Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer and also Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. Can the minister advise the Senate whether the updated Treasury modelling on the impact of the carbon tax, which was referred to by the Treasurer in his Economic Note on Sunday, has been completed? Mr President, through you, I inform the minister that I seek no other information from the minister. My question is simply whether or not the work has been completed: yes or no.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order. The question is actually asking for a yes or no answer, which is completely out of order. It should ask for information, ask for an answer in relation to X and not suggest the answer in the question.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. The question stands.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think Senator Birmingham is seeking to tell me how to answer the question. There have been various times in my life when people have told me how to answer questions and I have generally found that one should follow one's own instincts on that and answer as one sees fit. I shall do so on this occasion.

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, please resume your seat for a minute so that we can have order. When there is silence on both sides we can proceed. Senator Wong.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said yesterday, the Treasurer did indicate on Sunday that updated modelling would be released this week. As I have said in response to a number of questions yesterday, I think it was, from the senator, I will not be pre-empting the release of that modelling. It is interesting that the other side are so focused on modelling. They were when I was climate change minister and they are now. The interesting thing is that they disregard what the modelling shows, which is that we can continue to grow our economy—

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You do not want the facts, do you, Senator Brandis.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the question of direct relevance you have, with respect, correctly, ruled that the question is in order. The question could not have been more narrow. The question asked for one fact: whether the modelling had been completed or not. What we have heard from the minister has been commentary; it has been prologue; and it has been criticism of the opposition. But it has not addressed either directly or indirectly the only fact that you have ruled was the topic of the question. Has the modelling been completed: yes or no? We are entitled to have that question answered.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! You misinterpreted what I said. I allowed the question to stand, so you should not interpret what I said. I allowed the question to stand so that the minister could hear the question and answer the question. If you are asking me to rule whether the minister is answering the question, I say to you that I cannot direct the minister how to answer the question. This is a longstanding ruling in this parliament: I cannot direct the minister. The minister has one minute remaining to address the question that has been asked. I call the minister to answer the question.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order. Very briefly, you have indicated that it is a longstanding ruling in relation to how ministers answer questions. That is correct but for one position—that is, that the sessional orders were in fact changed to require direct relevance. That was not in the standing orders previously and if that change to sessional orders is to mean anything then surely the rulings must change, because if the rulings do not change it is quite clear that that change to sessional orders has meant absolutely nothing in the practical running of the Senate.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not accept that. I stick with the ruling. I give the minister the one minute that is remaining to answer the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I again refer to the Treasurer's public indication this week that he would be releasing updated modelling. He indicated that this would show the impact of the carbon price on the entire economy. The initial modelling showed that the economy will continue to grow strongly under a carbon price at the same time as we cut carbon pollution—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Yes, I understand the opposition do not want to hear this. This is the interesting thing. They want modelling but they do not accept the findings of the modelling, which is that the economy grows, jobs grow and incomes grow with a carbon price. So, despite the fact the modelling does not back up their shameless scare campaign, they come in here and demand it, only, I am sure, to come in here subsequently to say that the modelling should not be believed. What absolute hypocrites. It is an absolutely shameless scare campaign.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. With just 18 hours left before Treasury officials appear to give evidence to the shotgun inquiry into Labor's carbon tax legislation, will the minister give a commitment that this modelling will be released before that hearing occurs, and if so will it be released today so as to at least provide members with some time to read it before having to ask questions on it?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have indicated now on, I think, four occasions that I am not pre-empting the Treasurer's release of this modelling.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So you won't answer the question. That's it, sit down.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am being told by Senator Brandis to sit down. I clearly am not sufficiently obedient to Senator Brandis. Those opposite want to talk about reading time. I went back to the Work Choices debate, where there were 337 amendments—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, you need to address the question that is before the chair and to address your comments to the chair.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have indicated to the opposition that I will not be pre-empting the Treasurer's release of the modelling. The senator comes in here claiming he wishes time to read it. That was not the approach his government took on Work Choices. There were 300-plus amendments that were released 39 minutes before the debate—seven seconds per amendment. We remember.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Will the minister explain why it is that she will not and cannot answer these most basic questions about whether the updated Treasury modelling has been completed and, if so, when exactly it will be released? If Labor cannot be trusted to give a straight answer to such basic questions of process will the minister explain how on earth anything they say about the impact of their incredibly complex carbon tax can be believed by the Australian people?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the first part of that question, I have answered that by indicating that it is for the Treasurer to make this announcement. In relation to the second part of the question, those on the other side have engaged in the most shameless scare campaign. They have a leader who rocks up to a coalmine and says, 'This is the end of the coal industry.' Wrong. We have Senator Birmingham now coming in here advocating against a carbon price when he previously advocated for one. We have those on the other side running around telling Australians the sky is going to fall in if we price carbon, just as John Howard promised to price carbon prior to the 2007 election. It is absolute hypocrisy and a shameless fear campaign from those opposite, and history will judge those opposite very harshly. (Time expired)