House debates

Monday, 28 February 2011

Questions without Notice

Carbon Pricing

2:27 pm

Photo of Laura SmythLaura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. What is the basis for the government taking strong action on climate change? What other sources could be drawn on to inform a policy position on climate change and what are the dangers to our national interest of forming policy on anything less than a well-informed basis?

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

I thank the member for La Trobe for her question. Climate scientists—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The minister has the call.

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

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Climate scientists are telling governments all over the world that carbon pollution is contributing to climate change. The scientific consensus is overwhelming and the government respects the climate science. A government in that circumstance has a public policy responsibility to act upon that advice in everyone’s interests and we simply need to make a start in reducing carbon pollution in our economy. As the highest per capita emitter of carbon pollution amongst the developed countries, and being a nation that is especially vulnerable to the impact of climate change, we must tackle this issue.

Photo of Ewen JonesEwen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Ewen Jones interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Herbert is warned!

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

It is a public policy responsibility. The alternative would be to ignore the national interest, to ignore the science and to act solely in one’s political interest. Of course, that is exactly what we see from the other side of politics. And, of course, the Leader of the Opposition—

Photo of Dennis JensenDennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Dr Jensen interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Tangney is warned!

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

has notoriously described the science as ‘absolute crap’. Indeed, Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi has argued that the science has been fabricated. Of course, Senator Minchin famously blamed it on the communists! But the Leader of the Opposition has come up with my favourite. He said the following back in November 2009:

If you look at Roman times, grapes grew up against Hadrian’s Wall—medieval times they grew crops in Greenland. In the 1700s they had ice fairs on the Thames.

That was the Leader of the Opposition. Given that he was not around—

Photo of Luke SimpkinsLuke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Simpkins interjecting

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

in those days, one would—

Photo of Luke SimpkinsLuke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Simpkins interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Cowan is warned!

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

wonder what the authority is for that particular statement. It does not take long to find a very similar remark, and I will name the source in a minute:

There have been times when it is a lot warmer than now, when Greenland was ice free and you could grow melons in the open in England … and even in the 1600s when the Thames River in London froze over.

Where is it from? It is from the One Nation party climate change policy. The One Nation party seem very influential in the policies of the opposition. What a disgrace. You call that accepting public policy responsibility? It does not take much more googling to find out where the concept of the ‘people’s revolt’ comes from either: it is the Tea Party, the far right of US politics. No ideas, nothing to say, nothing to contribute on one of the most critical policy issues that we face. On reflection, the stand-off that we witnessed between the Leader of the Opposition and Channel 7 journalist Mark Riley provided us with an important insight into what is going on here. He is all menace, all aggression, with nothing to say, no ideas—it is ‘no, no, no’—nothing to contribute.

2:31 pm

Photo of Joe HockeyJoe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to his statement on 15 August last year, when he said:

Well certainly what we rejected is this hysterical allegation that somehow we are moving towards a carbon tax from the Liberals in their advertising. We reject that.

Treasurer, why have you changed your mind? And, Treasurer, are you the first Treasurer of Australia not to attend a press conference announcing a nationwide and an economy-wide tax?

Photo of Wayne SwanWayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | | Hansard source

I really do thank the shadow Treasurer for that question. There is a very basic reason why I take the position that I take and the government takes the position it takes: it is in the national interest. It is in the interests of a prosperous economy. What those opposite are doing is putting their political interests, through a scare campaign, ahead of the need to reduce carbon pollution and make our economy more prosperous for the future. The populism of those opposite is evident in the question from the shadow Treasurer. The shadow Treasurer used to believe, once upon a time, in markets. The shadow Treasurer, I know, goes around the place saying he is a great man of principle. In fact, he made this statement about what a great man of principle he was shortly after he was defeated in the Liberal Party leadership contest: ‘I believe in a market mechanism’—

Photo of Christopher PyneChristopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: the question was very straightforward, and the Treasurer’s answer is bearing no resemblance at all to a relevant question. I would ask you to draw him back to the question.

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Treasurer is required to directly relate any statements that he is using to the question, and he should consider that in making his response.

Photo of Wayne SwanWayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | | Hansard source

Like the shadow Treasurer says he is, I am a believer in a market mechanism. What we are going to do is move through a fixed price to a market mechanism, and that was made very clear the other day. But, when the shadow Treasurer was defeated in the leadership contest, he made this point, because he said then that he was a believer in a market mechanism:

I’m a believer. I want action for not only this generation but for my children, grandchildren.

So he, like the Leader of the Opposition, is a hollow man. He says he believes in a market mechanism and opposes it in this House. He says he is a believer in the science of climate change—

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The Treasurer will come back to the question.

Photo of Wayne SwanWayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | | Hansard source

and opposes it in this House. The government have moved, in the national interest, to make sure that we can protect jobs, direct investment into renewable energy and protect the prosperity of our economy, and every step of the way we are opposed by those opposite, who would rather see the country fail than see us succeed in battling climate change and investing in renewable energy. It just shows that all of those opposite would say anything and do anything to win a political action, but they will not stand up for the political interests of this country. They are only looking after their own.

2:35 pm

Photo of Michelle RowlandMichelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Why is a market mechanism the best way to tackle climate change?

Photo of Wayne SwanWayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | | Hansard source

A market mechanism is the best mechanism because it produces the least cost, most efficient reduction in carbon pollution. So we on this side of the House think markets have an essential role in dealing with market failure when it comes to carbon pollution. Now, Mr Stern, the most pre-eminent economist in this area, has made the observation that this is the greatest market failure in history—the failure to price carbon pollution. The failure to price carbon pollution means that carbon pollution continues to be emitted, with devastating consequences for the planet, for the global economy and of course for this country. Those opposite do not believe in climate change anymore, so perhaps they are not concerned with that market failure, but we do know that a number of those opposite do believe there has been a market failure, that it does require a price mechanism. The member for Wentworth believes that. The shadow Treasurer used to believe that, once upon a time. But we on this side of the House understand how important market mechanisms are in dealing with substantial economic problems.

Of course, the Prime Minister spoke before about tariff reform—utilising changes in the price of goods, changes in the market—to bring about greater prosperity. But, of course, those opposite do not favour market mechanisms anymore. They want central government direction. They want regulation. This would not be odd if they were not the Liberal Party of Australia, on whose basis it was form to say that they believed in the market. But they no longer believe in the market. This is a very big challenge for their economic credibility. It was not that long ago that the former Prime Minister Mr Howard believed in the market. This is what he had to say:

It is fundamental to any response both here and elsewhere that a price is set for carbon emissions. This is best done through the market mechanism of an emissions trading system.

It was a belief held by all of those towards the end of their period in government but now repudiated by those opposite. It is a belief which is held by many other countries in the world that are moving to put in place emissions trading systems. But, of course, now we have this incredible spectacle where those on the other side of the House, who professed to believe in markets, now believe in the heavy hand of regulation against free markets. Is that where the Liberal Party of Australia now believes they are—regulation over markets? We on this side of the House believe in markets. They believe in having a bureaucrat—

Photo of George ChristensenGeorge Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Christensen interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The member for Dawson is warned.

Photo of Wayne SwanWayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | | Hansard source

in every boardroom to deal with this question. They believe in saddling the budget with billions of dollars worth of expenditure. We on this side of the House believe in a market mechanism to deliver the best value, the most efficient outcome, so that we can get the investment in renewable energy to make our country prosperous.

2:38 pm

Photo of Tony AbbottTony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I ask whether the Prime Minister recalls saying:

… the Labor Party is the party of truth telling. When we go out into the electorate and make promises, do you know what we would do in government: we would keep them. When we say them, we mean them. That is the difference between you and us.

Given the carbon tax lie she told before the election, how can Australians ever again trust this Prime Minister?

Photo of Anthony AlbaneseAnthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: there was an element of the Leader of the Opposition’s question that was clearly unparliamentary.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting

Photo of Sophie MirabellaSophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | | Hansard source

Mrs Mirabella interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Indi is warned. I invite the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark and offer him the opportunity to replace the word.

Photo of Mrs Bronwyn BishopMrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Seniors) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on the point of order raised by the Leader of the House, he must identify what he believes to be unparliamentary before it can be dealt with.

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Mackellar will resume her seat.

Photo of Graham PerrettGraham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Perrett interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Moreton is warned. The member for Mackellar would be the exception in the House if she did not know which word has been objected to.

Photo of Mrs Bronwyn BishopMrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Seniors) Share this | | Hansard source

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

I am sorry if you are in the minority, but I am just mentioning that.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The use of the word has been a longstanding problem in the House.

Photo of Nicola RoxonNicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | | Hansard source

Ms Roxon interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The Minister for Health and Ageing is not assisting. I inform both sides of the House that I can walk away from this problem and you can descend into even greater chaos. What I have to do is give a ruling that is consistent. An objection having been raised, I have asked the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the word and I have offered him the opportunity to replace that word. That would, I hope, allow the House to consistently debate the actual gist of what is to be debated, not do sideshow things to Parliamentary Practice.

Photo of Tony AbbottTony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, may I say that I appreciate the opportunity. Instead I ask: when did the Prime Minister decide to break her word not to introduce a carbon tax? Was it on election night after she had spoken to Senator Bob Brown?

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! That took a bit of leeway with my generosity, but the Prime Minister now has the call and she will be heard in silence.

Photo of Julia GillardJulia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

I very much welcome the Leader of the Opposition’s question. To the Leader of the Opposition, I say this: if he wants to have a debate about political honesty, bring it on. This is the man that on the 7.30 Report basically said, when he was struggling under questioning from Kerry O’Brien, ‘If I say it, don’t believe it because it’s only anywhere near the gospel truth if I write it down.’ They were the words out of the mouth of the Leader of the Opposition. This is the man that went to an election giving a rock solid, ironclad guarantee and then broke his word immediately afterwards. This is a man who is on the public record as saying from time to time he gilds the lily. This is a man who created some of the most spectacular election footage ever shown on Australian TV when interviewed on Lateline and asked about his visits to Cardinal Pell. We all remember what happened. It looked a little bit like he looked with Mark Riley the other week—deadset looked down the camera at Tony Jones and told an untruth and then caught in that untruth looked filthy and aggressive the way we know the Leader of the Opposition can when he is at his most hollow.

Photo of Christopher PyneChristopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Pyne interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Sturt will withdraw from the House for one hour under standing order 94(a).

The member for Sturt then left the chamber.

Photo of Julia GillardJulia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

If the Leader of the Opposition wants to have a debate on political honesty, well, bring it on. I am happy to debate that any day of the week. The Leader of the Opposition’s track record on these questions is absolutely clear. He has gone to election campaigns and not been truthful with the Australian people. He has tried to defend on TV his lack of truthfulness with moving excuses and with odd excuses.

Photo of Luke SimpkinsLuke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Simpkins interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The member for Cowan will leave the chamber for one hour under 94(a).

The member for Cowan and then left the chamber.

Photo of Julia GillardJulia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

His lack of truthfulness has come to an absolute head on the question of climate change. The Leader of the Opposition has had every position on climate change it is possible for a human being to have. Climate change science—do you accept it or not accept it? The Leader of the Opposition has said and believed both. One day he accepts it; one day he does not. Do you price carbon or not price carbon? The Leader of the Opposition has said on different days different things about that. Some days he wants to price carbon; other days he wants to not price carbon. Do you want a carbon tax? The Leader of the Opposition is on the record as saying that he wants a carbon tax.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! There are others in the place that I have warned as well. Perhaps I have to go to the default setting and use warnings for what they were originally put in place for, and that was to go directly to naming rather than putting out people that have been warned, for one hour.

Photo of Don RandallDon Randall (Canning, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Local Government) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order going to relevance. Quite clearly, the question was about the Prime Minister, not the Leader of the Opposition. I ask her to come back to the question.

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The Prime Minister will respond to the question.

Photo of Julia GillardJulia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I was asked a very broad question on political honesty and I am answering it. On the question of pricing carbon and climate change, are you for it or against it? The Leader of the Opposition has had both positions: yes, he accepts the science; no, he does not. Should you price carbon? The Leader of the Opposition has had both positions: yes, you should; no, you should not. Should you support a carbon tax? Let me quote the words of the Leader of the Opposition—his words, not mine—

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will relate them to the question.

Photo of Julia GillardJulia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

He said:

I also think that if you want a price on carbon why not just do it with a simple tax?

And he goes on:

It would be burdensome, but it would certainly change the price of carbon—

He went on:

Why not ask motorists to pay more? Why not ask electricity consumers to pay more?

Photo of Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will relate her material to the question.

Photo of Julia GillardJulia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, what is vital about this carbon price debate is that people come to this place and put a position in our national interest. That is what I am focused on, that is what the government is focused on, and all we see from the Leader of the Opposition is his track record of untruthfulness and political opportunism on display.