House debates

Tuesday, 5 July 2011

Questions without Notice

Carbon Pricing

2:27 pm

Photo of Wayne SwanWayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Deakin for his very important question. We on this side of the House understand the importance of tackling clim­ate change. We understand the importance of doing that for our planet but also if we want a prosperous economy for our children and grandchildren. We also understand the importance of doing this in the most efficient way, and a price on carbon is absolutely critical to provide the incentive to drive the investment in more energy-efficient practices and most particularly in renewable energy. A price on carbon is the key to a clean energy future, and to be a first-rate economy in the 21st century you have to be able to invest in clean energy. That is the point of putting a price on carbon.

We understand that this will have a modest impact on prices, and that is why we will provide assistance to households and also assistance to support jobs. That is why we will support nine in 10 households, who will receive a combination of tax cuts, increases in family payments and pension increases. For those on the lowest incomes we will provide a battlers' buffer to make sure that those people are looked after. This will come on top of the tax cuts that have already been provided: three rounds of tax cuts over the past few years, where a person on $50,000 now pays $1,750 less tax and a person on $80,000 now pays $1,400 less tax. We will build on that to provide further assistance to households. There is one very clear difference here: we will put a price on carbon for the up to 1,000 largest polluters and use that revenue to support households and businesses. What those opposite will do is tax households and hand the money to the largest polluters. That will cost the average household something like $720 per year. That will be like sending cheques for $720 from Australian households to all of the largest polluters in our country. So there is a very clear choice between both of these policies. But the Leader of the Opposition cannot account for any of this. As former Treasurer Peter Costello said, 'He was never one to be held back by the financial consequences of his decisions.'

Comments

No comments