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

Photo of Michael McCormackMichael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Indeed I should be, Mr Deputy Speaker, because they could learn a lot from what I am going to tell them. This slippery slope to economic despair and job losses, this rocky road of higher electricity, gas, fuel and grocery prices—

Ms Rishworth interjecting

I know you might not care about it but, I tell you what, your constituents do—will strain already stressed everyday household budgets to the limit. And all this for what? Certainly not to help the environment. A carbon tax will not lower global temperatures by one degree, will not lower sea levels by one millimetre. If, as the member for Melbourne so hysterically foretold in his speech in this debate, the seas are rising due to the catastrophic climate change, why is it that so many of the doomsayers are still happy to live on the ocean's edge? For every alarmist scientist after their next funding grant who will tell you we are facing 'dangerous climate change', I can show you a salt-of-the-earth generational farmer who will be just as convincing with his assurances that the only thing which changes is the weather. 'Of droughts and flooding rains', as Dorothea Mackellar put it so well.

But back to Mr Iemma, who said:

"… the Greens' agenda is anti-growth and anti-investment. Lower growth and lower investment leads to lower incomes and fewer jobs."

The article went on to say, and I hope those members opposite who are from New South Wales are listening to this, that Mr Iemma said:

… New South Wales would be particularly hurt by the carbon tax in smelting steelworks and manufacturing in western Sydney.

He could have easily added agriculture, horticulture and a whole host of other worthwhile endeavours in the Riverina. He said:

"Voter reaction ranges from unease and uncertainty to outright hostility. I went down a coalmine myself recently and all the guys I spoke to were uncertain of their futures."

Mr Iemma also offered federal Labor some sound advice:

"We should always be standing shoulder to shoulder with steelworkers and miners and factory workers before we stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Bob Brown and Christine Milne."

To Mr Iemma I say: hear, hear! Rest assured we on this side will stand shoulder to shoulder with this country's hardest workers. Rest assured we on this side will not seek to curry favour with the Greens and their economically damaging and fiscally irresponsible policies. The article also said:

Mr Iemma's comments reflect the growing concern of many Labor politicians in private.

So tonight those Labor backbenchers so justifiably worried about their political futures would do well to support this opposition amendment.

Comments

No comments