Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer and the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. Does the minister accept that it was utterly contemptuous for the government to last week task a committee with reviewing the merits of their carbon tax legislation and on Sunday start selectively quoting from updated Treasury modelling into the impact of this carbon tax but only release the modelling minutes before the committee was due to start questioning Treasury officials about it this morning? How can the government claim to want a thorough and considered scrutiny of its proposals when it treats a committee that it established and that it set the hearing dates for with such complete contempt?

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

I call the Minister representing the Treasurer and Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.

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

You should be ashamed of yourself. You are a disgrace. I thought you were better than that. You have lost the respect of the chamber.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What's this pompous git on about? How can you put up with the pomposity?

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

Just resume your seat, Senator Wong.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Order! When there is silence on both sides, we will proceed.

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

If I may say, what is utterly contemptuous in this debate is the continued reliance on falsehoods from those opposite in relation to the impact of pricing carbon. What is contemptuous is the lack of regard for the science and the lack of regard for the truth that has been demonstrated in, and is central to, the fear campaign engaged in by those opposite. What is utterly contemptuous is the man who wants to be the Prime Minister of this country going out to different sites to get a good camera shot and telling—

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Senator Wong, just resume your seat. If people wish to have a debate they can go outside at this stage of the afternoon, because 3 pm is the time—

Senator Bernardi interjecting—

Senator Bernardi! It is you that I am referring to. A lot of your colleagues are surprised at that but I can assure them that it is you, Senator Bernardi. Senator Wong, please continue.

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

What is utterly contemptuous is telling people who work in the coal industry that pricing carbon will mean the death of the coal industry when you know that is not true.

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

If you believe in nothing I suppose you've got to lie through your teeth.

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

Senator Brandis, you will need to withdraw.

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

Mr President, Senator Brandis made a clearly unparliamentary and, quite frankly, really inappropriate remark, and I think he ought to stand and withdraw it.

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

Mr President, I withdraw if required to do so by you.

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

No, it has to be under—

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

I was not referring to a particular individual. I did not understand that the standing orders applied to generic remarks; nevertheless, I withdraw.

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

Thank you.

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

In relation to the modelling, as the senator would know if he has read it, it shows almost no difference from the modelling that was previously released. It shows that the economy continues to grow. It shows that jobs continue to grow. It shows that incomes continue to grow and that domestic emissions will fall to nearly half of what they would be without carbon pricing in 2050. These are all findings that I am sure the opposition will continue to ignore.

In relation to the committee, obviously I am not a member of the committee, but I am advised that the committee is reconvening on Monday for the purpose of enabling senators and members to ask the questions they think are appropriate. (Time expired)

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

When there is silence, we will proceed.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Speaking of falsehoods, I refer the minister to this updated modelling and the assumption and all the modelled scenarios within it that 'Australia introduces a domestic carbon price in a world where other countries also act to mitigate climate change'. Does the government believe that other countries, particularly the United States and China, have policies in place that will ensure they comply with this assumption? If not, how quickly will they have such policies in place?

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

As I have previously gone through on many occasions in this place, other countries are acting to mitigate climate change, other countries are acting to deal with the continued growth of emissions. There was a time when there were people on the other side, John Howard, Malcolm Turnbull—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Senator Wong, resume your seat. If people are wishing to have a chat across the chamber, which is disorderly, I am entitled to hear the answer.

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

There was a time when there were sensible people on the other side of parliament—Malcolm Turnbull, and even former Prime Minister Howard—who understood the importance of a sensible approach to tackling climate change. There was a time when the senator who in high dudgeon is questioning me came into this chamber and argued to support the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. So anybody listening would know that the reason those opposite are continuing on this campaign is that all they want to deal with when it comes to climate change is a fear campaign.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. In the four scenarios modelled by the government, why has the government not modelled at least one scenario where other countries do not meet the government's optimistic outlook for international action? Given that President Obama recently shelved a tightening of smog standards which would have lowered emissions, isn't it the case that not only are other countries backtracking on pricing emissions but they also backtracking on reducing emissions? Isn't Labor's policy just leaving Australia like a shag on a rock?

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

One would have thought that was actually a question from Senator Bernardi, not Senator Birmingham. No matter how hard Senator Birmingham tries to be a dry, they will remember that you were a Turnbull supporter, and it does not matter how many times you come in here—

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

Senator Wong, come to the question.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order. Thank you for bringing the minister to order before I have raised the point, but I continue the point that this minister is a serial offender. Every question she is asked, because she cannot answer it, she attacks the questioner or gives a commentary on the questioner and other people from this side. Can you bring her to order permanently, not just for this question?

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

That is not a point of order. I had drawn the minister's attention to come back to the question that has been asked. The minister has 42 seconds remaining.

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

As I previously said in this place, countries representing some 90 per cent of the global economy have pledged to reduce or limit their carbon pollution by 2020.

Opposition senators interjecting—

It is interesting, isn't it? We get a whole bunch of interjections. They do not want the facts in this debate. They want a scare campaign. You do not want the facts because they do not suit the fear campaign, they do not suit your agenda. No doubt Senator Macdonald will take another point of order when I point out the truth—

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Order! Senator Wong, please resume your seat. When there is silence, we can continue.

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

The fact is that the world is acting. The fact is that the countries that act to ensure they can exploit the clean energy opportunities in the years to come will be the competitive economies in the future. (Time expired)