HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2008-11-25 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite—Leader of the Opposition) (15:18): Why did the Premier not ensure, before Labor's carbon pollution reduction scheme was developed and released, that Port Pirie smelter owner Nyrstar was an exempt operator under criteria for industries at risk of being forced offshore to higher polluting countries by the scheme? Nyrstar products are sold at prices set by the London Metals Exchange making emissions intensive trade exposed to industries which should be eligible for substantial exemptions, assistance or free permits, but Labor's green paper uses a calculation that reflects an unusual two-year price spike on international markets, moving Nyrstar outside of its eligibility criteria and putting at risk the future of Port Pirie.

The Hon. M.D. RANN (Ramsay—Premier, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change) (15:19): Here is another example of the Leader of the Opposition saying one thing one day and another thing the next day. We have just heard the Deputy Premier after the fandango and the putting out of a release before and hoping that the media will not remember what he has said on water prices. Water prices, they told the media, were going to be the story of the day even though they had been previously announced and here we have it in his own words from August 2007: 'South Australia needs to ensure that water prices recoup the full costs of supplying water'—Martin Hamilton-Smith.

Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order, Mr Speaker, regarding relevance.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier must answer the substance of the question, which is about the Port Pirie smelter.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: And I will, because the relevance was the relevance of the Leader of the Opposition's character, which is going to be increasingly cut, just as his recklessness and his anger—

Mr WILLIAMS: I rise on a point of order, Mr Speaker.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for MacKillop has a point of order.

Mr WILLIAMS: Now I suspect that the Premier is debating.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier is debating. He must answer the substance of the question.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Just to explain the process for people opposite who do not understand about what is a green paper and what is a white paper and what is draft legislation and what a bill is and what a law is and what an act is. Okay? The federal government issued a green paper for comment on its emissions trading scheme, and I have been in discussion with a series of South Australian companies that are likely to be exposed to that scheme. Now, the fact is that there are not many companies in South Australia that would be affected by an emissions trading scheme. They are not part of the net, and there may be 25 to 30 companies.

I have been going around visiting companies such as Origin and AGL in Sydney and talking to companies like OneSteel about what it means for them. I remember when we introduced—and again it gets back to that same issue—legislation into this parliament, which was about greenhouse gas reduction legislation, the Leader of the Opposition marched in here—we were the first in Australia and the third in the world—and said it was not tough enough. He was not going to support it because it did not go far enough. Then, of course, what happened is that he received a phone call, and we have it on record.

The Hon. K.O. Foley: No; he said that we didn't do that.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: He said he didn't do it. Well, we have it on record. We are very happy to release the Hansard.

The Hon. P.F. Conlon: And he didn't say 'stripped'.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: That's right, and the media and I are going to go and check their tapes about whether he said stripped or not.

Mr WILLIAMS: I rise on a point of order, Mr Speaker.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for MacKillop.

Mr WILLIAMS: My point of order is one of relevance, and I also suspect that the Premier is debating again.

The SPEAKER: I will listen to what the Premier has to say. He is perhaps straying a bit close to debate, but I will listen to what he has to say.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Okay; so what has happened is that I have gone around and spoken to various companies and I have asked them, 'Okay; what does your modelling show in terms of how it will impact on you?' Because everyone across Australia, Liberal, Labor, business—John Howard even turned, in his last year, from being a climate change denier into supporting an emissions trading scheme—knows that we have to do something about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but at the same time what we need to do is ensure that we do not see the export of jobs with companies that would pack up in South Australia or in other states and set up in another country, where they do not give a damn about the environment or CO2 emissions. And it is the same atmosphere. There is no point in that.

So what we have said is that, just as we spoke to people before the green paper, we are asking people after the green paper, 'Tell us how it impacts on you and tell us how we can help in terms of making submissions to the federal government.' It is what a government does rather than play games. Of course, what happened is that I met with Nyrstar, which is in fact registered on the Belgium stock exchange, although its corporate headquarters are in London. Not only that, but I will be seeing the chief executive officer and the COO in London and those arrangements—by the way, despite what was said in the media—were made before the announcement of a by-election in Port Pirie.

So, if you are suggesting that, when we made those arrangements, somehow Rob Kerin conspired with us and gave us a week's notice of what he was going to do, I think that is a terrible condemnation of a former leader of this state, who is known for his integrity, but we remember when you said that you were right behind him, Rob, and then stabbed him in the back.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier is debating now.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Let us go on to what he said. I visited Nyrstar because I am seeing the Prime Minister this week at the COAG meeting and the night before, and I am then going to be seeing the heads of Nyrstar internationally about what they want to me to do and what their negotiations subsequently have been. We made a submission to the federal government following meetings with the company. In fact, while I was in China, the Acting Premier made a submission to Kevin Rudd on our behalf, because Nyrstar told me that basically they fell just out of the ambit of getting assistance or exemptions for transitional arrangements.

What happened is that the opposition leader has accused my going on Friday to Port Pirie for talks with Nyrstar about the future of the plant and the thousands of jobs that depend on it ahead of a by-election as a Labor Party stunt. I am not quite sure how the Leader of the Opposition, on his way to Port Pirie three days later, could describe my going there three days before as a stunt, but, anyway, the difference between us is that I met Nyrstar's management in Adelaide back in August to discuss their concerns. Did I know about Rob Kerin pulling the plug before Christmas back in August? If I did, then it must have been through ESP. I have requested further meetings as well.

In contrast, the Leader of the Opposition suddenly has decided to take an interest in the matter only once a by-election is underway. It was a stunt for me to go there. It was all about the by-election, even though I had meetings and requested meetings in London before a by-election was caused, and we had written to the Prime Minister because we are actually concerned about those jobs. Then, suddenly, the Leader of the Opposition changed his mind: there was no threat to Nyrstar at all. Apparently it had all been sorted. In fact, they had been exempted, he said, so why was he going there on Monday? It does not make any sense to me.

In his media release yesterday, the opposition leader said that I was playing cruel mind games and then went on to say 'an exemption is guaranteed under the criteria outlined in his own party's green paper on the scheme'. By asking this question today, he has totally contradicted what he said in Port Pirie yesterday. Why is he asking me questions about it if he says they were exempted under the criteria outlined in the party's green paper? Again, on radio this morning, the leader said:

I can assure the people of Port Pirie that he's [that is me] already cooked something up behind closed doors with Mr Rudd and Ms Wong.

How can there be both a secret deal to give Nyrstar an exemption, as well as an exemption being plain in black and white in the federal government's green paper? You can't have it both ways.

He says that they are already exempted in the green paper and now he is saying, 'Don't worry, Rann has already fixed it up.' It does not make any sense at all. You have to mean what you say and say what you mean, because three times today you have been caught out—and this goes to the question of your character. Let me just say this: I prefer to believe the boss of Nyrstar. Is the Leader of the Opposition calling the chief operating officer of Nyrstar a liar in this house? The company's statement dated 12 November states:

Under the proposed Emissions Trading Scheme, neither the Port Pirie nor Hobart smelters will qualify as an emissions-intensive-trade exposed industry because the emissions intensities using the proposed metric are below the thresholds proposed.

Nyrstar (internationally and nationally) says that they are not exempt and now you are saying to us that they have been exempted, anyway, and they were exempted in the green paper. Please start telling the truth to the people of Port Pirie.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT