Contents
-
Commencement
-
Personal Explanation
-
-
Bills
-
-
Ministerial Statement
-
-
Personal Explanation
-
-
Bills
-
-
Parliamentary Procedure
-
Answers to Questions
-
-
Parliamentary Committees
-
-
Question Time
-
-
Grievance Debate
-
-
Parliamentary Committees
-
-
Bills
-
CARBON TAX
Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (14:39): Will the minister confirm how much extra we will pay as a result of his decision to suspend the rail electrification projects?
The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:40): Do you mean over the next 12 months?
Ms CHAPMAN: The forward estimates, seeing as they have completely dropped off the budget papers.
The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Over the forward estimates. Given that what we are seeking to do is transition over time from a diesel system to a fully electrical one and given that the current order for trains was only proposed to be reduced by four trains coupling together three carriages, I am quite happy to suggest that over the forward estimates we work out what the difference in diesel was between those and when they would have been in operation in any event and come back to you. But I think from my answer it would be clear to you that it would be a marginal cost in the overall system.
Can I say that what we have here is the thwack of leather on deceased equine. We have had their spiritual leader, Tony Abbott, out there predicting the end of the world with the carbon tax, and it did not occur. Now he says that it will not be the end of the world: it will be a slow strangle—
Members interjecting:
The SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CHAPMAN: Point of order: the minister has indicated that he will get the answer. He does not know; he will get the answer. I am happy with that. He does not need to start flying insults.
The SPEAKER: Thank you. I am not sure what your point of order is. Minister, would you like to complete your answer?
The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I will. The point I make is that it will be, in my view, marginal. I will bring that back. What I would say is this, and I make the distinction: we believe in doing something to reduce the emission of carbon and you do not. It is as simple as that.
Members interjecting:
The SPEAKER: Order!
Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order: the minister is now entering debate.
The SPEAKER: The minister has sat down now. There is no point of order.