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

My question is to be Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. Has the government given consideration to the impact of the carbon tax on the value of assets, and in particular plant and equipment, owned by those companies liable to pay the tax? Has the government made any provision in its modelling for the inevitable reduction in the capital value of those assets?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Brandis for the question. It does give me the opportunity to correct something I said yesterday in question time—

Senator Abetz interjecting—

You will enjoy this, Senator Abetz. I provided two quotes to the chamber, both of which I said—

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

Mr President, I rise on a point of order.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Wong interjecting—

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

Senator Conroy and Senator Wong! I am waiting to give Senator Brandis the call.

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

Mr President, on a point of order: I think I have a reasonably clear idea of what Senator Wong proposes to say and, may I say, I welcome her correction at the appropriate time. But it is not a proper use of the short period of time allowed for her to answer a question to use that time to correct the record from yesterday's Hansard. There is another time allowed for that in the proceedings. I want to know about the effect on the capital value of assets.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: I have never yet seen a point of order taken on something someone might say. I have always appreciated that George can see into the future. Senator Brandis has enormous forward vision, but to actually take a point of order on something that somebody might say is a little unusual. Perhaps he might want to be ruled out of order, Mr President.

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

The opening statement by the minister was that the minister was going to correct the record from a question that was asked yesterday. The appropriate time to do that is at the end of question time, and always has been.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

I am not going to get into an argument; I am just telling you what the practice and the procedure in this place have been for a long period of time. The minister has one minute and 41 seconds remaining to address the question that was asked by Senator Brandis. I invite the minister to answer the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. I am surprised that Senator Brandis is so reluctant to own up to the fact that the quote I referred to was actually from him. The quote I referred to advocating for petrol to be in an emissions trading scheme was in fact from Senator Brandis.

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

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The minister is openly defying your ruling. You have just said that the time to correct the record is after question time and that the minister must come to the question. The question had nothing to do with petrol; the question had to do with the effect on asset values of the carbon tax. You should direct the minister to answer the question. If she continues to defy the ruling, she should be directed to resume her seat.

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

As I have said before, I cannot direct the minister how to answer the question. I did draw to the minister's attention—

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Conroy! I did draw to the minister's attention the fact that there was one minute and 41 seconds remaining at that time to address the question that had been asked. There is now one minute and 20 seconds. I invite the minister to answer the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was asked, I think almost hypothetically, about assets in unnamed industries—

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

You were asked about industries affected by the carbon tax.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Would you like to add that to your question and amend it along the way?

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

Interjections do not help question time on either side. Continue, Senator Wong.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

First, I do not believe any particular industry was indentified—which, in any event, would make the question difficult to respond to. In the context of the CPRS, the government obviously did look at the value of assets in the electricity sector. The senator would be very aware of the policy the government put previously before this parliament, which looked at the energy sector and the argument about the loss of asset value, which was part of the energy security assistance scheme that was included in the CPRS.

In relation to the package to be announced on Sunday, as I have previously said, details on these matters will be announced on Sunday, and I am sure the senator will have the opportunity to consider those aspects which are relevant to his question.

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

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Is it not the case that any decline in asset values of the companies affected by the carbon tax will be borne by the shareholders and investors in those companies, including those super­annuation funds entrusted with the retirement savings of millions of Australians?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you look at, for example, what a number of investors of those funds have said publicly, you will see that there has been a very clear view about the importance of dealing with the uncertainty that currently exists around carbon pricing, because, of course, uncertainty creates a greater perception of risk. That is one of the reasons that the government is so clear about the importance of proceeding with what is a very economically sensible policy. I am not sure if the senator is aware of the Investor Group on Climate Change and the range of investors who have spoken about the need to end the uncertainty that has been brought about as a result of the actions of those on that side of the parliament, but it is very clear that business certainty will be best met if we can finally clarify the design of a price on carbon and carry that legislation through this place.

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

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Can the minister assure the Senate that, when the government reveals the detail of the carbon price this Sunday, that announcement will include an announcement of the provisions it intends to make to safeguard the retirement savings of Australians affected by a decline in the share price through a decline in the asset values of the thousand or so companies directly affected by the carbon tax?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The hypocrisy of a coalition senator asking about retirement savings, when that side of politics has consistently opposed superannuation for working Australians! You opposed it when it was first introduced by Labor, you continue to oppose a lift in the superannuation rate for working Australians and you come in here and talk to us about retirement savings. People in this country understand which is the party of superannuation, which is the party that has been prepared to add to the retirement savings of working Australians, and it is the Australian Labor Party, Senator Brandis.