Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Senator Carr. Is it a fact that, under the green paper proposals for the so-called Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, companies emitting up to 1,499 tonnes of carbon dioxide per million dollars of revenue will get no compensation while companies emitting just one tonne more—1,500—will get 60 per cent compensation. Minister, won’t the government’s proposed ETS simply encourage industries to pollute more in order to get compensation?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Ellison for his question. The point has been made by the government on numerous occasions that the green paper has been issued for the purpose of consultation. This government is a government that takes the issues of climate change exceptionally seriously. The approach that has been taken by this government is in sharp contrast to that which was taken by the opposition. The opposition took the view that we could deal with these questions over any length of time and it really was not a matter of urgency. The government, under the portfolio responsibilities of Senator Wong, has taken on these issues with deliberation and has sought to ensure that there is an effective means by which these questions can be dealt with. The government has demonstrated that it is committed to reducing the enormous competitive challenges faced by emissions-intensive industries in such a manner as to ensure that incentives remain for those industries to adjust to the emerging global, carbon constrained environment.

On that basis, the government put out a green paper for consultation. It welcomes discussion with industry. It is seeking to ensure that the proposed scheme is effective, meets the criteria that the government has set and allows industry in Australia to remain competitive while at the same time encouraging a fundamental shift in attitudes on climate change. This is the way in which we can ensure that this country is prepared for the future. This is the way in which we can attract new investment. This is the way in which we can ensure that industry is able to meet its responsibilities and that this community as a whole is able to face up to the challenges of climate change.

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the minister for confirming that the CPRS will indeed encourage some companies to increase pollution. I ask the minister a supplementary question: can he advise the Senate of any other country which has proposed or is proposing an emissions trading scheme which will create a similar carbon emissions trap?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much for the supplementary question. Senator Ellison, you are only too aware of the representation responsibilities in this chamber. I think you will also be aware that there are a range of responses around the world to these questions. Australia is taking its responsibilities seriously. It is an enormous pity, Senator Ellison, that in the 12 years in which you were in office you shirked your responsibility and so much time was lost as a consequence of your negligence and dilettante attitude to these questions. You basically sought to give aid and comfort to the climate change sceptics to the point where this country is not as prepared as it should have been to deal with these fundamental issues. Now we have a government that is keen to ensure that consultation occurs, that we prepare this country for the future and that we attract the necessary investments so that this country can meet the challenges of climate change.