Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 30 May 2012
Page: 6217

Mr HUNT (Flinders) (09:34): I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Flinders from moving the following motion forthwith—That this House requires the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency to come into the Parliament:

(1) to tell the truth and correct his statement that “on road fuel costs are not increasing under the carbon price and in fact off road costs will decrease. Excise is being cut. It will fall from July the 1st for local Governments”, given that:

(a) the carbon tax will apply to off road commercial activity from 1 July 2012;

(b) the carbon tax will apply to on road commercial activity from 1 July 2014;

(c) the Government’s own projections show a total increase in fuel excise revenue as a result of the carbon tax package of $920 million over the first three years of operation;

(d) the Minerals Council estimates that the fuel tax changes will hit 60,000 businesses in year one and will hit almost 100,000 businesses by year three; and

(e) the South Australian Local Government Association has confirmed in its report, Financial Implications of the Carbon Price on South Australian Councils, that councils will have increased off road charges from 1 July 2012 and increased on road charges from 1 July 2014; and

(2) to explain why he says fuel taxes are going down when in fact they are going up by $920 million.

Fuel taxes are going up under the carbon price, not down. The minister has deceived this House and he should have the courage to make a statement about it now.

Mr Albanese: Madam Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: I seek your clarification. There are specific provisions in the standing orders, if a member has deliberately misled the parliament, for it to proceed in terms of substantive motions. The member for Flinders has not had the courtesy to provide us with a copy of the resolution in order to make a judgment as to whether we will support the suspension of standing orders or not.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms AE Burke ): The Leader of the House is correct that there are other forms of the House if the member is claiming the minister has misled the parliament. I also do not have a copy of the motion before me, so it does generally—

Honourable members interjecting

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I am not disputing who did or did not. I am just stating: I do not have a copy. I am not trying to apportion blame. If there are portions of the motion about misleading the House, then there is another form to do that. But the member has the call, as there are other issues in respect of the motion he is moving. I will ask him, though, if it is a suspension of standing orders, to refer to the actual motion before the chair.

Mr HUNT: I will indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is urgent that this minister explains himself. He made a statement in question time yesterday which was completely at odds with the $920 million of additional fuel taxes outlined in the government's own MYEFO.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Flinders will resume his seat—and it is not just about the Leader of the House seeking the call; it is about me requesting people to resume their seats, and people should respect that call.

Mr Albanese: Madam Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: the member is now attempting to move a suspension of standing orders. He must outline to the House why the suspension of standing orders should be allowed as opposed to the budget that is before the chamber—the budget of the Commonwealth of Australia.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Leader of the House will resume his seat. The member for Flinders has the call and will refer to the motion before the chair.

Mr HUNT: This matter is urgent, immediate and important, precisely because a statement was made which was completely at odds with the budget of the Commonwealth. The reason that it is important is that yesterday the minister denied the fact that fuel excise is going up, under the carbon tax, not down. He claimed that it was going down; it is going up.