Senator Joyce in questioning Treasury today has made it quite apparent the only direction prices of specific items will go, when they are affected by a charge brought on by the emission trading scheme, is up.

“The department was unable to state that this process will be revenue neutral for the government. That is, the charges you pay on some goods will be matched by subsides on others to make them more affordable. Treasury said there will be a positive revenue stream to the government and this is code for ‘they will make a lot of money out of it’.

“The argument that was delivered by Treasury is after you have paid the extra charge on such items, probably including fuel, you will have less money in your wallet so you won’t be able to buy as much. Therefore if people want to sell other goods to you, such as food, they will have to reduce the price.

“This sort of economics defies all logic and what they should have been saying is as you pay more money, by reason of a specific government charge, certain goods under the guise of the emission trading scheme will enable the government to collect more revenue. The government will get richer, you will get poorer and your standard of living will fall.

“The government’s figures for 2010 and beyond do not incorporate the effects of the emission trading scheme. They are based on the status quo of current events and current events do not have an emission trading scheme. Therefore the veracity of the government’s own budget figures has to be called into question.

“Furthermore, current modelling appears not to have dealt with the affect on the capital base of those Australians who hold assets which will have caveats placed over them by reason of their carbon content; the obvious one here is rural land. The model does not anticipate any contingency plan for current climate change data which means if we have got it wrong and, for reasons not yet evident to us, the science further elucidates other reasons for climate change then how do we get out of this emission trading scheme without bringing the economy unstuck?

“In the period of this government Labor has heralded a suite of issues including the emission trading scheme, a luxury car tax and the alcopops tax. All three have three things in common; one they put up the price of goods, two they collect revenue for the government and three they are inflationary. This is inflation as a direct cause of government policy.

“Mr Swan should immediately furnish details of the specific affects of government charges via an emission trading scheme because although he might have not planned for it in three years time, other more diligent operators will want to make decisions based on better information than what the government’s budget figures provide. Australian working families, Mr Rudd and Mr Swan, just want to know what money they will have left after the implementation of your new ETS. Ends





Ends