Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is always good to hear from the member for Ryan. It was interesting to hear him list some of those suburbs, like Enoggera and Keperra. Unfortunately, the residents of those suburbs will not get to meet him unless they go to the waiting lounges of European airports. It is unfortunate. He is certainly one of the most well-travelled MPs in the parliament. It is always good to see him in this location. Hopefully, after the next election we will have a representative who knows how to live in Ryan and how to look after the interests of the people of Ryan.

But I am not here to talk about the member opposite. I am here to talk about the great big compensation package that is bolted on to our Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. I will acknowledge to those opposite that our Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme involves a market. That concept is not something that those opposite seem to be as familiar with now as they were before the last election. There is a market, and that market means that there will be goods that are emissions intensive and it will become a little bit more expensive to produce them. That is how a carbon market works. I just wanted to make sure that people knew I was not retreating from that fact.

I am here to talk about the great big compensation package associated with our emissions trading scheme. It involves things like direct cash assistance for nine out of 10 Australian households—households in Enoggera, Keperra, Taringa and Indooroopilly. Nine out of 10 households will be receiving cash assistance under the Rudd government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. Low-income households, such as some of those in the northern bit of Enoggera, are expected to receive 120 per cent of any anticipated costs in direct cash assistance. The household assistance package will deliver around $50 billion over 10 years under the CPRS.

I urge those people opposite to look at the Department of Climate Change webpage. Have a look at the information there. Around $50 billion will be spent over 10 years under the CPRS. Obviously there will be some modest price rises. As I said, it is a market. It is a carbon market. I will give you an example. A dual-income family earning $100,000, with two children aged 10 and 13, would receive $1,014 in 2012-13 in assistance from the government, even though the cost impact of the CPRS would be $976 for that year. There are other examples I can give. For a single-income couple earning $50,000, with two children aged two and seven, the cost impact in 2012-13 will be $680. They will receive $802. They will be $122 better off under the Rudd government’s CPRS. For a family earning $120,000, with a fifty-fifty income split and with three children aged four, six and eight, the estimated average cost of the CPRS in 2012-13 will be $1,088. How much will they receive? They will receive $1,240. They will be $152 better off under the CPRS. Yes, there is a compensation package. Yes, we will hear the fear campaign being mounted by those opposite. But we need to remember that 92 per cent of households will receive compensation under this scheme.

I know that those opposite are very good with the fear button, so I should point out that petrol prices will not be affected by our action on climate change. The Australian government will make cent-for-cent reductions in fuel tax for the first three years of the scheme. The new leader opposite, the member for Warringah, has replaced the merchant of Venice and has become the merchant of fear. He keeps talking over and over again about every fear button that he can possibly put out there. To paraphrase, this is the man who said that climate change is absolute bovine faeces. I do not want to offend you, Mr Speaker. The next day he came out and said it was real and then he flipped back again and said, ‘No, we can run a fear campaign on this.’ This is the man who said to Malcolm Turnbull that he was an absolute weathervane when it comes to climate change. We all know what is on top of a weathervane, don’t we? It is a rooster that swings in the breeze. The member for Warringah has embraced the political expediency of pushing fear, and we are going to see more and more of that in the roll-up to election night.

Alan Griffin (Bruce, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What’s on top of a weathervane?

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A rooster.

Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Johnson interjecting

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is despite the fact that those opposite, like the member for Ryan, and a majority of the party, according to Ian Macfarlane, supported the CPRS and the amendments. The majority of the Liberal Party supported the CPRS, and I believe Ian Macfarlane’s little black book more than I believe what those opposite say. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.