Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is quite exciting to be standing here in this chamber debating the carbon pricing initiatives that the Gillard Labor government was able to get through the House of Representatives today. It is a very historical day in this nation because this will go down in history as one of the major reforms, along with Medicare, superannuation and a range of other initiatives that a Labor government federally, through history, has been very proud to initiate.

Let me start with a quote. Once upon a time there was a senator in this chamber, back in November 2009, that said:

One way of avoiding the volatility of an emissions trading scheme would be to have a carbon tax. A carbon tax provides a very steady and known price for carbon, if you like, which is only varied by varying the tax. That tax can be set at a level that allows renewable energy systems to be competitive.

As Senator Abetz might say, 'Who would have said that?' That is a quote from Senator Alan Eggleston in November 2009. In 2009 Senator Eggleston was spruiking the benefits of a carbon tax. I could go to a quote from Senator Michael Ronaldson, from Senator David Johnston, from Senator Brandis and even from you, Senator Fifield, if you would like. In fact, this is what you said, Senator Fifield, back on 7 May 2009: 'So why do you think we are against an emissions trading scheme? It was our policy. The coalition has committed to an emissions trading scheme since Malcolm Turnbull was environment minister. The difference between ourselves and the government is that we don't see an emissions trading scheme as an end in itself. We see it as part of a range of measures to reduce global emissions. The important thing is to get the ETS right.' He went on to say: 'It's not new that the coalition support an ETS. We have done for some time.' You see, that is the problem we have with the opposition and that we are unfortunately confronting in this chamber. Senator Cameron is right: on the day our carbon pricing legislation goes through the House of Representatives and we are taking note in the Senate—and they roll out Senator Boswell, who clearly does not understand what we are talking about, has no argument on the basis of facts and seeks to impugn senators personally to get his message across—we have a consistent message from the coalition. Their leader, Mr Abbott, in the last 2½ years has had no fewer than eight different positions on a carbon price. And that is leadership; that is consistency! I would not have thought so. First of all, in an article in the Australian on 24 July 2009, Mr Abbott supported Mr Howard's decision to not take an ETS to the 2007 election. He supported Mr Rudd's proposal for an ETS the very same month in 2009. Of course, that is when all these senators opposite me were wheeled out, backing the then position of Mr Howard and Mr Abbott. Then, on 27 July, just three days later, Mr Abbott opposed an ETS. Two days later he supported a carbon tax.

Let us fast forward to 2 October 2009, when Mr Abbott admitted that this was all about politics. Remember? 'Climate change is crap,' I think he said. Two days after that he said that an ETS is a sensible policy. Let us now fast forward to November 2009, a month later, when he challenged Mr Turnbull on the ETS. We all know what happened. The climate change sceptics on that side got their way. If you were a supporter of climate change, you very quickly had to become a sceptic or else you had no career in the opposition.

Now, since the election in 2010, Mr Abbott is totally against a carbon price. So in 2½ years there have been eight different positions on a carbon price. The Australian people cannot believe the coalition's position, because it is never consistent. Not one month goes by when the coalition has a consistent position on this policy issue—this major, incredibly important environmental issue of tackling climate change, along with the rest of the world. (Time expired)