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 Prime Minister, Senator Evans. I refer the minister to a recent letter sent from the Prime Minister to the secretary of the Electrical Trades Union Queensland and Northern Territory branch, Mr Peter Simpson, clarifying the government's recently released energy white paper. In that letter the Prime Minister states: 'The government has not and does not advocate for the privatisation of electricity assets.' Is it the government's position not to support or advocate plans for the privatisation of electricity assets?

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

I thank Senator Joyce for the question. I am a bit shocked to get a policy related question, but, as it involves a trade union, no doubt we will soon dive down into something far less highbrow than a policy question. First of all, Senator—through you, Mr President—I am not aware of the letter sent by the Prime Minister. As you have not made a copy available to me I am not able to provide any assistance in relation to that letter. I am happy to take it on notice if there are issues you wish to raise.

In terms of the privatisation of electricity assets in Australia, I think the minister has made it very clear in the white paper that these are issues for state governments. They own those assets and we have not made pronouncements about what they should do with those assets. There is a healthy debate in the community about the impact of the sale of those assets or the privatisation of those assets. In my own state of Western Australia and, I know, in Queensland, it has been a very contentious issue.

The Commonwealth's role in the energy white paper was to set out the range of issues that need to be tackled and a broad direction, and to encourage the states to deal with the overinvestment in poles and wires, if you like, in an attempt to encourage them to reduce the cost to consumers. But the question about the ownership of electricity assets state by state is a question for the state governments and, as I say, they have traditionally taken a variety of paths in dealing with that. But what this Commonwealth government is interested in is making sure we have enough capacity and reducing the cost to consumers. (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. I acknowledge the answer given by the minister that the privatisation of assets is therefore a role for the states, but, if that is the case, Minister, then shouldn't the letter that had been sent from the Prime Minister have properly stated that it was from a position of the states and not a position of the Prime Minister? What is the explanation for the fact that the letter sent to Mr Peter Simpson is completely at odds with the answer you just gave?

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

Senator Joyce seeks to come in here and say, 'I've got you: what you said is different to what the Prime Minister said,' but he has not said what the Prime Minister says. He has not provided a copy. He has not provided the Senate the information he is making the comparison with. So I have no idea about the veracity of the claims Senator Joyce makes.

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

I seek leave to table a letter to Mr Peter Simpson from the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.

Leave not granted.

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

The government will be very happy to have the Senator table a copy of the letter after he has shown the normal courtesies to all sides of the chamber.

As I said, the energy white paper makes it very clear what the government's policies are—its vision for the energy future of Australia. It is a road map to guide Australia's energy transformation. But I simply make the point that the electricity assets are owned by the states.

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. The Prime Minister tells the ETU that she does not support privatisation. Then we come into the chamber and find out that they actually do. She said there would be no carbon tax under the government she leads, and then we get one. She said she does not recall a letter to the WA corporate affairs commissioner, and then it becomes apparent that she does. She said she was more likely to play full forward for the Western Bulldogs than remove Rudd, and then she did. Do you think the Australian people are starting to see a pattern in the practices of the current Prime Minister?

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

I was too kind to Senator Joyce. It is not like me, but I was too kind: I thought he was asking me a policy question. And what do we get? The normal slander, the normal abuse, the normal poorly based claims. It was just another excuse for the Liberal opposition, who have nothing positive to say, nothing to contribute to public policy in this country, other than to try to slander and abuse anyone in public life. It does not matter whether it is the Godwin Grech affair or whether it is the matters involving Mr Slipper, the member for Dobell or now the Prime Minister. It is just straight slander. This is apparently the new positive agenda. Well, they finish the year on the same note that they started: nothing to say on issues of importance to the Australian people.