Download Fragment

Thursday, 25 August 2011
Page: 5571

Carbon Pricing

Senator BOSWELL (Queensland) (14:47): My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. I refer the minister to the Vivid Economics report commissioned by the Climate Institute and the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. Is it the minister aware that on 6 October 2010, prior to the publication of the Vivid report, the department of climate change advised the Climate Institute that the stated implied carbon price on the Chinese electricity sector was too high and not comparable to Austra­lia's calculations? My question is: when did the department of climate change advise Mr Combet that the Vivid Economics report was flawed and the implicit price on China's emissions was lower than Australia's and that the implied carbon tax in Australia was $2.34 and in China was $1.78?

Senator WONG (South Australia—Minister for Finance and Deregulation) (14:48): First—and I am sure this was a slip of the tongue from Senator Boswell—I am obviously not the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.

Senator Abetz: No, not anymore.

Senator WONG: That is right, because I am the Minister for Finance and Deregulation.

Opposition senators interjecting—

Senator WONG: I am trying to assist Senator Boswell with—

Honourable senators interjecting—

The PRESIDENT: The congratulatory terms around the chamber are very interesting, but I cannot hear Senator Wong.

Senator WONG: In relation to the issue of what is occurring in China—and I have had this discussion with Senator Boswell at length in Senate estimates and in this chamber—his proposition, which I think was also included in the question about where China is going in terms of dealing with its carbon emissions, is not one the government shares. I have made the point previously that China has—

Senator Boswell: Mr President, I raise a point of order. I asked about a Vivid Economics report and the response from the Climate Institute and the department of climate change. I am not interested in a diatribe that Senator Wong and I have had across the floor on many occasions. I ask you to rule that she answer the question that I have asked about Vivid Economics.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Boswell, I consider the minister is answering the question. The minister does have one minute and 14 seconds remaining to continue her answer.

Senator WONG: I have to say that there might have been times when accusing me of a diatribe was close to the truth, but perhaps not in response to this particular question. I was simply making the point that China has the world's largest installed renewable energy generation capacity, that China has indicated its intention to introduce an emissions trading pilot scheme in a number of provinces, including Beijing, Shanghai and Guangdong, and the World Bank has indicated there is a prospect of these schemes being expanded to a national scheme by 2015.

In relation to the detailed information that the senator has sought about what was said by whom and when, between a particular non-government organisation and the department of climate change, unsurprisingly I do not have that information to hand. I will certainly see if there is anything further that can be provided to the senator. But I would again say that the senator has a long history of asserting nothing is happening internation­ally. With respect, we believe he is wrong and I think the facts demonstrate that he is not correct.

Senator BOSWELL (Queensland) (14:51): Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. When did the department of climate change advise Minister Combet that the Vivid Economics report was flawed and that the implicit price on China emissions was lower than Australia's and that the implied carbon tax in Australia was $2.34 and in China was $1.78? I ask that question again because this has been the subject of an editorial in the Australian and two articles in the Australian, and you must have a brief on it or you are not trying. (Time expired)

Senator WONG (South Australia—Minister for Finance and Deregulation) (14:51): I do always try to assist Senator Boswell. I simply do not agree with the propositions he is putting. As I have explained, there are a range of policies that China have in place. They have the largest installed renewable energy capacity in the world. My recollection is also that they have energy intensity targets and renewable energy targets. On that aspect of the question which the Senator re-asked, as I have said, I do not have any further information to hand about the details of who said what to whom or when. I would respectfully, through you, Mr President, say to the senator, I doubt that his mind would be changed even if that information were able to be provided. The senator has made very clear, in his public statements and in this place, his assertions and his belief that no-one else in the world is doing anything. That assertion is demonstra­bly wrong.

Senator BOSWELL (Queensland) (14:52): Mr President, I ask a further supple­mentary question. Whether I believe—

The PRESIDENT: Senator Boswell, just ask your question.

Senator BOSWELL: Can the minister explain why Mr Combet quoted an in­accurate figure on the Lateline program on 9 March 2011, when he stated:

… the effective carbon price in sectors of the Chinese economy was $14 a tonne compared to $1.68 in Australia.

This has been in the media and you must have a brief on it, or your department is letting you down badly.

Senator WONG (South Australia—Minister for Finance and Deregulation) (14:53): I have some recollection of the Lateline interview amongst many interviews that Minister Combet has done, and done very well, in his capacity as Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. In relation to China, I would remind the senator, if we look at this on a per capita basis, that China's level of carbon pollution is around six tonnes per person; Australia's is around 27 tonnes per person. We are the highest per capita emitters of any advanced economy in the world. If you truly believe that in 10 years time or 20 years time the world will continue to shift towards clean energy and clean-energy technology, it is in the interests of Australians and Australian jobs to start to transition to cleaner energy and to build our capacity in clean-energy technology. The difference between those opposite and us is that we do care about building those jobs and making those changes that will benefit Australia over the long term.