Sean Edwards (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. I also refer the minister to the report by the Energy Users Association of Australia which shows that, following the implementation of Labor's carbon tax on 1 July this year, people in my home state of South Australia, like Queenslanders, will be paying some of the highest energy prices in the world. Is Labor proud of this achievement, which—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! On my right, I am entitled to hear Senator Edwards and Senator Edwards is entitled to be heard in silence.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Order! It would help the chamber if the discussion across the chamber in the front would cease. Senator Edwards.

Sean Edwards (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is Labor proud of this achievement, which will not only add to the cost of living concerns of all South Australians but must surely make South Australia one of the least competitive places in the world to do business?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the good senator cares about the competitiveness of South Australian businesses, or in fact businesses across Australia, he could explain why he opposes tax cuts and tax breaks for businesses, including in South Australia.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was asked about competitiveness. Why does he oppose tax breaks for small business and tax cuts across the economy? If he cares about competitiveness, why is he, as a South Australian, lining up behind a coalition policy to take $1.5 billion out of the car sector? If the senator cares so much about competitiveness, why is he lining up behind a policy which is about increasing tax rates for small business from what the government is putting forward?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President on a point of order: question time is for people to ask the minister questions, not for the minister to ask opposition senators why they are doing something else. Could you bring her on to the question she was asked and get an answer from her.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was asked about competitiveness, and I am making the point that we do believe in competitiveness and in utilising the benefits of the boom to provide tax cuts—something that the senator who asked me a question will be opposing for small business. He can explain to all the small businesses in South Australia why he thinks they should pay more tax and miners should pay less. He can explain how that is good for their competitiveness.

If the senator cares so much about what the ESAA says, I would remind him of the comments that have previously been made about the importance of certainty and how the lack of certainty could lead to higher electricity prices. In fact, last year the industry warned that power prices would rise if the coalition carried out its threat to dismantle the carbon tax, because of uncertainty. I will quote from Ms Savage:

We're concerned that if there is any uncertainty around a future price of carbon it will affect the ability for electricity generators to invest and that it will also impact on their ability to offer fixed price electricity contracts—

(Time expired)

Sean Edwards (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I note that the minister has highlighted the pre-existing high level of electricity prices in South Australia in her previous representations. Does the minister agree that, with electricity prices in South Australia already being amongst the highest in the world, there is already a strong incentive for people to be careful and judicious in their use of electricity? Will the minister inform the Senate why, if there is already a strong price incentive to reduce electricity— (Time expired)

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those of us who are very aware of high electricity prices support things such as increases to family tax benefits, increases to pensions and tax breaks for people earning under $80,000 a year. That is what this side of politics supports. What that side of politics supports is a policy that would add to cost-of-living pressures by increasing the tax that Australian households would have to pay by $1,300 a year.

What I was trying to describe before is this simple proposition that, if you have investment uncertainty, that can lead, on the basis of what the industry itself says, to higher prices. I would remind senators of this quote:

… it—

referring to the uncertainty—

will also impact on their ability to offer fixed price electricity contracts which could put up prices for households.

That is a reference to your policy's effect on uncertainty and investment uncertainty, which manifests as— (Time expired)

Sean Edwards (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Will the minister advise the Senate of how it is consistent with Labor's promise to do no more and no less than the rest of the world in terms of carbon pricing for it to actually impose a carbon tax that leaves Australians with, incredibly, the highest electricity prices in the world?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The highest effective carbon price is the one that those opposite would impose were they elected, and it would effectively cost $1,300 a year for every household in this country. It would require bureaucracies to dole out money to big polluters and would have little environmental gain, and it would not provide the sort of investment certainty which is required not only across the economy but particularly in the electricity generation sector, where you are looking at investment in long-lived assets. These are the same policy reasons why John Howard agreed to put forward a price on carbon and went to the 2007 election promising to do so.

Senator Abetz interjecting—

I invite you, Senator Abetz, to actually read your policy, because that is not what Malcolm Turnbull got you to say. The reality is that those opposite have no policy credibility. (Time expired)