Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on the modelling of the Clean Energy Future package and what it says about prospects for jobs and growth in our economy?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Oxley for his question because this morning the government released its update of Treasury modelling on the impacts of the carbon price on the economy. Of course, the update shows the impact of a carbon price starting at $23. It also includes elements for the first time of the Steel Transformation Plan and the Jobs and Competitiveness Program that were not included in the initial report.

The opposition has had a lot to say about the modelling and what it all means. We have heard a lot of rubbish from the opposition about the modelling. They have been claiming that the modelling would be entirely different, and all the impacts would be entirely different, when we put the $23 figure into it. The truth is that the updated modelling does not make any substantial difference to the outcomes of the initial modelling—no substantial difference whatsoever. What it does show—and this is very important—is that the economy continues to grow strongly, and gross national income per person will grow at an average rate of 1.1 per cent to 2050. It also shows that jobs will grow strongly, with national employment expected to increase by 1.6 million jobs by 2020. Incomes will continue to grow strongly, rising by around $9,000 in today's terms, by 2020. Emissions, of course, by 2050, will fall to nearly half of what they would have been without carbon pricing.

What we see here is a picture of strong employment growth and strong income growth. We see a very effective scheme in terms of reducing emissions. This demonstrates that putting a price on carbon in the way we have is the least costly and most effective way of making this very important change. To be a first-rate economy in the 21st century, you have to be substantially driven by clean and renewable energy. What the carbon price does is provide that incentive for investment, particularly in renewable energy.

But none of this is really understood by those on the other side of the House. The other day we had this real clanger from the shadow Treasurer. He was asked a question about carbon pricing and he said, 'Sorry, one of the biggest, most significant ways to reduce emissions globally has been economic downturns.' That was his seminal contribution to carbon pricing; he wants to do it by having a recession.

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

Mr Speaker, on a point of order—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Sturt will resume his seat. I simply indicate to the Treasurer that he has had his wide incidental reference to the other side, and I would caution him on further debate. He may be being directly relevant but, as I said, we are trying to minimise the debate.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The really important thing about this modelling is that it shows we can have strong and sustainable economic growth while cutting carbon pollution. This stands in stark contrast to those on the other side of the House who want to tax households $1,300 a year.