Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, there's Tony's team! What has really astounded me today is that we are not hearing the voices from the people who are saying, 'Yes, I want action on climate change'—and there are hundreds of thousands of them across this country who are saying yes. I have received lots and lots of emails in the last day saying, 'Congratulations, well done, for standing firm in the face of this hysteria.' Thousands of people are saying: 'Yes, we want a clean future for our children. We want you to take action. We applaud you for taking action.' I have had recommendations from small businesses in my electorate saying, 'Thank you for doing this.'

I do not deny there are concerns; that would be stupid. But I say yes because it is our responsibility for future generations. I want a healthy future for me and for future generations. It is up to us to give future generations a liveable planet. The science is clear. We must act urgently to slow climate change. I am no climate change expert but I respect those who are. Climate change is a great but still avoidable threat to our and our children's health and survival.

This is the smartest way to secure our children's futures. Where are the voices saying, 'We need to act, and we need to act now'? If we do not act now we have gone past the tipping point, past the point where we can actually make an impact. How can you have businesses in an environment you cannot operate in? If the climate is so bad, those businesses will not be able to work. That is what is being missed from this debate: why we are actually doing it; why we are taking these steps not just now but into the future. When a constituent wrote to me the other day saying, 'It's all just about your super,' I said, 'Well, mate, if it was all about my super I would probably be voting against the thing, wouldn't I, because electorally it would probably be the soundest thing to do'—as we keep being reminded. However, it is the right thing to be doing. Occasionally you actually stand up for principle, for policy, for fact, not hysteria. It would be great if we could return to debate about that.

The Prime Minister recently addressed the Chifley Research Centre. It was a far-reaching, reflective speech, but in that speech she said:

For a long period of time our great movement—

the Labor movement—

believed that the highest aspiration of working people was for a decent job.

Now we understand it can be to run a decent small business.

We are a party who adapts and changes. We are a party who recognises that many of those who vote for us run their own small businesses. The majority of small businesses are one person. A lot of them will get compensation because they are in a household running their small business. You can go on and on about it but, as the Treasury modelling has quite clearly stated, the impacts on business are projected to be minimal. Indeed, the Treasury noted:

Pricing carbon will have much less of an impact on production patterns than we are currently experiencing from the mining boom, and much less than we'd expect from technological advancement and demographic change.

Many businesses will be able to pass their costs on to customers. We recognise that and that is why we are compensating households. While there will be an impact on some businesses who cannot pass on these costs, the impacts will be offset by the numerous measures to protect jobs, to fund research to create clean technologies and ensure Australia's long-term economic growth. Across Australia, the carbon price is expected to increase retail electricity prices by 10 per cent on average in 2012-13 or by $3.30 per week. The sky is going to fall in for everybody at $3.30 per week, which has been factored into the level of household assistance! We recognise there is going to be a cost impost; it is going to be borne by those small businesses. They will pass those costs on to consumers and the consumers will be compensated. The sky is obviously going to fall in and we have not thought about the impact on small business!

The opposition have not thought about the growth in small business that comes from the green clean technologies. In my seat, I have the largest CSIRO campus at Clayton. They are working with small businesses now to create the environment of the future, to create the products of the future. One thing they are working on is packaging pallets. Every time you move goods overseas on a pallet, that pallet must be then thrown away—it is not biodegradable. They are trying to create a biodegradable pallet. It is an amazing achievement. It is a small business that is based in South Australia and has come to Clayton CSIRO to create technology in conjunction with Monash University. There we go—they are waiting for this carbon tax package because they know they will be able to get assistance and support for something that will be a great boom for our planet. Isn't that great?

Interestingly enough, Capricornia Enterprise centre gave evidence to the inquiry of the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Clean Energy Future Legislation. The chair of the centre said that she had put out in her recent publication to the membership that clean small businesses will not have to directly pay a carbon price. She said:

They will not be required to undertake any compliance activity or fill out any forms due to the carbon price. When it comes to indirect impacts, most small businesses will not be materially affected. Nevertheless, many small businesses may wish to make a contribution towards the move to a clean energy future. The Government will support these businesses.

Yes, that was taken from our clean energy fact sheet, but that is also what a local business enterprise in Capricornia—a group that was brought along by the Liberal members of the committee—presented to us. The group said in evidence:

… businesses constantly tell me that they are drowning in red tape, their fees and charges are going up, with local government and state government taxes and ultimately this federal tax. The general viewpoint of businesses right across the board is that they are being forced to deal with consistent increases in red tape and they feel that increased charges are being constantly put upon them.

We recognise that. That is why there is not going to be any red tape on small business. Five hundred large businesses, all of them who know and report their emissions, will have to pay. Again, there is not going to be a huge compliance cost. We heard evidence that there will not be a downturn in jobs. There will be impacts in certain industries, but this will onflow to other businesses where jobs will be created. If we do not act now to clean up our environment and to cut the pollution from our atmosphere, no business will survive anyway.

See this speech in context