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

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. I refer the minister to the government's own modelling of the impact of the carbon tax, which shows that Australia's GDP will be over $1 trillion lower between now and 2050 due to the carbon tax, representing over $40,000 for every Australian. These are large costs to bear, and Australians would rightly expect some form of tangible benefit for bearing them. I refer the minister to the Prime Minister's speech on 23 July last year when she said that, as a result of climate change, 'the number of droughts could increase by up to 40 per cent in eastern Australia.' Can the minister now confirm how many droughts the government's carbon tax will prevent?

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

The first part of that somewhat lengthy story of a question dealt with the Treasury modelling. As I have said a number of times in this place, the fundamental set of findings from that modelling shows that, with a carbon price, we can continue to grow our economy, increase jobs and reduce our carbon pollution from what it will grow to. That is what the Treasury modelling shows. One thing I will say for Senator Joyce is that he is at least being consistent on this. He has never supported it and he was a pretty big player in making sure that Mr Abbott became Leader of the Opposition.

In terms of the science of this, we on this side have a very simple proposition—that is, we think the scientists ought to be taken heed of.

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

Which scientists? The ones that agree with you?

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

I will take that intervention—

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

Mr President, I have a point of order on relevance. The question was: can the minister confirm how many droughts the government's carbon tax will prevent? I am looking for one drought, two droughts, 10 droughts, 20 per cent of droughts. The Prime Minister has said it would reduce droughts, so I want to know how many droughts it is going to prevent.

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

There is no point of order. I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question. It would assist if there were not interjections from your side during your question which divert the attention of the minister. The minister knows to ignore interjections, as they are disorderly. They do not assist in the conduct of answers during question time.

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

Thank you, Mr President. It is disappointing that people who call themselves Liberals are so illiberal when it comes to scientists in this debate. We on this side recognise that climate scientists around the world are telling politicians that carbon pollution is causing climate change. We accept the climate science. I would remind Senator Joyce that, globally, 2010 was the warmest year on record. For his information, it tied with 2005 and 1998, with the decade 2001 to 2010 being the warmest decade on record. The year 2010 was the 34th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th century average. Senator Joyce and those opposite might like to dismiss these figures; they might wish simply to say that scientists ought not to be believed. We on this side of the chamber do not believe that that is a responsible act. It is not responsible for elected members of parliament and senators— (Time expired)

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

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Minister, I again refer to the Prime Minister's speech of 23 July last year, entitled 'Moving forward together on climate change'—it sounds like it could be a horse at the show. In that speech, the Prime Minister said:

I understand that a lot of families are under pressure.

My Government will always act with the interests of those Australians in mind.

Does the government believe that it is acting in the interests of these Australians by adopting a carbon tax that will increase electricity prices for many Australians who cannot afford them even now?

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

Senator Joyce is opposed to pricing carbon. He does not want to accept the advice of scientists and he does not want to accept the advice of economists about the best way to deal with climate change. So there is a fundamental difference of opinion in this chamber—

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

Which economist? One that agrees with you?

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

I will take Senator Brandis's interjection about the economist, because there is no economist who supports his plan. That is because it is a plan that will cost more and will not work. (Time expired)

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

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I refer to the Prime Minister's infamous statement on 16 August last year: 'There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.' Given the active undermining that is currently going on by people proximate to you, Senator Wong—in fact, all around you—and given that we might soon see a carbon tax in place, does that mean that Julia Gillard is now no longer going to lead the government?

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

Senator Wong, you need only answer that part of the question that refers to your portfolio.

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

Prime Minister Gillard has achieved a successful vote in the House of Representatives today on a Labor reform that is about the future. I anticipate that, in years ahead, people will look back to people like Senator Joyce and they will talk about how he was on the wrong side of history again, just as those opposite were on Medicare, just as they were on superannuation and just as they were on Work Choices. They are always playing short-term politics and never looking to the future. I also remind Senator Joyce that his policy will oblige him to go to the next election arguing for lower pensions, because he is going to take the pension increase from pensioners, for higher taxes, because he is not going to be able to triple the tax-free threshold—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

It is not long now, another eight minutes and you can debate the issue. You know that. It is not the time now to debate the issue.

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

If he wants to look to the past perhaps, among many quotes, he could look to Senator Brandis, who said, in August 2009:

The Opposition supports an emissions trading scheme.