Senator WONG (Minister for Climate Change and Water) (12:43 PM) —I actually provided that detail to another one of your colleagues earlier, but I am happy to do so again. The Transitional Electricity Cost Assistance Program—and it is included in the document which was presented to your party room—is intended to reduce the impact of the CPRS on medium and large enterprises. It is a transitional fund which will apply after the fixed price year. It will be capped at $1.1 billion and it will be distributed over two years as follows: up to 50 per cent of the projected increase in retail electricity prices in 2012-13 and up to 25 per cent of the projected increase in 2013-14. The targeted recipients are those within the mining and manufacturing sectors.

Senator Barnett —Why?

Senator WONG —That is probably a question you should ask your negotiators.

Senator Barnett —It’s your bill.

Senator WONG —Can I just say this. We negotiated an agreement in good faith with the alternative government in order to get this legislation through, and we did that because we are very strongly of the view that it is in Australia’s national interests to act on climate change. It is in our interests to no longer delay. We have so much evidence, including from the Business Council and other industry groups, saying that delay will increase costs. That advice was presented to you when you were in government. The secretary of your Prime Minister’s department has said very clearly that his advice to Prime Minister Howard was to go soon because the costs of delaying were significant. They are difficult to quantify but I think I have used before in this chamber an example where the International Energy Agency have quantified globally the costs—and these are energy sector costs—of delay in introducing these mechanisms and moving to a lower carbon energy sector at around $500 billion a year. In fact, their advice is that that number will increase. In other words, the longer we wait the more expensive it will become every year. That is why the government entered into good-faith negotiations with the opposition. It was at the opposition’s request that these were the industries on which there was focus. There was also assistance to the food-processing sector which has also been outlined.

Senator Barnett, I am glad that you put on the record your view about not needing to wait until climate change and that you support an ETS. But your question suggests that you support an ETS that has no impact on electricity prices. I am sorry, Senator, but there is a reason—and this is with respect to Senator Xenophon too, and I know he disagrees with me but he knows my position. There is a reason that no peak business body that I am aware of—and I could be wrong, but it is certainly not the Business Council of Australia or the Australian Industry Group—has supported the Frontier model. I think it is important for Liberal senators who are seeking an easy way through this to realise this is a hard policy area and there is a reason why the business sector has not adopted that model.

You asked about and I advised about the transitional electricity cost assistance program. I would make this point. Given the importance of providing detailed responses to questions in this chamber, I have endeavoured to engage with the chamber in this debate. But I would make the point that we have been debating in the committee stage for just under 13 hours—12 hours and 40 minutes, or thereabouts—and we have done four sets of amendments. We are not currently debating Tasmanian electricity prices and the small business sector. We are currently debating Senator Xenophon’s amendment which goes to targets. Whilst I think it is reasonable for there to be a range of questions which might be associated with that, we have not discussed Senator Xenophon’s targets for some time. You might not agree with the agreement struck between your representatives and the government, but an agreement was made. It was an agreement made after very lengthy good-faith negotiations—and I want to place on record that they were good-faith negotiations. One person described the negotiations to me as old-fashioned negotiations in the sense that they were not conducted in the public arena and the confidences of both sides were kept. We worked through some very difficult issues, some very complex issues, and both sides had to give and take. I want to place on record my thanks to the opposition negotiators for the way in which they conducted those discussions. But what you are asking of me is to justify, on my side of the chamber, a policy position that your party took. Senator, Barnett, I respectfully suggest that your question would be better addressed to your leader and your negotiator.