Alan Eggleston (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance and Deregulation (Senator Wong) to a question without notice asked by Senator Boswell today relating to a proposed carbon tax.

The thing that really concerns me about this carbon tax more than anything else is its effect on industry, employment and our international competitiveness. These are major issues that need to be aired in the Senate. In its submission on the clean energy future legislation the Minerals Council of Australia noted that the jobs and competitiveness program in this piece of legislation is vastly inferior to competitiveness safeguards contained in other schemes, specifically the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. That is a matter of real concern. The Minerals Council went on to say that even the well-known and flawed Treasury modelling concedes that real wages and productivity in Australia will grow much more slowly with the level of carbon pricing proposed under this legislation. Treasury modelling also reveals that Australia's economy will be $1 trillion—that is, one thousand billion dollars—smaller than it might otherwise have been by 2050 as a result of this carbon pricing legislation. And we have to ask ourselves: if we are going to inflict such pain and injury on our economy, how effective will the carbon pricing be in reducing world carbon levels? Because part of the rationale for this legislation seems to be that we are on a crusade, with our 1.4 per cent of carbon emissions, to save the world from the horrors of an increased carbon level. The Gillard government claims the carbon pricing scheme will save 160 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2020. In 2020, on Treasury's baseline estimates, China alone will be producing 49 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent every day. In other words, in 2021 China will replace Australia's projected emission reductions—that is, 57 million tonnes of carbon dioxide—in just over one day! So in one day, Chinese emissions will replace the whole year's savings in Australia, and Australia's projected emissions savings, including purchases of international permits, in less than four days. I think that set of figures, more than anything else, just shows what a pointless exercise this carbon tax is in terms of the higher ideal which the legislation is supposed to be addressing—that is, our role in reducing world carbon. It is not going to make any difference whatsoever.

It is very interesting also that, in terms of employment, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry have given a pointed assessment of the proposed carbon tax. The CCIWA had a checklist on the carbon tax, of I think 11 points, and it notes that the carbon tax failed to meet the core principles on more than half of those objectives. So, again, the carbon tax is proving to be an illusion in terms of the objectives it is supposed to meet. It is really, as I said yesterday, a fraudulent tax—and so it is proving to be.

The Australian Trade and Industry Alliance claimed manufacturers would be worse off than their European counterparts under the proposed emissions trading scheme—and, in fact, they had research commissioned which shows that the carbon tax will cost 950,000 jobs in Australian companies under this regime. We can hardly be proud of the effects and impacts of this program on the Australian economy. As we have said during the week, this tax is a fraud. This Senate should not be proceeding with it; it should not go ahead. (Time expired)