Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. Can the minister confirm that according to Treasury modelling of the Gillard government's carbon tax package, at table 5.1, page 72, Australia's GDP is expected to be 2.8 per cent lower by 2050 than it would be without a carbon tax?

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

I can confirm that the Treasury modelling shows that Australia can continue to grow with a carbon price, that GNI per capita will continue to grow at about 1.1 per cent per year, that average incomes will continue to grow strongly and that jobs will grow strongly, and that carbon pollution will fall by about 160 million tonnes by 2020 from what it would otherwise be.

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

Mr President, my point of order goes to relevance. The question could not have been more specific or more narrow. The minister was asked to confirm a single fact, identified by reference to the page and table number in an identified document. She cannot respond directly to that question by asserting other facts. She has to confine herself to the only fact about which she was asked.

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

I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question. The minister has been going 28 seconds and has one minute 32 seconds remaining to address the question.

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

Those on the other side should actually listen to the argument. I was asked about economic growth and I spoke about the GNI figure and the annual growth rate. The reality is that we have two approaches to this issue. We have the Labor Party's approach and, in the great Labor tradition of caring about the future, we are on the side of pricing carbon. Again we see the coalition on the wrong side of history. They opposed Medicare, they opposed superannuation, they supported Work Choices—always on the wrong side of history. Today, again, in the House of Representatives they showed us they are the party which is not interested in the future.

We on this side of the parliament take our responsibility to the next generation seriously. We want to ensure this economy changes to one that pollutes less. We want to ensure that Australia contributes less to climate change and we want Australia to be part of the growth in goods and services that a low carbon—

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The minister has now spoken for a minute and 40 seconds and she has gone nowhere near answering the very specific question, which was whether the minister could confirm that, according to the Treasury's modelling, Australia's GDP will be 2.8 per cent lower in 2050 than it would be without a carbon tax. The minister has gone nowhere near answering that. While I appreciate that as President you cannot direct the minister how to answer the question, you can, according to our standing orders, direct her to be directly relevant to the question that was asked. With all due respect, the minister is not being directly relevant to the question.

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

The minister has 21 seconds remaining to answer the question. I call the minister to complete the answer.

Senator Abetz interjecting—

I am asking the minister to answer the question. You would know that is what I said if you listened.

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

I made the point, and I expect that he may not have heard it, that I opened the answer with a response on GNI, which is directly in response to the issue raised.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I asked about GDP.

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

Okay, GDP—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Perhaps we can have a discussion about GNI per person. GDP— (Time expired)

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a supplementary question, Mr President. Given that the government's own Treasury modelling indicates that Australia's GDP by 2050 will be $100 billion lower in that one year alone as a result of the carbon tax—and that is in today's dollars—what is the government's assessment of the cumulative dollar cost of that lower, slower growth in GDP caused by the government's carbon tax and emissions trading scheme between now and 2050?

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

I again remind those opposite that what the modelling shows is that with a carbon price the economy grows, incomes grow, jobs grow and emissions reduce from what they otherwise would be. The simple facts do not fit the scare campaign that those opposite continue to run. It is a sad thing when we see a party so addicted to opposing that they do not even want to look at the facts. Jobs grow, the economy grows and incomes continue to grow with a carbon price. That is why they used to support this policy. Under a different leader, when they actually had a brief moment of responsibility and cared about the future of this nation and cared about the next generation of Australians, they too used to support pricing carbon.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I have a further supplementary question. Why is the government so intent on making Australian families suffer by imposing the world's biggest carbon tax, which will cost the Australian economy $1 trillion between now and 2050 or $40,000 for every man, woman and child, forcing Australians to work effectively for nothing for a whole year to pay for the impact of the carbon tax between now and 2050—

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

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

Order! On my right. Senator Cormann, repeat the last part of that question. You will have time. I will give you the time. You are entitled to be heard. I did not hear that part of the question.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The last part of my question was: 'forcing Australians to work effectively for nothing for a whole year to pay for the impact of the carbon tax between now and 2050, while sending $792 billion overseas to buy international permits because the carbon tax does not reduce emissions in Australia?'

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

There are so many falsehoods in that question one does not know where to start. Firstly, incomes continue to grow with a carbon price. Secondly, it is extraordinary, isn't it, that a party that used to believe in open trade wants—because they want to run this anti trading permits line—to make the comments about foreign trade—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

Order! Senator Wong resume your seat. When there is silence we will proceed. It is as simple as that.

Senator Bernardi interjecting—

Senator Bernardi, you might cease the discussion across the chamber with your friend.

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

They are so intent on playing politics on this issue, they are proposing a policy which would increase the cost for Australian business and Australian households. The real question here is: why is the opposition so intent on wrecking everything? Why is the opposition so devoid of policies? Why is this opposition so intent on talking down the economy?

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Senator Wong, resume your seat. You are entitled to be heard in silence. When I am satisfied that people will be quiet and allow the question time to proceed, we will proceed.

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

The real question is: why is it that the opposition is incapable ever of looking to the national interest?