The whole modus operandi of this legislation, taking place merely days before Copenhagen, the place where the world will meet, is such that if we are truly looking for a global solution we will find it. But, if people are in fear of Copenhagen not delivering a global solution, I can say that the only reason that we would vote on this legislation now would be to force the issue, to actually undermine Copenhagen. After lauding Copenhagen, it is a statement that you do not believe. You have a lack of confidence in Copenhagen being able to deliver an outcome. So, far from being part of a global solution, it is part of inciting and undermining Copenhagen.

If we truly believe in keeping Australia as a competitive nation in a global economy with open borders and open trade, we cannot unilaterally go down this path. It would be the height of self-indulgence by a government in Australia to take us down a path that would put at risk Australian working families and those pensioners who have been contacting us not in their hundreds but in their thousands. We have also received tens of thousands of emails. Today the weather is remarkably cold—maybe that is a sign where we are going with this—but no doubt summer will come. One of the big things people will want is the capacity to be able to pay for the air conditioning in their house. Pensioners who are on the breadline do exist. We have to remind the Labor Party that they are doing it terribly tough, and they will be the people who will be afflicted by this scheme. We know that at the start there is compensation, that there is a bit of sugar on the table to help those who are doing it tough, but that all passes, that all finishes, and people will then be left with the cost.

 

Senator Wong—Mr Temporary Chairman, I have two points of order: one is that the senator is deliberately misleading the chamber. He knows I have made it clear to this chamber on a number of occasions that household assistance is ongoing. The second point of order is in relation to relevance. We are currently discussing the Greens amendment—an amendment with which the government does not agree—in relation to a default reduction in the cap. How is this contribution relevant to that?

 

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Mark Bishop)—Senator Joyce, do you wish to speak to the point of order?

 

Senator JOYCE—No.

 

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN—On both points of order, I rule that they do not exist.

 

Senator JOYCE—I remind the chamber of what the minister has just said, that in these amendments there is a $5.5 billion reduction in household assistance. That is the money that goes from the pensioners. That is the money that goes from the working families. That is the money that makes life harder. We hear that things will go along as per normal, but these amendments actually speak to the reduction in household assistance.

 

Senator Bob Brown—Mr Temporary Chair, a point of order: Senator Joyce himself negotiated that $5.5 billion rip-off from pensioners. Now he is complaining about it. He should be consistent if not relevant.

 

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN—Senator Brown, you know that is a debating point.

 

Senator JOYCE—The National Party was not in any way part and parcel of the $5.5 billion reduction in household assistance. In fact, we want to exempt households completely and make sure that those working families, those pensioners, those who live in the quiet streets in the weatherboards and the brick-and-tiles do not have to pay anything for this ludicrous, unilateral attempt to change the temperature of the globe by Minister Wong’s office. That is what is being inspired here—a unilateral attempt by Kevin Rudd to change the temperature of the globe. Is the temperature of the globe going to change from the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s office? Is the temperature of the globe going to change because of a piece of legislation that is inspired by Minister Wong? No, it is not. Even now we would have to query the extent to which they are actually going to reduce carbon emissions. We have still got this confusion where we are looking at 2008 modelling on a 2009 proposition. We take in piece and parcel bits and pieces of it. We have had an appreciation of the dollar, yet the modelling stays the same. Frontier Economics has been talking about a $3.7 billion hole. This is where this modelling leads in 2020. There is currently a $2.5 billion hole. This just goes to show the paucity of economic acumen in the Labor Party and also the self-indulgent position that they would inflict on Australian working families, on pensioners, on farmers and on small business. This sort of tax—

 

Government senators interjecting—

 

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN—Order! There is too much audible interruption going on in the chamber. I would appreciate it if senators allowed Senator Joyce to make his contribution in silence.

 

Senator JOYCE—People listening will acknowledge this. Senator Cameron is supposed to be in here looking after working families. He is supposed to be looking after his rank-and-file union members. What was he going to deliver to those rank-and-file union members? He was going to take those working families out of work. He was going to make the pensioners poorer. He was going to put the farmers off the farm. This is the sort of outcome we will have.

 

What will we have if this ends up in a double dissolution? It is going to be quite easy for us to define. If you understand the tax, vote for it. If you do not, vote for us. It will be quite clear. We borrowed that line from a former Prime Minister, Paul Keating. If you understand this massive new tax, you vote for it. If you want to make working families poorer, you vote for the Labor Party. If you want to put families off the farm, you vote for the Labor Party. If you want to take working families out of work, you vote for the Labor Party. It is quite clear how we can define this line for an election. It is quite clear now for the tens of thousands of Australians who have contacted our office and have said emphatically that they do not want this to go forward.

 

I listened to talkback radio last night as people pleaded for this chamber not to go forward with this massive new tax. Did the Labor Party hear them? No, they did not. What did the Labor Party do? They became self-indulgent in a fit of pique that they would just pursue this course, that they would demand that the Australian people have to comply with the globetrotting benevolence of our Prime Minister as he sets the most massive carbon footprint in air travel of all time. He is over there now speaking to President Obama. I do not think President Obama is going to turn around the US Senate. Let us be realists about this. There are environmental solutions that we can deal with, but it does not have to be your massive new tax. We as a nation can be smarter than that. We can be smarter than that and deliver a better outcome for our nation than this massive new tax. The National Party and the Liberal Party will be at one in fighting this massive new tax because today there has been a change of direction.

 

Now we have the capacity to fight the Labor Party, to drag them into this chamber day after day and, piece by piece, pull apart this ridiculous tax and show the Australian people exactly how much the price of food is going to go up by, exactly how much the price of electricity is going to go up by—exactly how much every section of their life is going to be afflicted by it. We will drag the Labor Party in. Now the problem has become the Labor Party’s. It is now on the Labor Party’s lap. They have to convince their working families how they will keep them in work, and the only way they can keep them in work is to walk away from this ridiculous tax. We say to the people of the Hunter Valley: it is the Labor Party who are going to put you out of work. We say to the people of the Hunter Valley: it is Mr Combet who is one of the grand architects to reduce your standard of living. We will say to the people of Dawson: it is the Labor Party who wish to take your standard of living down the tube. They do not believe that you are entitled to the standard of living and the wages you have been getting. The Labor Party do not believe in truck drivers getting paid up to $100,000. No, they are going to take you back to green jobs. They are going to have you building duck ponds, they are going to have you building concrete paths around duck ponds—they are going to have all these fantastic schemes—but they will not give you a decent living. That side of politics will not give you a decent living.

 

Today is a great day, because today you will see a unified opposition that will take you on, and you know that, because now we have got the capacity to take you on, day after day. From the front benches of this side of the political chamber we will deliver the questions that you will not be able to answer. It will be a great day.

We have this ridiculous proposition that if we pass this bill we are going to be borrowing money from China to send back to China to help develop China. We will be borrowing money from China and from Saudi Arabia to send to African despots. That is not the form of politics that we believe in. We will be able to fight this piece by piece. This is going to be an interesting time. From now on we have the capacity to unify this show. This side of the chamber will be as one. This side of the chamber is, as you speak, working out the questions to ask you about how on earth you are going to be able to pay for this.

 

Senator Wong—Bring it on.

 

Senator JOYCE—And we will. We are looking forward to it, Minister Wong. We are looking forward to talking to construction, forestry and mining workers about your outcome for their world. We are out to try to get them more money. We are out to protect the dignity of their lives. You are out to take them on some fantastic trip, for what is left for them at the end of the day is poverty, destitution and an economy that is completely out of kilter with the rest of the world. That was your outcome. That is what you are going to deliver them. And they are awake up to you. We are going to drive this agenda and we will drive it persistently and without query and without equivocation. Today is a good day, because the Australian people are going to see the debate, the debate on the technicalities, and how completely implausible this whole tax was. Today is the day that we start pointing out that you had this unitary outcome, a unitary decision on the price of a permit with apparently a multiplicity of baseline preambles.

 

Senator Wong—Er, er, er.

 

Senator JOYCE—I take the minister’s interjection because she is an angry lady today and therefore she goes for the ad hominem type of approach. That is disappointing, Minister, because I thought better of you than to do things like that. But if that is the approach we are going to have—where they start ducking back to the ad hominem type of attack—and that is what you want to deliver, it just goes to show you the implausibility of your argument.

 

Senator Cameron interjecting—

 

Senator JOYCE—This is going to be a period of time where we will listen to Senator Cameron, and he will talk about—

 

Senator Cameron—You are absolute rabble!

 

Senator JOYCE—The only rabble, Senator Cameron, will be your support base. Your support base will be scattered across the Hunter Valley and across the Illawarra as we tell the workers of the Illawarra that we kept them in a job, as we tell the workers of Dawson that we kept them in a job, as we tell the workers of the Hunter Valley that we kept them in a job. What did they give to the Australian working family? The promise that they would put them out of work. That was the delivery that the Labor Party gave to the Australian working family. They said they would ease the squeeze. What a joke! They ease the squeeze for working families by putting up the price of power, putting up the price of food, putting up the price of everything in their life—and they have got no choice but to pay the tax. This tax comes from every corner of the house, and they know it. That is them easing the squeeze for working families!

 

Senator Cameron—When you give them Work Choices, Barnaby!

 

Senator JOYCE—As we go forward with this approach we will look forward to Senator Cameron explaining to working families how their massive new tax—

I0VWilliams, Sen John0Senator Williams—Mr Temporary Chairman, I raise a point of order. Since the arrival of Senator Cameron into this chamber it has been nothing but a rabble. I ask you to call him to order and let Senator Joyce continue his speech.

 

Senator O’Brien—On the point of order, I think Senator Williams frankly has a bit of a cheek after the performance of the National Party when various other people have been speaking in this debate, particularly the minister, in trying to rationally answer questions and having a filibuster going on here for days and days. We are 25 hours into this debate and we are about 15 per cent through the amendments. Senator Williams has the temerity to say that there is an interjection taking place to that absolute diatribe, which has got nothing to do with the amendment before the chair. Frankly, if you uphold the point of order I understand, but it is a point of order which is based on hypocrisy.

 

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Mark Bishop)—All senators should conduct themselves at all times in an orderly fashion.

 

Senator JOYCE—This amendment speaks to an increase from one per cent to five per cent. It follows the same rule and method as the Labor Party. You could think of it as an increase from one per cent to five per cent in unemployment or maybe a 20 per cent to 40 per cent increase in costs. Everything the Labor Party do, every suggestion they make, is an increase in costs to the working families of Australia, an increase in the probability that working families of Australia will lose their job, an increase in costs for farmers in Australia. It is the complete obstruction and letting go of pensioners in Australia, and you should be disgusted in yourselves.