of the economy outside of the ETS, those sectors which are covered will have to pay a higher price and do more work to deliver the reduction in emissions that this country and the globe needs. And what will become clear over time is that this opposition simply will not face up to the economic task of tackling climate change.

Grant Chapman (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given the comments by the minister on 6 June that the emissions-trading scheme will have ‘maximal coverage’, hasn’t the minister been misleading the people of Australia about whether petrol will be in the emissions-trading scheme? Will the minister not provide certainty for Australian families about the price of petrol and tell the Senate: is petrol in or is it out? If it is in, when will it start and how much will it cost?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the date is wrong. I think it was 6 February that I announced the very clear, high-level principles the government would take to its approach to ETS design. An interesting thing for Senator Chapman to note is that it is the same position that you had when you were in government—when Prime Minister Howard finally responded to community concern on climate change and said, ‘Yes, we will have an emissions-trading scheme’—because it was the right thing to do. That was when Minister Turnbull, as he then was, said that petrol and transport should be included. That was the position that you adopted in government. Now that you are in opposition, you do not want to take the hard decisions. You do not want to present a responsible economic alternative. You want to play short-term political games with an issue that is critical to Australia’s future. I have outlined, time and time again, the process the government is going through in its decision making. (Time expired)