Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for her questions. On the question of a carbon tax generally, the government has been very clear about the process which is now underway to determine the most appropriate way of pricing carbon in the Australian economy. The member will be aware that there is a climate change committee that is involved in consultation and discussion with the government and that the government will bring forward that proposal once the processes for consultation have been concluded. The member will also be aware that there has been significant consultation with industry, and that has been the hallmark of the government's approach to delivering a price on carbon. Those consultations are varied and diverse but I can assure the member that consultation with industry has always been and will remain one of the important principles that this government follows in relation to a reform of this kind. I will refer now to a couple of the specific questions that the member put to me, which I will take on notice. The questions relate to whether or not there has been any research, consultation or interaction on the question of border tariffs. I might have slightly paraphrased the question that was put to me by the member, but it is on the record. We will take that particular question on notice. Again, I think it is appropriate to take on notice the question of whether or not there have been any briefings or advices sought in relation to legal action being taken in respect of the steel industry and issues around them more generally.

On the question of whether or not the government has come to a view about a ceiling price for the carbon tax, again, I refer the member to both my earlier comments in answer to her question and also to the comments made by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, by the Prime Minister, by the Treasurer and by others on numerous occasions, including in question time, pointing out the processes that are underway and the principles that underpin the government's approach on climate change.

I will make one observation to conclude this answer, and it is simply this: many businesses agree that a price on carbon is the most efficient way to begin to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Most climate scientists are unanimous in agreeing that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is necessary in order to stabilise the climate so that we do not suffer the expensive impacts of dangerous climate change. The long-term sustainable prosperity of our nation, including in respect of our industrial base, our innovation, our research, our development of new technologies and industries and the like, is very much linked to our capacity to begin to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the most cost-effective way for us to do that is to have a price on carbon. Economists are of a single view about that. Members of the party of the member opposite are of a single view about that. And, in order to have a price on carbon introduced into the Australian economy we need to agree on the way in which that particular scheme will be brought forward.

I am very confident that the process of consultation and negotiation that is underway, not only with industry but with all of the other players in this substantial reform, is being conducted in a way that enables the government to have a clear view about the most effective way for us to introduce this important reform. For those of us who are genuinely interested in innovation and genuinely interested in building a low-carbon economy, the introduction of a carbon price is a much needed element.

See this speech in context