Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister representing the Prime Minister (Senator Chris Evans) to a question without notice asked by Senator Brandis today relating to carbon pricing.

Today, 13 September 2011, is the day that Labor has irrevocably turned its back on the Australian people. Eyes firmly fixed down the camera lens, Ms Gillard solemnly promised there would be no carbon tax under a government that she led. In the most desperate grab for power in Australian political history, that promise has been discarded as lightly as one would discard a soiled tissue. I detect the Australian people may be returning the compliment to the Green-Labor government. Having promised no carbon tax, Labor broke their word. Having promised a people's convention to establish a community consensus on climate change, Labor broke their word. But one thing I do congratulate Labor on is their having built a community consensus on action on climate change. That community consensus is a huge consensus against the carbon tax. All the advertising dollars that they have taken out of Australian taxpayers' pockets have not convinced those Australian taxpayers that this carbon tax is a good idea.

In the face of breach of promises to the people, strong community opposition to carbon tax, countries all over the world backpedalling on a carbon tax—and you can go from Japan to France, to the United States, to New Zealand and then off to Canada and elsewhere in the world—Labor still insists it wants this job- and wealth-destroying tax that will do nothing for the environment. In the face of all this, why does Labor continue with this foolish and destructive policy? Labor may have changed leaders, but it clearly has not changed policy. The rush with Labor's collapsed and discredited Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme had nothing to do with the world's physical environment; it had everything to do with the position of Mr Rudd and Labor in the environs of the United Nations.

If we had followed Labor's foolish path, we would now be known as the clowns of Copenhagen. Having failed to get the global agreement at Copenhagen, we would have been the laughing stock of the world and would have destroyed our economy at the same time. But, not able to learn from history, Labor is prepared to yet again take us down the same foolish path. Instead of being the clowns of Copenhagen, it wants Australia to be the dunces of Durban by legislating the world's most extensive and expensive scheme—a scheme which by 2020 will see over $3 billion per annum of Australian income going overseas to buy so-called carbon credits. The trading scheme that we are told to look at is that of Europe, which is only one-tenth of the size of our proposed carbon tax, a scheme which is now acknowledged to be corrupt and rorted and is now being fully investigated in countries even as sophisticated as Norway. But Labor simply ignores the facts, ignores its promises, ignores the wishes of the Australian people and ignores the facts of the rest of the world.

This deceit by Labor will be remembered by all Australians as the grossest and most deliberate betrayal of their trust by a political party in our nation's history. As Labor look high and low for an alternative leader, we know they are all complicit. A change of leader will not change their policy. It will not change anything, just like Labor's carbon tax will not change the environment of the world. But it will change the jobs environment in this country and it will change the environment of the family budget for millions of Australians. Today marks the occasion of the biggest betrayal of the Australian people by an elected government. I trust the Australian people will respond—(Time expired)

Ursula Stephens (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If we were to listen to Senator Abetz we would believe that the sky was falling with the introduction of the carbon tax and clean energy bills which were introduced into the House of Representatives today. However, I do think that this is a very momentous day. That is the only point upon which I agree with Senator Abetz, because the Clean Energy Future package as we see it and know it will see so much change in Australia. Every one of us knows, as we have been debating this issue of climate change for decades, that tackling climate change is critical from an environmental perspective, an economic perspective and a social perspective.

Senator Boswell interjecting—

I certainly do believe it, Senator; I do indeed. We know, from the world's scientists, that climate change is real and that we must reduce our carbon pollution. We know we have to take these steps and we know that the cheapest way of doing it is to create this market based mechanism of putting a price on carbon. But the opposition would have us believe that there is no such thing as needing to have a price on carbon. That is why we heard questions from the opposition today suggesting, as they were, that 500 businesses, the 500 biggest polluters here, deserved to be able to continue polluting for free and that the rest of Australia should actually pay the price of carbon pollution. So the Clean Energy Future package that was introduced in the House of Representatives today is incredibly significant for all of Australia. It puts a price on carbon to be paid by those biggest polluters while providing assistance to householders and small businesses. And it is going to be the package that drives fundamental reform in our economy. It will invest in clean energy and it will invest in jobs for the future, and the scaremongering that goes on about the fact that we are going to lose jobs in Australia does not recognise that Australia is the most innovative country in creating clean energy jobs.

What the opposition would have us believe about their approach to climate change, direct action, contradicts and confuses and misinforms. The people who have been trying to use their briefing packs—the coalition members out in their electorates—have been trying to explain what the direct action package is going to produce for Australia and have actually been getting so confused by the whole issue. The clean energy package is the right way to go. We are here ready to debate it. Senator Brandis was challenging the fact, saying that that was going to be pushed through the parliament. We are going to be sitting an extra two weeks to enable that debate to continue and we will make sure—as to those people who need to have their say, and we will be looking forward to some constructive contributions to that debate—that this issue is debated fairly. The establishment of a joint select committee on this issue, to investigate and consider the package of bills that were introduced, will allow people to have their say. It will allow the citizens of Australia to understand the implications of this comprehensive package and it will allow them to see and to hear, from those who are most intimately involved in this package, that there will be more than a million and a half jobs created in this country over the period to 2020 on the basis of what we have been bringing into the parliament today, with almost three-quarters of a million jobs created by the Labor government since we came into office. These are the things that we need to ensure that this government produces for all of us as part of the broader economic agenda that we have here. Take the major shifts that are happening in our economy now. We need to be part of those. Take the major shifts that are happening in the global economy. We need to be part of those. We need to be engaged in all this. We need to build the climate change agenda into everything that is happening here. So reforming our training system, reforming our economic system and our regulatory system, investing in the NBN and ensuring that we can have smart, clean jobs in our regions are all part of a broader economic strategy.

The other important point that we bring to the debate today is the way in which the Clean Energy Future package will compensate people impacted by the carbon tax. Nine out of 10 households will receive a combination of tax cuts. (Time expired)

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

I must say I like Senator Stephens enormously.

Ursula Stephens (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, thank you!

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

I do and I always have and I look forward to her promotion to the front bench under the new Rudd government. But it does sadden me when a person as sensible as Senator Stephens feels obliged, in reciting the Labor Party talking points, to dismiss the 500 most prosperous companies in Australia—the 500 biggest employers in Australia, our 500 greatest private enterprises—as Australia's '500 biggest polluters'. That is the contempt which the Labor Party shows to the productive sector of the Australian economy.

But, Mr Deputy President, this is a debate about parliamentary scrutiny and I want to share with you an experience I had some six years ago when I shared with Senator Chris Evans a rostrum at an event, down at Old Parliament House, about the role of the Senate. The coalition had just won a Senate majority. Senator Evans gave a speech and I want to read to you some of the things Senator Evans said in his speech. He talked about the development of the Senate committee system and how it was prejudiced by the Howard government's Senate majority. These are Senator Evans's words:

... the Government's—

that is, the Howard government's—

arrogance and determination to exercise its new found power did not end at avoiding scrutiny in Question Time. It quickly moved to use the tyranny of its majority to overturn or deny every practice, procedure and mechanism that had defined the Senate's modern role. ... Every Senate procedure and mechanism to ensure proper scrutiny and debate was bludgeoned by a Government committed to getting its own way. ... No proper examination of the legislation was possible.

... inquiries are for the purposes of window dressing alone. The Government majority has ensured limited terms of reference, limited times for inquiry, Canberra-centric hearings and reporting dates that prevent effective scrutiny, community participation and proper analysis and reporting. They are a fig leaf for a power drunk and arrogant Government.

He went on to say this:

Let me be brutally frank. Future Labor Governments with a Senate majority would face the same temptations that this Government has faced and grabbed with both hands. ... But Labor is fully committed to supporting the Senate's review and accountability functions in government and opposition. Labor believes the Senate's functions that have developed over the last 24 years are worth defending and preserving.

What hypocrisy! What shameless hypocrisy! Today, now that Labor is in government, now that Labor with its Green partners does have an effective Senate majority and the Senate is seized with what the government itself claims to be the most important package of legislation this parliament will see, there is a denial of effective parliamentary and Senate committee scrutiny of that legislation. The carbon tax package of bills comprises 19 bills stretching for 963 pages, not including the regulations. How much Senate committee scrutiny will there be of those bills? Three weeks! There will be three weeks of scrutiny by a committee with a government majority and a government chairman who will no doubt do the government's bidding.

The clearest comparison is with the GST legislation introduced by the Howard government. It was far-reaching tax legislation, with far-reaching implications throughout the economy. The Howard government afforded five months of scrutiny outside the period of the parliamentary debate, with no fewer than four parliamentary committees examining the GST legislation. So, for the all the honeyed words of Senator Evans six years ago, when he was in opposition, promising that in government Labor would do better, the truth of the matter is that, whereas the Howard government was prepared to allow four Senate committees—none of them controlled by the government of the day—five months to scrutinise the GST bill, this desperate, hypocritical Labor government will allow one Senate committee controlled by the government all of three weeks to examine legislation even more far-reaching.

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today in the House of Representatives we heard from many government ministers highlighting our plan to tackle climate change, and we have just heard from Senator Brandis about the issue of fast-tracking. There have been 35 parliamentary inquiries into climate change since 1994. People are sick and tired of politicians talking about this. They actually want something done. Climate change is an issue that is not going to go away. It cannot be chased away simply by the scaremongering of those opposite. One thing is absolutely clear: it is in Australia's long-term national interest to deal with climate change.

The Gillard Labor government has introduced a package of clean energy bills to parliament that will ensure Australia reduces its carbon pollution in the most economically efficient way—by putting a price on carbon, which says to 500 or so big polluters that enough is enough, that it is time to pay for every tonne of carbon pollution put into our atmosphere. The Gillard Labor government has a plan to remove 160 million tonnes of carbon pollution from the earth's atmosphere by 2020. It is about using a market based mechanism to Australia's advantage. This mechanism will involve a fixed price for three years from 1 July 2012, then move to a floating price after 1 July 2015. The fixed price will start at $23 per tonne of carbon pollution and progressively increase each year, providing certainty to those businesses and allowing for a manageable transition. After 1 July 2015 a cap will be placed on Australia's emissions and the market will decide on the carbon price. But there will be a price floor for the first three years of the floating price system to ensure the transition is as smooth as possible.

At the core of an emissions trading scheme is a cap on carbon pollution. The cap will guarantee reductions in carbon pollution and allow us to achieve our long-term goal of an 80 per cent reduction from the 2000 level by 2050—that is, 17 billion tonnes of carbon pollution out of the atmosphere between now and 2050. This emissions trading scheme will also involve international linking to give Australians access to a broader range of abatement opportunities. This will help to contain costs and promote international action on climate change. I note that the Prime Minister has recently met with the President of the European Union, President Barroso, and their discussions naturally led to what they are doing to combat climate change. I understand Mr Barroso said:

Australia's decision to put a price on carbon emissions is ... an important step, both environmentally and economically.

Because:

It is in our view and the European experience, the most cost-efficient way to reduce emissions and also create green business opportunities. We will now continue our joint work for a global climate regime and also on a bilateral basis we will see what we can do together.

To those opposite that say we are acting alone, you are only kidding yourselves. Australia is the 15th largest emitter of carbon pollution, with emissions comparable to many European nations but with a population many times smaller.

The Gillard Labor government is committed to a smooth transition. We will use all of the revenue to support households, to invest in a clean energy future and climate change programs and to support jobs and competitiveness in energy intensive programs. For households there will be tax cuts, increases in family payments and higher pensions, benefits and other government allowances. Nine out of 10 households will receive assistance through tax cuts and/or payment increases through the transfer system. In total, in my home state of Tasmania, more than 174,400 people will receive household assistance through the transfer system. This assistance is permanent and will increase. The government will review the adequacy of assistance each year and will increase it further if necessary. We are taking this opportunity to make significant reforms to our tax system that will see over one million Australians no longer required to lodge a tax return.

The government understands there are a great many Australians who are concerned about this policy, who are concerned to understand the impact of the Clean Energy Future package on their households and on their families, which is why the government has worked very hard to ensure that information is provided to the Australian people. This is also why the government has committed to extend— (Time expired)

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is interesting, isn't it, when you see those opposite reading speeches delivered to them straight from the local propaganda unit in the other place? It is just the biggest scam that this nation has ever seen concocted. This scam started out as global warming. That did not work so then it became climate change. That did not work so now it has become clean energy. If we hang around long enough, it will be 'Saving the pets'. Who knows where this will end up? The question that everybody has on their lips is: by how much will this change the temperature of the globe? Of course, it will not do anything. It is a mere gesture. It is a platitude of excuses to cover up for a gesture that is going to make people poorer. We are allowing the Australian Taxation Office to be the arbitrary collector of the spare cash in everybody's house, via every power point in every corner of every room. That is what is being forced on the Australian people.

It is so absurd and so naive and deceitful to say, 'It's the 500 biggest polluters.' Do you think they are going to absorb the cost? Do you think that Macquarie Generationwill say, 'We'll absorb the costs or we'll shut down'? No; they will just push it off to the punter. They will push it off to the pensioner. They will push it up every street, into every weatherboard and every tile and brick. They are the ones who will pay the tax. They are the ones who will have to cough up the lolly to pay for this deceit of the Australian people as delivered by the Australian Labor Party when they went to the previous election and completely and utterly misrepresented what they were going to do.

Why are we doing this? Now we have this concocted, almost profane, type of approach to the Australian people. The debate has now been truncated in such a way as to get it through because Bob Brown has to go to Durban. Bob Brown is off to Durban. He is going surfing, so we all have to get this piece of legislation through. There will be the equivalent of about one minute per member of parliament for every piece of legislation that there is. This is where we have ended up and this is where the Australian people have ended up. But I can assure you: 'honour and homage, tribute tax and toll', as Tennyson would say. This is the honour and homage, tribute tax and toll to the Australian Greens.

Why are we doing this? There are so many things in this legislation that are so peculiar. By 2020, we will be sending $3.2 billion a year overseas, and it will end up in scams. It will end up in scams in the West African republic: 'If you would just send me your bank account details, I'll send you some carbon credits.' But, no, it does not end there. By 2050, so help me, $58 billion a year from Australia will be just wandering off into the ether, making the world cooler obviously. Think of the hips that would replace, the teeth that would fix, the pensioners that would pay for, the kids who could be lifted out of poverty and the Indigenous people we could help. But, no, we are just sending it off into the blue horizon, off into the haze.

The government say, 'We've got to fight climate change.' So I always refer to Professor John Christy, who is actually the lead scientist on the IPCC. He is actually an atmospheric scientist and he said, 'Yes, there is global warming, about one degree every hundred years.' There is absolutely nothing, in his words, that Australia can do about it. It is going to happen, so this is a gesture. Why are we doing this to our people? Why do we live with this absurd belief that currently carbon is free? Obviously the government must believe that there is no pricing mechanism on power. It is free. They just give it to you with your fuel and your groceries. You just walk out and they hand it to you. You do not have to pay for it.

But there is a pricing mechanism and there are a lot of people now who cannot afford it. So they say, 'We'll compensate you.' You only get compensated when you have been injured, and that is what is about to happen to the Australian people. They are about to be injured by a government that has deceived them, that has let them down and that is continually changing the metaphor and glosses it over so that global warming is now climate change and climate change is now clean energy. No matter what it is, it is a lemon. It is a multibillion-dollar lemon and it is something the Australian people will not forgive you for. We actually know what happens to you next. It is what happened to us with IR and it is going to happen to you with this fraud on the Australian people. You will pay. Have a look at the polls and ask why. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.