Energy Minister Michael O’Brien ignored his own department’s economic modelling on the impact of the federal carbon tax, instead relying on his own calculations to claim Victoria would be hit ”first and hardest”.
Department of Primary Industries secretary Jeff Rosewarne has revealed the department provided Mr O’Brien with ”estimates and projections” on the likely impact of the controversial tax.
But in a letter to Labor rejecting for a second time a freedom of information request, Mr Rosewarne said his department’s calculations were ”different to the figures ultimately published” in a July 2011 media release issued by Mr O’Brien.
”This reflects the inability of the department to influence how the advice of its officers will ultimately be treated by the minister,” the letter says.
”Releasing that advice would also result in potential confusion about how advice received by the minister was considered by him in circumstances where the minister made his views known in the media release.”
The letter raises further doubts about the ”economic modelling” the state government used to attack the tax, which was detailed on the front page of the Herald Sun before its broader release.
Mr O’Brien’s press release, titled ”Julia Gillard duds Victorians again”, claimed the tax ”will see Victorians pay up to an extra $2.5 billion to the Gillard government” and provided a range of cost estimates for different businesses and electricity users. ”This is equivalent to Canberra taking up to $450 from the pocket of each Victorian,” the press release said.
At the time, Mr O’Brien described the calculations as ”economic modelling”, but refused to discuss details of how the calculations had been made.
He also conceded that the figures did not make allowances for the compensation that will be provided to nine out of 10 households.
A spokeswoman for Mr O’Brien said last night the information provided by the department had informed the government’s media release on the potential impact of Labor’s carbon tax on Victorian households and businesses. She said the government had been even more conservative than the department in its assumptions.
”Had the government exclusively used the estimates provided by the department, the estimated cost impact of Labor’s carbon price would have been higher for every category of electricity use than the figures published,” she said.
Opposition energy spokeswoman Lily D’Ambrosio accused Mr O’Brien of ”abusing his own department’s advice to produce dodgy figures” to suit the government’s political agenda. ”Will the minister now admit he misled Victorians by peddling inaccurate figures?” Ms D’Ambrosio said. ”Michael O’Brien will say and do anything for political reasons.”
In his letter, Mr Rosewarne said at the time the department provided its advice to Mr O’Brien on the impact of the tax, the only information available had been a series of media leaks.
The department initially rejected Labor’s FOI request for the documents relevant to the press release on the grounds that the information was not in the public interest and represented ”opinion, advice or recommendation” made during government deliberations.
