All changes made to the description and title of this division.

View division | Edit description

Change Division
representatives vote 2011-10-13#5

Edited by Henare Degan

on 2014-10-10 15:01:29

Title

Description

  • The majority voted against a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3) that Labor MP [Ed Husic](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives) be no longer heard.
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on carbon pricing(You can read more about carbon pricing in Australia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia). ) as a [matter of public importance](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance) when Liberal MP [Christopher Pyne](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives) moved the motion.(You can read the whole debate [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2).)
  • Following this division, the [Speaker](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary) moved that the House be adjourned.
  • This division relates to the Policy _[For a carbon price](/policies/3)_.
  • The majority voted against a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3) that Labor MP [Ed Husic](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives) be no longer heard.
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on carbon pricing(You can read more about carbon pricing in Australia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia). ) as a [matter of public importance](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance) when Liberal MP [Christopher Pyne](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives) moved the motion.(You can read the whole debate [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2).)
  • Following this division, the [Speaker](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary) moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
representatives vote 2011-10-13#5

Edited by system

on 2014-10-07 16:19:26

Title

Description

  • The majority voted against a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3 motion] that Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] be no longer heard.
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on carbon pricing(You can read more about carbon pricing in Australia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia here]. ) as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance] when Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] moved the motion.(You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].)
  • Following this division, the [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary Speaker] moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
  • The majority voted against a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3) that Labor MP [Ed Husic](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives) be no longer heard.
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on carbon pricing(You can read more about carbon pricing in Australia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia). ) as a [matter of public importance](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance) when Liberal MP [Christopher Pyne](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives) moved the motion.(You can read the whole debate [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2).)
  • Following this division, the [Speaker](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary) moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
representatives vote 2011-10-13#5

Edited by system

on 2014-10-07 16:16:22

Title

Description

  • The majority voted against a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3 motion] that Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] be no longer heard.
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on carbon pricing[1] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance] when Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] moved the motion.[2]
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on carbon pricing(You can read more about carbon pricing in Australia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia here]. ) as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance] when Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] moved the motion.(You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].)
  • Following this division, the [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary Speaker] moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
  • * [1] You can read more about carbon pricing in Australia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia here].
  • * [2] You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].
representatives vote 2011-10-13#5

Edited by mackay

on 2014-01-24 11:07:14

Title

Description

  • The majority voted against a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3 motion] that Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] be no longer heard.
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia carbon pricing] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance] when Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] moved the motion.[1]
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on carbon pricing[1] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance] when Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] moved the motion.[2]
  • Following this division, the [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary Speaker] moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
  • * [1] You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].
  • * [1] You can read more about carbon pricing in Australia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia here].
  • * [2] You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].
representatives vote 2011-10-13#5

Edited by mackay

on 2014-01-24 11:05:28

Title

Description

  • The majority voted against a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3 motion] "''That the member be no longer heard.''"
  • The motion was moved by Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] to end the contribution of Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] to a discussion on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia carbon pricing] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance].[1]
  • The majority voted against a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3 motion] that Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] be no longer heard.
  • MP Husic was just beginning his contribution to a discussion on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia carbon pricing] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance] when Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] moved the motion.[1]
  • Following this division, the [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary Speaker] moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
  • * [1] You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].
representatives vote 2011-10-13#5

Edited by mackay

on 2014-01-24 11:02:08

Title

Description

  • The majority voted against a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3 motion] "''That the member be no longer heard.''"
  • The motion was moved by Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] to end the [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.1 contribution] of Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] to a discussion on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia carbon pricing] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance].[1]
  • The motion was moved by Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] to end the contribution of Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] to a discussion on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia carbon pricing] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance].[1]
  • Following this division, the [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary Speaker] moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
  • * [1] You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].
representatives vote 2011-10-13#5

Edited by mackay

on 2014-01-24 11:01:18

Title

  • Matters of Public Importance Carbon Pricing
  • Matters of Public Importance - Carbon Pricing - That the member no longer be heard

Description

  • <p class="speaker">Harry Jenkins</p>
  • <p>I have received letters from the honourable member for Menzies and the honourable member for Fraser proposing that definite matters of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion today. As required by standing order 46(d), I have selected the matter which, in my opinion, is the most urgent and important; that is, that proposed by the honourable member for Menzies, namely:</p>
  • <p class="italic">The failure of the government to understand the impact of the carbon tax on Australian families.</p>
  • The majority voted against a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.3 motion] "''That the member be no longer heard.''"
  • The motion was moved by Liberal MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Christopher_Pyne&mpc=Sturt&house=representatives Christopher Pyne] to end the [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2011-10-13.124.1 contribution] of Labor MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Ed_Husic&mpc=Chifley&house=representatives Ed Husic] to a discussion on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia carbon pricing] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_of_public_importance matter of public importance].[1]
  • Following this division, the [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Harry_Jenkins&display=summary Speaker] moved that the House be adjourned.
  • References
  • * [1] You can read the whole debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2011-10-13.120.2 here].
  • <p>I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.</p>
  • <p class="italic"> <i>More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places&#8212;</i></p>
  • <p class="speaker">Kevin Andrews</p>
  • <p>Yesterday was a day on which the government of Australia betrayed the families of this country, and this week is a week in which the government of this country has severed the bonds of trust between it and the families of Australia. Indeed, this session of parliament is a session in which Australians have finally had revealed to them what a cowardly and dishonest government they have here in Canberra. Yesterday, this Prime Minister, Ms Gillard, at the behest of the Greens, revealed that she is more interested in her job as Prime Minister of Australia than in the jobs of ordinary Australians. Yesterday, it was revealed to everybody in this country that we have a government that is so out of touch that it came in here and applauded and congratulated itself for a measure that will increase the cost of living for every Australian, will bite and hit every business in this country and will destroy jobs for so many people right around this nation.</p>
  • <p>There are three enduring images of this government that history will mark. The first was of a Prime Minister who went on television a few days before the last election and said, as we all know&#8212;</p>
  • <p class="italic">Opposition members: 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.'</p>
  • <p>'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.' That is the first enduring image of this Prime Minister. The second one is of course the political marriage of convenience that we saw consummated in the signing ceremony and the smiling photograph of the Prime Minister, Senator Bob Brown and the other Greens after the election, after she did a deal, becoming beholden to the Greens, in order to retain the keys to the Lodge. That is the second enduring image of this government. The third image was of course played out yesterday: the arrogance and hubris of this government when those on that side stood up and applauded themselves and kissed each other and patted each other on the back for implementing a measure which is going to hit the livelihood of every person in this country.</p>
  • <p>What we have seen this week is 72 members of this minority government betray Australian families, and I tell you what: we will remind the constituents of each of those 72 members from this day until whenever the next election is called that those members betrayed the interests of ordinary Australian families simply in order to preserve their own interests and preserve their positions on the treasury benches in this chamber, remaining beholden to Bob Brown and the Greens in this place. Then, to add insult to injury, we had that clapping and cheering carry-on from them yesterday&#8212;even the Judas kiss from the foreign minister to the Prime Minister. I will wait and see how that plays out in coming days!</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Luke Simpkins</p>
  • <p>Were there 30 pieces of silver?</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Kevin Andrews</p>
  • <p>I am not sure whether or not there were 30 pieces of silver, but it certainly brought up images of another occasion on which a famous kiss was given.</p>
  • <p>We know that the Greens are not interested in ordinary Australian families. If you look at the whole range of measures that they put up to this parliament, you can see they are contrary, they are antithetical, to the interests of Australian families. Protecting the environment comes before protecting Australian families, as far as the Greens are concerned. The tragedy for Australians is that we have these measures because we have a minority government which is totally beholden to Bob Brown and the rest of the Greens. Was this something that was being proposed by the government prior to the last election?</p>
  • <p class="italic">Opposition members: No!</p>
  • <p>No. It was ruled out. Then, after the election, in order to retain government, the Prime Minister signed up to this deal with Senator Bob Brown.</p>
  • <p>This carbon tax is going to hurt Australian families; there is no doubt about that. I would just like to take the chamber through some instances of real people in this country who are going to be hurt by this measure. Now, these are not my constructions; I did not create these scenarios. These are taken from the government's own material. This is what the government is saying about the effect and impact of this particular tax. These are real people, like Melbourne couple Kirsten and Julian Finger. Kirsten is a qualified paramedic and Julian is a registered nurse. They have one child who is under four years of age and they are expecting a second child. They are a pretty typical Australian family, with two people in the workforce and two kids&#8212;one under four, one on the way. We are talking about ordinary Australian families that could be in any of our electorates right around this country. And what is the impact on them? They will be approximately $200 a year worse off under the government's carbon tax, based on the government's own online carbon tax estimator. If we go to the online estimator which the government has put up on the web and put in these figures, what do we find? After all the compensation that the government talks about, this ordinary, typical Australian couple are going to be $200 a year worse off.</p>
  • <p>Let me take another example, that of a police sergeant earning $80,000 a year, married to a clinic nurse earning about $80,000 a year, with two children, one five and the other six years of age&#8212;again, what I would call a relatively typical Australian family: two parents, two incomes and two kids, who in this case are in primary school. They will face a cost-of-living impact of $859 a year but receive compensation of only $31. That is $859 worth of additional costs offset by what? A measly $31. The family will be $828 worse off because of this government's tax. Let me take a third example, that of a storeman earning $38,500 a year who is married to a part-time retail assistant earning $16,500 a year and this couple has no children. The storeman's wage is not huge by any stretch of the imagination and nor is that of the part-time retail assistant by the measure of incomes in Australia; a lot of Australians are in this situation but they are hardly wealthy. This couple will have a cost-of-living increase of $440 a year, according to the government's own calculations. What compensation will they receive? They will get just $303 in compensation. Again, this is a relatively low-income working couple who are going to be $137 a year worse off under this government's carbon tax.</p>
  • <p>Yet we have the Prime Minister day after day when asked about the impact on these sorts of Australian families just laughing it off&#8212;giggling it off is perhaps a better description. She says: 'Don't worry about that; people are going to be better off.' The reality is in the government's own calculations. Do not trust my word for it; go to the website this government has put in place and do the calculations. You will find that, in situations like these, people are going to be worse off.</p>
  • <p>Take the situation of a single mother with two children aged three and 12 and who is working as a nurse earning about $80,000 a year. She will face a cost-of-living increase of $514 a year and yet the compensation she will receive is only $445 a year. She is going to be $69 a year worse off under the carbon tax. We have the government pretending all Australians are somehow going to be better off because of these changes. The reality is, as these examples illustrate, tens of thousands of Australians are going to be worse off because of this taxation proposals.</p>
  • <p>Let us consider an electrician earning $75,000 a year who is married to a stay-at-home mum and they have one child under five years of age. Again, this is a typical family constellation in Australia. They will face an increase of $491 a year, but they will only get compensation of $409 a year. This family with one person in the workforce and mum at home with a kid is going to be $82 worse off as a result of these proposals.</p>
  • <p>It is not just families who are affected. Consider an occupational therapist earning $80,000 a year who is single and without children. This person will face a cost-of-living increase of $441 a year, but receive just $16 by way of compensation.</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Stuart Robert</p>
  • <p>That's an insult.</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Kevin Andrews</p>
  • <p>That's right, an insult. That person will be $425 a year worse off as a result of this government's great big new carbon tax. We know that 52 per cent of households in Western Australia, for example, will be worse off under this carbon tax.</p>
  • <p>This is coming at the worst time of all so far as Australian families are concerned. We know that no other country in the world is doing this. We are racing ahead of the rest of the world to the great competitive disadvantage of Australia. It is coming at a time when Australians are already facing increased cost-of-living pressures so far as their lifestyles are concerned. From the December quarter of 2007, when the Labor Party was elected to government in Australia, until the March quarter of this year&#8212;so measuring their term in office&#8212;what has happened so far as the cost of living is concerned? Electricity prices have gone up by a whopping 51 per cent on average across Australia. Gas prices have increased by an average 30 per cent. Water and sewerage rates have increased by an average 46 per cent. Health costs&#8212;that is, things like hospital, optical, dental, pharmaceutical costs&#8212;have gone up by an average 20 per cent across Australia. Education costs, school fees and other incidentals related to education and schooling, have increased on average by 24 per cent since 2007.</p>
  • <p>Interest rates have increased seven times since September 2009, increasing repayments on the average mortgage by over $500 a month in a little under 18 months. On top of these, we know that the costs of all sorts of other things have gone up. The price of bread&#8212;one of the staples of life for any family or any individual, for that matter&#8212;is up by 11 per cent. The cost of food overall is up by 13 per cent. The cost of fruit has gone up by 28 per cent. The amount of rent that people are now paying has increased by 20 per cent.</p>
  • <p>I cannot think of a worse time to introduce a carbon tax in terms of the impact that it is going to have on the cost of living of Australians and their job prospects and the job prospects of their children. That is the great tragedy of it. We have an out-of-touch government hell-bent on simply continuing the deal it has done with Bob Brown and the Greens. That is going to lead to ruination of not just this country but the standards of living of so many Australian families.</p>
  • <p>Let me remind you what a carbon tax means. It means a $9 billion a year tax. It means a 10 per cent hike in electricity prices in the first year alone. It means a nine per cent increase in gas bills in the first year alone. You will see higher marginal tax rates for many low- and middle-income earners. Of course, there is a $4.3 billion hit on the budget bottom line which will see every Australian slugged over $40,000 over the coming decades. That is the equivalent of a whole year's work for many Australians who are going to be paying year after year after year for Labor's broken promise. On top of that we have a $515 a year hit on the cost of living and that is just for starters under this great big new tax which is being introduced by the Labor Party.</p>
  • <p>What we have is a Prime Minister who has lost the trust of the families of Australia. There is one thing that a government cannot lose. It can lose all sorts of things and it can be unpopular for a time, but when the bond of trust between the people of the nation and the Prime Minister, in particular, and the government is destroyed then it will not be regained. That is why people have given up listening to this Prime Minister. That is why when you go around the electorates of this nation, people explain their great frustration about what is going on in this place at the present time. Promising commitments with no intention of honouring them is the greatest measure of all of distrust and that is what we have seen from this Prime Minister. Of course, now we have the foreign minister stalking, the backbench in disarray, the government in denial and this leaves the country without any real leadership for the future at a time when we need it.</p>
  • <p>At a time when the cost of living is increasing significantly in Australia, when the international financial situation is in crisis, when Australians are concerned about their job security&#8212;for example, we have seen 54,000 jobs lost in manufacturing alone in the last year, and we know that nine out of 10 workers in the manufacturing industry are not going to be in businesses that get one cent of compensation&#8212;so far as this tax is concerned we have a complete lack of direction from this government. We have a Prime Minister who is no longer focused on the concerns of Australian families. She is focused simply on her survival and whether or not the faceless men will do what they did to her predecessor and remove her at sometime in the future. What we have is a disjointed, dysfunctional disarray that pretends to be a government in Australia&#8212;they should do the decent and honourable thing and call an election.</p>
  • <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>