Senator WONG (South Australia—Minister for Finance and Deregulation) (14:53): I will seek to answer the parts of that question I can. I will answer what I think was the first part of the question. The question related to pollution being free. I think the economic point is that unless you price pollution there is no incentive to reduce it. It is a very simple economic point: unless you price pollution there is no incentive to reduce it. Currently there is no incentive— Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator Bernardi and Senator Faulkner, it would be very helpful to Senator Joyce— Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: He was not on the phone, I can assure you. Senator Faulkner interjecting— The PRESIDENT: You are now; I will concede that. Senator WONG: I was making the point about price signals that as long as pollution is free there is no incentive to reduce it. I think that is, frankly, self-evident. The whole reason that you put a price on pollution is to give a price signal incentive to business to reduce its pollution and to look to find lower-polluting ways of doing business and to give an incentive to invest in clean energy and in cleaner technologies. We are a very highly carbon-intensive economy. That is as a result of the nature of our economy. That means we have to transition if we agree that we have to reduce pollution. As I recall it, the opposition agree on that. Senator Joyce: Mr President, I rise on a point of order regarding relevance. She seems to be eluding the question. Does she believe that they use electricity in the refining of fuel, or not? The PRESIDENT: Senator Joyce, there is no point of order. It was a far-ranging question. I believe that Senator Wong is addressing the question or questions. Senator Wong, you have 45 seconds remaining. Senator WONG: I was making a point about why we want to try to give an incentive to business to reduce its pollution and to invest in clean energy, cleaner ways of doing business and cleaner goods and services. In relation to price impacts the government has been clear: there is a price impact once you price something that is currently free. That is obvious. The question is: how do you do it, and how do you ensure that you assist Australian households? How do you ensure that you look to lower-income families and how do you provide tax cuts and increases in payments to recognise that price impact? We are up-front about that, Senator Joyce, unlike you who are imposing a tax on Australian families to fund your direct action policy.