Senate debates

Thursday, 10 September 2009

Tax Laws Amendment (2009 Measures No. 4) Bill 2009

In Committee

1:37 pm

Photo of Helen CoonanHelen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Hansard source

I want to place some very brief comments on the record. We have seen this amendment before and we have had this discussion ad nauseam and at great length. The core positions do not seem to have moved very much and the debate is not much advanced by repetition.

I also strongly contend that the debate is not advanced by dropping this on to the end of a TLAB which deals with a lot of other issues and does not deal, in any kind of primary sense, with carbon sinks. However, that is what we are currently considering in the Senate.

The Greens have foreshadowed that, with every tax bill, we are going to have this debate over and over again and I would suggest to them that they might like to reflect on whether this achieves very much. This has been exhaustively discussed and, from the coalition’s perspective, our views have been well and truly put on the record. So I am not going to burden the Senate and the record with stating them all over again other than to say that, in our view, carbon sink forests are an important tool in the fight against climate change and in reforesting areas of Australia that arguably should never have been cleared in the first place.

We do not believe that there is compelling evidence that the carbon sink provisions encourage the planting of carbon sink forests on prime agricultural land. It is, in our view, highly unlikely, perhaps even improbable, that farmers would allow prime agricultural land capable of producing a crop or livestock for profit to be planted with a carbon sink forest for the purpose of claiming a tax deduction.

I realise that there are strongly held views that are in disagreement with that proposition, but that is the coalition’s position. It is certainly our position in relation to this amendment. We continue to believe in the benefits of carbon sink forests. We have not altered our view about that, despite the heat and light that has been generated by this debate. As I have said, we think that they are an important carbon sequestration technique and tool.

Carbon sink forests currently have support from the majority of the Senate. This amendment of course will not succeed. Having said that, I do appreciate that our friends in the National Party have a passionately held, differing view on this and we respect that. I am very glad that I belong to a party that allows, in such a civilised and civil way, the advocacy of a different viewpoint when members consider it appropriate. The National Party have consistently expressed that view. However, respecting those differences, from the coalition’s perspective we still do not see that there is a compelling case to alter our view.

I could go on and on and take issue with all the points. I do not think anything is to be gained by that, as I have said. It was nevertheless appropriate that I very briefly indicated that the coalition will not be supporting the amendment and the reasons why.

Comments

No comments