Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Wong. I refer the minister to the publicly stated concerns about the flawed design of the government’s emissions trading scheme by the Business Council of Australia, the Australian Industry Group, Bluescope Steel, Woodside, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Nyrstar, Alcoa, Visy, Qantas, the Regional Aviation Association of Australia, the energy sector, international investors, the cement industry, a member of the Reserve Bank board and the Labor Premier of Tasmania, to name just a few. If it makes sense to wait for the world on targets, why—

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! There needs to be order on my right so that I can hear the question.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If it makes sense to wait for the world on targets, why does it not make sense to wait for the world outcome at the Copenhagen meeting next year before rushing in the introduction of Labor’s flawed emissions trading scheme?

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

I thank the good senator for her question. I could go through and list off all those on that side who do not believe we should take action on climate change. That might take a great deal longer than I have for responding to this question. We made it clear as a government when we put out the green paper that we were putting out some detailed design propositions for consultation because we understood how important it was to get the balance right on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. We on this side absolutely understand the importance of getting the balance right when it comes to the design of this scheme. It will be progressed in an economically responsible way.

We have undertaken extensive consultation with industry, as the good senator knows, in relation to the issues in the scheme. I would also remind the senator in relation to the start date that we have clearly also heard the views of people such as the Business Council of Australia and the Minerals Council of Australia, who have clearly indicated that what business does require when it comes to climate change is policy certainty, which was never provided in your government, other than the certainty of inaction and delay. We have heeded the calls of the Business Council of Australia, the Minerals Council of Australia and others when it comes to the issue of the start date. It is only those on the other side who are failing to recognise the importance of business certainty in this regard.

We on this side of the chamber absolutely understand that climate change is a key economic challenge for the future of this nation and the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is the economically responsible way to respond to climate change and to do what we told the Australian people we would do before the election, which is to take action on climate change. (Time expired)

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that the minister will not listen to the concerns of industry and other affected parties, will the minister at least act on the concerns of Labor senator Steve Hutchins, Labor senator Glenn Sterle and the Labor member for Throsby, Ms Jennie George, the former head of the ACTU, about Labor’s flawed emissions trading scheme, or will the legitimate concerns of these backbenchers also be dismissed? Are they climate change deniers for daring to question the design of the emissions trading scheme?

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

I say to Senator Cash that we know where the climate change deniers are; they are on that side of the chamber. Those on this side of the chamber—all of us—are concerned about jobs, particularly in this time of global economic crisis. That is why we are working so hard to strike the right balance on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. We on this side also understand that we have to not only protect the jobs of today but prepare Australia for the jobs of tomorrow. We need to build a lower pollution economy that will be competitive in tomorrow’s world. We on this side of the chamber absolutely understand something those opposite have never understood: that in government you have to lay the groundwork for the economy of the future. Unlike those opposite, who saw the way forward on that as stripping away wages— (Time expired)

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Doesn’t the fact that the minister has broken her promise to have draft laws for the emissions trading scheme in place by the end of this year prove that the government’s 2010 deadline for the introduction of Labor’s flawed emissions trading scheme is unworkable? Will the government now listen to the advice of the opposition, of industry and of its own backbenchers and defer the commencement of the scheme beyond 2010?

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

If we listened to the advice of the opposition on climate change we know that nothing would ever happen. What we will do is listen to the advice of key business groups, who have said they need—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Wong has the call.

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

We will listen to the advice, through our consultations, particularly from key business groups, who have made it clear that certainty is key to how we respond to climate change and that delay would simply increase uncertainty. We know on this side that there will never be an easy time to transition to a low-pollution economy, which is vital to Australia’s future. But we on this side are prepared to do the hard yards, to do the work to strike the right balance and to put in place a scheme that will do what we told the Australian people we would do before the election—that is, respond to climate change, because we understand it is in Australia’s best interests now and into the future for us to do so.