Download Fragment

Thursday, 3 November 2011
Page: 8194

Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (16:08): The turkeys have just voted for Christmas. I say to those in the Australian Labor Party that they will need to explain to the Australian people and explain a few answers to questions. The first one is: on what basis, what authority, do they claim to guillotine this legislation through the parliament? Is it on the strength of an election promise? Is it on the strength of an electoral mandate? Is it on the strength of popular demand for this legislation? During this committee stage, having avoided answering question after question during question time and in the public debate, the minister can explain to the Australian people on what moral authority, on what mandate or on what popular support she claims that this legislation needs to be guillotined through the parliament. She might like to also explain to the Australian people why this needs to be rushed through, as she has claimed. I suspect it is for Durban, but let us wait for the answer.

She might also tell the Australian people what is the actual environmental dividend. If we pass this legislation, by how much less will temperatures rise or how many fewer droughts will we allegedly have or how much less will sea levels rise?

Senator Wong interjecting—

Senator ABETZ: Senator Wong says, 'exactly the same as ours', our direct action plan. For the first time we have an acknowledgment that our direct action plan will deliver the environmental dividends we have said but without the huge tax being imposed on every single Australian.

Another question that the minister might like to answer during the committee stage is: why is it that if we dig out coal in Australia to burn in Australia for Australian jobs and for Australian electricity it is such an unmitigated evil that it should be taxed, but if that same coal is dug out of Australia and shipped to China or India and burnt in China or India for the benefit of their populations and their manufacturing sectors, it is not an unmitigated evil and not worthy of a tax?

Senator Colbeck: It is counted against our carbon emissions.

Senator ABETZ: As Senator Colbeck interjects, then why does that count against us? There are a number of questions that the Australian Labor Party needs to answer. My colleagues will be asking a lot of technical questions and of course Labor will not be able to answer them. But there is a fundamental threshold question; indeed, there are three. On what basis do you bring this legislation in? Was it an election promise, was it because you received an electoral mandate or was it because there is overwhelming public support? We know that the answer to all three questions should dictate what you actually promised the Australian people, which was no carbon tax. You have no moral authority, you have no mandate, you have no moral support, so on what basis do you bring it into this chamber? And please do not tell us the line that we have to do it because it is the greatest moral challenge of our time. Remember that Ruddesque line of the 2007 election: the greatest moral challenge of our time? That was the reason we needed it. The great moral challenge of our time could be so easily dispensed with when the electoral polls turned sour on them. If it is indeed the greatest moral challenge of our time, why did you deny its existence during the 2010 election? That is another question that the Greens might have to answer in this debate.

So I would invite the Australian Labor Party to search their collective conscience, knowing that they were all elected into this place on a promise of no carbon tax, as to why they are still supporting this legislation. They know they have no moral authority, they know they have no mandate, they know that there is no popular support. They have dispensed with the argument that somehow it is the greatest moral challenge of our time. So what is it? I suspect that, if the minister were truthful in her answer, she could be quite brief and say to us: 'The answer is because we did a deal with Mr Bandt, the member for Melbourne, and the Australian Greens to cling on to power.'

Senator Milne sits there smiling like the cat that has just swallowed the canary. I say, good luck to the Australian Greens, but bad luck to the Australian Labor Party. They have sold out their traditional supporters like never before in their history. They have junked the manufacturing workers, they have junked the miners, they have junked the agricultural workers, they have junked those who are on low incomes who battle on a weekly basis with the cost of living, because they will be imposing job losses and increased cost of living on those people in a manner which is a complete betrayal of that for which the Australian Labor Party was actually founded. So, without delaying the committee further, Minister, on what moral authority, what mandate or indeed what popular support do you claim to bring in this legislation?