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
Tuesday, 4 June 2013
Page: 5061

Carbon Pricing


Mr ABBOTT (WarringahLeader of the Opposition) (14:01): My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister confirm that a recent NATSEM report confirmed that, even on worst-case scenarios, 87 per cent of Australian households will be better off under the coalition's plan for tax cuts without a carbon tax? Why is the Prime Minister keeping a tax that hurts families without helping our environment?


Ms GILLARD (LalorPrime Minister) (14:01): To the Leader of the Opposition's question, families will be worse off under his plan to take away the schoolkids bonus—a direct cut for families raising two children across the schooling life of their children of $15,000. That is real money, worse off, Australian families around the nation.

On carbon pricing, the Leader of the Opposition has come into the parliament and yet again misrepresented the impact of carbon pricing. Carbon pricing is working to reduce carbon pollution. There is no doubt about that.

Mr Abbott: I rise on a point of order. Madam Speaker, I asked the Prime Minister about the NATSEM report that showed that 87 per cent of Australian households would be better off under the coalition, even on worst-case scenarios.

The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Prime Minister has the call.

Ms GILLARD: The Leader of the Opposition's question referred to the government's carbon pricing policy and suggested it was not working to reduce carbon pollution. I refer the Leader of the Opposition to the question he actually asked. The question he actually asked, in answer to it: the government's policy—the carbon price and the Renewable Energy Target—are working to reduce carbon pollution. We have a policy working to reduce carbon pollution. Not one of the ridiculous, hysterical claims made by the Leader of the Opposition against carbon pricing has come true—not one of those claims.

I note that the Leader of the Opposition was out at a steel-manufacturing facility earlier today. No doubt he refused to tell the workers there that he came into this parliament and voted against their jobs by voting against the Steel Transformation Plan.

The intention of this government is for carbon pricing to continue because it is the least-cost way of reducing carbon pollution in our atmosphere. The Leader of the Opposition would prefer a higher cost way of reducing carbon pollution in our atmosphere. No doubt he would push those costs through to Australian families. It is estimated that that would cost families up to $1,300 a year. Then, of course, there is the Leader of the Opposition's plan to make them $15,000 worse off during the life of their children at school. The Leader of the Opposition has tried every act of hysteria when it comes to carbon pricing. Now the Australian people can judge from the facts, not from his fiction.