House debates
Tuesday, 11 October 2011
Bills
Clean Energy Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Tax Laws Amendments) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Fuel Tax Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Customs Tariff Amendment) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Excise Tariff Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011, Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment Bill 2011, Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Unit Shortfall Charge — General) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge — Auctions) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge — Fixed Charge) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (International Unit Surrender Charge) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Charges — Customs) Bill 2011, Clean Energy (Charges — Excise) Bill 2011, Clean Energy Regulator Bill 2011, Climate Change Authority Bill 2011, Steel Transformation Plan Bill 2011; Consideration in Detail
8:16 pm
Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Hansard source
I want to quote a Labor politician in my next comment, and that is former New South Wales Labor Premier Morris Iemma. On 21 July he summed up the feelings of many when he was quoted as saying:
… Labor's platform for re-election in 2013 is environmentally marginal, economically costly and likely to lead Labor to a historic electoral train wreck.
Ka-boom! That is my contribution—the sound of the train wreck. It is happening tonight and it is going to happen into the future. He went on to say of the carbon tax to the Australian:
"One thing is sure—it won't change the world, but it could change the government"—
His remarks are precisely why federal Labor needs tonight to support the amendment to the Clean Energy Bill 2011 and accompanying bills to make commencement of the carbon tax contingent on a proclamation of the next parliament. The article went on:
Mr Iemma accused the Gillard government of betraying the Hawke-Keating legacy of economic reform, instead embracing the environmental policies of the Greens' agenda.
"We embraced economic growth, and the benefits of economic growth, in the Hawke Keating era, but we're fighting this battle on the Greens' turf, not our turf. Bob Brown wants to replace the Labor Party as a major party."
… … …
He rejected the government's view that Australia's carbon tax was similar in scope to actions being taken by other countries.
Members opposite should listen to Mr Iemma:
"Every day there are reports of growth and development in China, its growth in emissions will far outstrip our total emissions," Mr Iemma said.
"The carbon tax at best reduces the rate of increase of emissions slightly."
Indeed, even the Gillard government's chief promoter of the climate debate has admitted even a global effort to cut carbon emissions would not lower temperatures for up to 1,000 years. Chief Climate Commissioner Professor Tim Flannery said on 25 March:
If the world as a whole cut all emissions tomorrow, the average temperature of the planet's not going to drop for several hundred years, perhaps over 1000 years.
If, as Professor Flannery declared, cutting all, not merely reducing, emissions will do nothing to cool the planet then why on earth are we going down this path? This slippery slope to economic despair—
No comments