Download Fragment

Monday, 30 May 2011
Page: 5011

Carbon Pricing

Ms JULIE BISHOP (Curtin—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:12): My question is the Prime Minister. I refer to the Press Club address last month by the Minister for Climate Change. He said:

If the imposition of a carbon price led to production being moved offshore to a country without a comparable carbon constraint, we could end up with a worse environmental outcome as well as the loss of Australian jobs.

Given that, at the weekend, Russia, Japan and Canada advised that they would not join a second round of carbon cuts under the Kyoto protocol and the United States has reconfirmed that it will not join, will the Prime Minister guarantee that no industries will move and no jobs will be lost overseas as a result of her carbon tax?

Ms GILLARD (Lalor—Prime Minister) (14:13): I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for her question. As the Deputy Leader of the Opposition would know—from news reports, from the briefings that she reads and, indeed, from the information she would get from the sister political parties of the Liberal Party around the world—other nations are moving on climate change. I am sure, for example, that there is a great exchange of information between the Liberal Party of Australia and the Conservatives in the United Kingdom. Indeed, we know that the Leader of the Opposition has been to the UK to consult with David Cameron, now the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. People would remember when he went to do that. What does David Cameron stand for? This is a man who, were in Australia, would be the holder of a Liberal Party ticket. He has announced to his community that he stands for cutting carbon emissions by 50 per cent by 2027—a conservative. But we do not need to look as far away as the UK. We can look across the ditch to New Zealand—another conservative. The Prime Minister there, John Key—

Ms Julie Bishop: I asked about Russia, Japan, Canada and the United States not joining Kyoto and asked the Prime Minister to guarantee that no industries would move and no jobs would be lost overseas as a result of her carbon tax. She has not answered that question and is not—

The SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her place. The Prime Minister has the call. She knows her obligation to be directly relevant to the question.

Ms GILLARD: I presumed the opposition would be interested in the actions of their fellow conservatives overseas, including of course the Prime Minister of New Zealand—a conservative in a country with an emissions trading scheme. Then let's come to the US, mentioned in the deputy opposition leader's question. President Obama has committed the US to a hugely ambitious agenda about ensuring that 80 per cent of the energy used in the US comes from clean energy sources—a huge agenda for change. Right around the world, whether it is China or India, we see countries acting on climate change.

I do not put the case to the Australian people that we should act in front of the world, but we cannot afford to be left behind either. We have a high-emitting economy. We emit more carbon pollution per head of population—

Mr Hartsuyker interjecting—

The SPEAKER: The member for Cowper is warned!

Ms GILLARD: than any other developed nation. That means, in generating a clean energy economy for the future, we have got a bigger journey to travel, and that is why we need to start the journey now. I understand that the Leader of the Opposition and members of the Liberal Party generally are out there trying to stoke fear on this issue. They have got no solutions; they have got no belief in climate change; they have got no views about the future of this country. All they stand for is relentless negativity, to the disgust of many people who hold a Liberal Party ticket. We will meet their fear campaign with facts. As we design carbon pricing, we will be working with Australian businesses and industry to ensure that we protect Australian jobs.

If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is truly concerned about the employment prospects of Australians today and Australians tomorrow then she should be supporting the most efficient way of tackling climate change: pricing carbon and generating the clean energy economy we need for the future. She should not be advocating a strategy which would have our nation left behind, including behind countries where her conservative counterparts are taking positive action on climate change.