Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency) Share this | Hansard source

That really was like being whipped with a piece of wet lettuce. One is reminded of Tony Abbott's promise that there would be a people's revolt, and this is what it culminates in—a pathetic address from the shadow minister. They have nothing left. They have tried every piece of fearmongering they can find. They have misrepresented every fact they possibly can. This is nothing but a desperate, failing fear campaign.

I spent many, many years representing working people and I never, ever stood before them and deceived them or tried to create fear to garner their support in the way the coalition has. It is a disgrace what the coalition has done. The mendacity of the opposition leader is unparalleled in a campaign against a very important public policy initiative. It is pathetic and it has come to nothing. And people are finding you out. You are wondering what is going on in the community; you make assertions. They are finding out exactly how they are being misled by the coalition.

Let us just take a look at the electricity bill submitted by the member for Menzies during question time. Just a cursory glance indicates that, in the previous billing period, the total of the bill was approximately $9,500. In the billing period subsequent to the introduction of the carbon price, the bill has actually fallen by 36 per cent in quantum to $5,970. This is the level of complexity that they cannot come to grips with; the bill actually fell by 36 per cent. The member for Menzies claimed, I think, that it had gone up 45 per cent due to carbon pricing. The mendacity of these people to keep coming forth and making these claims!

The shadow minister and the opposition leader repeatedly try and attribute all electricity price increases to carbon pricing. Let us have a few facts. They said in their argument that a 10 per cent increase in electricity prices attributable to carbon pricing—across the country it is an average of $3.30 per household—is the end of the world, the end of the economy. They said regions and industry will be smashed and destroyed. The Latrobe Valley, which the member opposite represents, was going to be destroyed. It would be the end of it. They would all be gone. And, of course, it was all rubbish.

What did they say over the last three years as electricity prices across the country in fact went up by 50 per cent on average and it was nothing whatsoever to do with carbon pricing? There was not a word out of them. What did they do when Colin Barnett's government in Western Australia increased electricity prices by 57 per cent in the last two years? They said that is fine, no problem whatsoever. But when you add $2.50 to the average household bill in regional Australia they say it is the end of the world, it is the end of the mining industry, it is the end of the Western Australian economy! They are a farce. What they have been putting is a complete joke. And now they have come to this: the shadow minister waving around a piece of wet lettuce in an attempt to make an argument. I mean, how pathetic!

Let us just go back to some of the basics of what we are doing here. We are responding to scientific advice that the coalition say they respect too. Who knows? The opposition leader has called it absolute crap from time to time. This government respects the scientific advice, the overwhelming scientific consensus, that tells us increasing greenhouse gas emissions are contributing to climate change. This government has responded in an economically efficient manner, in a manner that will be environmentally effective and, importantly, in a manner that is socially fair. On electricity bills, I mentioned that the average household impact across the country is $3.30 a week. That is what it is, that is what was modelled, that is what has been determined by regulators and that is the outcome. And we did not mislead anyone. What did we do? We provided an average of $10.10 per week per household to people across the country to assist them with that cost increase. Because we are a Labor government, we are using the majority of revenue from the carbon price to assist households. Nine out of 10 households will receive some assistance. Millions of households are better off as we have introduced a carbon price in a socially fair and equitable manner.

I mentioned the science and the fact that the carbon price mechanism is responsive to the advice of scientists, academies and science internationally. There was news just this week about the increasing melting of Arctic Sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere. The scientific evidence is overwhelming that governments have a public policy responsibility to deal with this issue. It is important to deal with it in the most economically efficient manner, the way that is the lowest cost to Australian businesses and lowest cost to Australian households. That is precisely what the government is doing. And we are not acting alone in that endeavour.

I have the privilege of representing this country in international climate change negotiations. It is a tremendous honour. I sit there with all the other members of the United Nations. Not one country rejects the science, and every country is working hard towards an international solution to deal with this issue. And, given that we are the 15th largest emitter of greenhouse gases internationally amongst all members of the United Nations and that we are the highest emitter of greenhouse gases among the advances economies on a per capita basis, our colleagues internationally expect this country to do our fair share of the work in tackling greenhouse gas emissions. And that is exactly what we are doing.

We are working with the international community to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. We have implemented the policy of the Howard government in many respects. The Shergold report of 2006-07, which was a policy position adopted by the Howard government and taken to the 2007 election, is essentially what this government has worked from to implement the carbon pricing mechanism. It is in fact an emissions trading scheme that starts with a three-year fixed-price period and transitions to a fully flexible emissions trading scheme from 1 July 2015. From 1 July 2015 our carbon price mechanism will be linked with the European Union emissions trading scheme. That will mean we will have a carbon price that is effectively the same as 30 other countries covering 530 million people. We will have a carbon price that will be common to the efforts of 30 other economies—and, taken in aggregate, those economies represent our second largest trading partner after China. So much for the argument from the coalition that somehow Australia is going it alone—that somehow we are out of step with the rest of the world. All that we are doing is in the context of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, negotiations with countries under that convention, and work on a bilateral basis, including with the European Union. We are working internationally to tackle this issue and to ensure that Australia does no more than its fair share in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The Leader of the Opposition runs around all the time misleading people, deceiving people by saying nothing is going on internationally in relation to this issue. I indicated in question time how he had just remarked last month that there was nothing going on in the Asia-Pacific region. I had the opportunity of visiting China earlier this year to discuss with Chinese authorities the development of market mechanisms similar to our own. We have working groups working with China. Guangdong province, which is our sixth-largest trading partner, is developing an emissions trading scheme. Cross to the other side of the Asia-Pacific, to the United States: the US state of California, which is the eighth-largest economy in the world, has introduced an emissions trading scheme. It has carbon pricing. It is a larger economy than our own. The Korean government has legislated an emissions trading scheme to start in 2015. They are our fourth-largest trading partner. We are working with all of these countries, all of these provinces, all of these states, to develop a response that is effective and market based in dealing with climate change issues.

The mechanism that we have introduced is a market mechanism, and it is simple. It provides a price signal for the major greenhouse gas emitters in our economy, which number approximately 350 in this current compliance period. It is an incentive for them to cut their greenhouse gas emissions. They will make the decisions about how best to achieve that. They will be obliged, under the legislation, to purchase a permit for every tonne of greenhouse gas that they emit. It creates a powerful incentive to reduce emissions.

It was the policy, once, of the coalition. It was the policy of the Howard government. It was an agreement that was reached with the coalition in opposition under the leadership of Malcolm Turnbull. It is a policy proposition that has been supported and is supported by every living Liberal leader, including the current opposition leader.

It is economic common sense that we apply an incentive in this way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and it is exactly what is happening. The entire conversation with the business community has changed as a consequence of carbon pricing coming into place. Businesses are looking to see how they can improve their energy efficiency—produce the same output for fewer greenhouse gas emissions. They are looking to improve the efficiency of their operations, to reduce their emissions intensity. Landfills are applying mechanisms to cut their methane emissions and utilise them to generate electricity. I spoke at the meat industry conference just two weeks ago in Adelaide where it is feasible for abattoirs that have a carbon price liability to capture the methane emissions that are produced from the decomposition of the biomass that is produced in an abattoir, convert them into electricity, be self-reliant on their electricity generation, sell the electricity into the grid, create fertiliser and have new revenue streams, and remove themselves from carbon price liability. That is exactly what the carbon price mechanism is intended to achieve. We have done this in a careful consultation with the business community across many, many industries over a considerable period of time, and it will be effective in reducing our greenhouse gas emissions.

The entire case brought against it by the coalition is fallacious. The price impacts, that were said to be unimaginable by the opposition leader, are, of course, bang on what the Treasury estimates indicated they would be. In fact, the Reserve Bank had this to say about it in the minutes just recently:

There was no evidence that the carbon price had raised medium-term inflation expectations.

And they indicated that:

… the introduction of the carbon price had not yet had a significant effect on downstream price pressures, with only isolated examples of suppliers attributing price increases to the carbon price.

The Treasury modelling indicated price impacts would be just 0.7 per cent on the CPI in financial year 2012-13. They are coming in underneath that on all indicators. We are using the majority of the carbon price revenue to help households and particularly to help pensioners—to help the households that need help the most. The business community is adjusting. In fact, there was a survey of many of the liable entities under the carbon price mechanism, and there are not many of them that want it repealed, because the fact of the matter is: they know that a carbon price is the most effective way for us to create this incentive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce the emissions intensity of our economy.

There is a simple fact that is becoming clear to the Australian community, and it is not only that there has been a mendacious and deceitful fear campaign conducted by the opposition against this policy initiative; it is also the knowledge and the realisation and the common sense of the Australian people that the carbon price cannot and will not be repealed. It cannot and it will not be repealed. It is a fact of the matter that it will not be repealed.

The Leader of the Opposition stood there this afternoon, full of hubris. They reckon they have got the next election in their pocket. Well, I tell them what: they are in for a fight. We are fighters on this side, and we are going to fight you, and we are going to win this issue. We will win it because it is the right thing to do. It is the right thing for the country. It is right for our economic future. It is right environmentally. It is socially fair. And we are going to argue it out and argue it out, right up to election day, and we will win it. You will not be the wreckers that you want to be. I do not know how you can sit there and retain any integrity, given your background, and adopt the policy position that has been taken by the coalition on this. David Marr nailed the character of the opposition leader in that essay, and he knows it. It is all politics and no policy, and you know it as well as I do. And we will win this argument.

See this speech in context