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

6:02 pm

Photo of Greg HuntGreg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Hansard source

This debate was summed up in a simple sentence given to me by a senior within my own electorate of Flinders. That senior, a pensioner, said to me, 'If the people have to pay, surely, the people should have a say,' and right now we are debating the Leader of the Opposition's attempt to give the people who will pay in higher electricity prices, higher gas prices, higher grocery prices and higher prices across all goods made or manufactured in this country, a say. That is what is on the table at this moment in this place. Whether you support a carbon tax or oppose a carbon tax, you should support giving the people a say at the next election as to whether or not they face that carbon tax. It is a simple proposition. In a democratic society a government has a duty to take a fundamental policy to the people to win that mandate and then to implement it.

This government unfortunately pledged that there would be no carbon tax. The Prime Minister in particular said on the day before the election, 'I rule out a carbon tax.' It was so fundamental to her pitch to the Australian people that it was her closing pledge and, on the Monday leading up to that election, she ruled out a carbon tax with the very famous words: 'There will be no carbon tax under any government I lead.' In that context, these amendments are about giving the people a say. It is about giving the people the right at the next election to determine whether or not they face a carbon tax. There is no barrier to anyone in this House supporting the right of the people having a say and, if the Prime Minister believes all that she says, then take it to an election. Bring forward the election. Let the people vote and let them vote soon, and in that way they can determine whether or not Australia faces this tax. That is our goal, our objective: to give the people a say and let them determine their future and to do so because of the profound consequences of a system which is ineffective, sends an extraordinary amount of money overseas, and will not solve the problem.

This does not solve the problem. Let me give you three simple examples. Does it decrease demand for electricity, as the Prime Minister has discussed on many occasions? The parliamentary secretary in a debate last week conceded that this bill is not designed to decrease demand for electricity. That is a profound and extraordinary concession. Demand will not be decreased.

What about supply? Will it change supply? Will this bill cause any coal fired power stations to shut within the next decade? The answer is that the carbon tax side of it will not. What have the government had to do? They have had to go straight to the coalition's direct action plan to create an Emissions Reduction Fund to buy out coal fired power stations. We would clean them up; they want to close them down. But they have conceded that their bill will not cause one single coal fired power station to close. But, according to the National Generators Forum today, it will lead to the best part of $40 billion in additional electricity costs between now and 2020 being passed on to consumers.

The third thing it was meant to do was to bring on board new renewable energy. But the tax itself will not do that. We have a 20 per cent renewable energy target and that will not be increased by one watt—not a megawatt, not even a watt. This legislation will not decrease demand for electricity, as claimed by the parliamentary secretary. It will not close down any coal fired power stations, as claimed by the government, who have had to rely on the coalition's own mechanism to try to clean up the coal fired power sector. It is interesting: having conceded that their method will not deal with cleaning up coal fired power stations, out of all of the possible systems in the world they could use, they chose the coalition's. Great work, guys! Your system will not work and you have had to turn to ours. The difference is that we will not close down power stations. We will clean them up and you will close them down—and to no effect. Above all else, it will send $3.5 billion every year, going north from 2020, straight to foreign carbon traders. That is why we do not support this legislation. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments