Allens Arthur Robinson

• Introduction
• All recent publications
• Climate Change publications
• Climate Change services

Focus: CPRS legislation introduced into Parliament

19 May 2009

In brief: The Federal Government has introduced into Parliament legislation to implement its proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. The legislation as introduced has been modified in a number of respects from the exposure draft legislation that was released in March. Partner Grant Anderson (view CV) reports.

• Background
• Targets
• Delay in CPRS commencement
• Transitional price cap
• Intragroup transfer of CPRS liabilities
• Transfer of CPRS liabilities to financial controller
• Supply of fossil fuels and the obligation transfer number scheme
• Emissions-intensive trade-exposed activities
• Landfill facilities
• Other changes
• Voluntary emissions reductions
• Funding initiatives
• The next step

Background

On 10 March 2009 the Federal Government released exposure draft legislation to implement its proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS). This legislation closely mirrored the proposals that were put forward by the Government in its December 2008 White Paper and that are summarised in the nine-article series that is available on the Climate Change publications section of our website. Following intensive consultations with stakeholders and the report of the Senate Standing Committee on Economics, the Government announced a number of changes to the CPRS legislation on 4 May 2009 and also included some climate change-related initiatives in the Federal budget that was handed down on 12 May 2009.

The Federal Government has now introduced its CPRS Bill into Parliament, where it faces an uncertain future in the Senate. Despite announcing a delay in the commencement of the CPRS from 1 July 2010 to 1 July 2011, the Government is pressing ahead with its timetable to have the legislation passed in this Parliamentary session so as to provide certainty to industry¹ and to enable the Government to attend the Copenhagen meeting in December this year with a finalised scheme. However, the Government does not control the Senate, which is now due to receive a report on the CPRS from its Select Committee on Climate Policy on 15 June 2009, and the non-Government parties in the Senate have already expressed considerable reservations about the Government's scheme, even with the newly announced changes.² Moreover, the Government will also face the challenge of delivering its household assistance package in circumstances where, due to some of the changes the Government has made to the CPRS, its auction revenue for 2011-12 will fall from $12 billion to $4.5 billion.

This article examines the principal differences between the Government's exposure draft legislation and the CPRS Bill as introduced into Parliament.

Targets

One of the stated objects of the exposure draft CPRS legislation was to take action to meet Australia's targets of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to between 5 and 15 per cent below 2000 levels by 2020, and to 60 per cent below 2000 levels by 2050. The CPRS Bill amends these targets in two ways.³

First, the CPRS Bill clarifies that the targets are expressed in terms of net greenhouse gas emissions (ie inclusive of emissions reductions purchased from overseas) and are to be calculated in accordance with the Kyoto Protocol or any successor international climate change agreement.

Second, consistent with the Federal Government's 4 May 2009 announcement, the CPRS Bill now includes an additional object – namely, to take action to meet Australia's target of reducing net greenhouse gas emissions to 25 per cent below 2000 levels by 2020 'if Australia is a party to a comprehensive international agreement that is capable of stabilising atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases at around 450 parts per million of carbon dioxide equivalence or lower'. While the CPRS Bill does not specify the elements that an international agreement must satisfy for this purpose, the Federal Government has previously stated that such an agreement must include:⁴

• comprehensive coverage of gases, sources and sectors (including avoided deforestation);
• a global emissions trajectory that peaks by 2020;
• a commitment by 'advanced economies' (ie Annex I countries, such as the United States, Europe, Russia, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, and non-Annex I high/middle income countries such as Singapore) to reduce their aggregate emissions by at least 25 per cent below 1990 levels⁵ by 2020;
• a commitment by 'major developing economies' (ie non-Annex I countries that are members of the Major Economies Forum, such as China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Korea, Mexico and South Africa) to reduce their aggregate emissions by at least 20 per cent below business-as-usual levels by 2020 and to each nominate a peak emissions year; and
• the development of fully functional global carbon markets.

At this stage, it seems highly unlikely that an international agreement that meets these criteria will be agreed to in the short term. In any event, a 25 per cent reduction target would not necessarily be reflected in proportionately tighter annual caps under the CPRS. The targets set out in the CPRS Bill are national emissions reduction targets, which are intended to be achieved through a combination of measures that include not just the CPRS but also the expanded renewable energy target and increased energy efficiency. Indeed, the Government has indicated that after 2015 it might meet up to 5 percentage points of the 25 per cent target by purchasing international credits (such as avoided deforestation credits) using revenue raised from the auctioning of Australian emissions units (AEUs).

Delay in CPRS commencement

On 4 May 2009, the Federal Government announced that the commencement of the operation of the CPRS would be delayed from 1 July 2010 to 1 July 2011, ostensibly to enable the economy to substantially recover from the current global financial crisis before imposing a carbon price.⁶  The CPRS Bill not only gives effect to this announcement but also includes a number of consequential changes, eg there is now time for the Australian Climate Change Regulatory Authority (ACCRA), instead of the Minister, to make the rules for the auctioning of all AEUs, including the pre 1 July 2011 auctions.⁷ Notwithstanding the delayed commencement of the CPRS, AEUs that represent forestry sequestration will still be able to be generated in respect of sequestration that occurs from 1 July 2010 (rather than only from the commencement of operation of the CPRS).⁸

Transitional price cap

A further initiative of the Government, which has been included in the CPRS Bill and is designed to ameliorate the impact of the carbon price on the Australian economy as it recovers from the financial crisis, is the treatment of 2012 vintage AEUs (ie AEUs issued for the first year of the CPRS). Only two categories of recipients will be entitled to receive these kinds of AEUs.

The first category of recipients is liable entities, who will be able to purchase an unlimited number of 2012 vintage AEUs from ACCRA at $10 per AEU to satisfy their CPRS liabilities for the 2011-12 year. These AEUs, which will be made available between the end of the 2011-12 year and 15 December 2012 (the final surrender date for the 2011-12 year), will be automatically surrendered to satisfy those liabilities and so cannot be either traded or banked.⁹ 

The second category of recipients is entities that are allocated free AEUs under the emissions-intensive trade-exposed (EITE) assistance program or the coal-fired electricity generation transitional assistance scheme. These free AEUs may include 2012 vintage AEUs but, because it is necessary to ensure that those AEUs do not prejudice the integrity of subsequent year CPRS caps, they must be cancelled if they are not surrendered to meet a CPRS liability by 15 December 2012. Because the absence of a secondary market for such AEUs renders them potentially worthless in the hands of a recipient who does not require them to meet a CPRS liability (at least unless the recipient is prepared to sell them for less than their assumed $10 value), ACCRA must buy them back from such recipients at a discounted $10 per AEU price if requested to do so before 1 December 2012.¹⁰ Conversely, 2012 vintage AEUs cannot be issued for forestry sequestration (2013 plus vintage AEUs will be issued instead) although, curiously, they could potentially be issued for the destruction of synthetic greenhouse gases.¹¹ 

Other consequences of the issue of these $10 2012 vintage AEUs are that there will be no scheme cap for the 2011-12 year, the unit shortfall penalty for 2011-12 will be $11 per AEU, Kyoto units will not be able to be used to acquit CPRS liabilities for the 2011-12 year, the significant holding notification provisions do not apply to 2012 vintage AEUs, and 2012 vintage AEUs will not be able to be voluntarily surrendered.¹²  And although the $10 fixed price for 2012 vintage AEUs will potentially delay trading in AEUs, this will only be temporary.

For the following four years (2012-13 to 2015-16), the Government's previously proposed price cap will apply under which liable entities will be able to acquire AEUs at an indexed amount (CPI+5 per cent) of $40 per AEU to meet their CPRS liabilities for those years.¹³ While this price cap does not currently extend to years after 2015-16, one of the matters that is to be reviewed every five years by an expert advisory committee is the need for a price cap.¹⁴

Intragroup transfer of CPRS liabilities

Both the exposure draft legislation and the CPRS Bill enable a subsidiary in a corporate group that has operational control over a facility to take a transfer from the controlling corporation of the CPRS liability associated with that facility.¹⁵ The commentary accompanying the exposure draft legislation stated that a purpose of this mechanism was to address the situation 'where placing Scheme obligations on the controlling corporation would significantly impair the ability of... a member of [the controlling corporation's] group... to pass through carbon costs in existing contracts and convey efficient price signals to end users'.¹⁶ This situation will most commonly arise where it is the subsidiary (rather than the controlling corporation) that is the counterparty to a contract for the sale of the facility's output and the contract contains a change-in-law cost-passthrough provision.

Unfortunately the proposed mechanism is unlikely to enable this purpose to be realised. This is because a change-in-law provision will typically only permit the pass through of costs that the subsidiary incurs 'as a result' of a change in law. However, the liability transfer permitted by the CPRS Bill will only occur if the subsidiary applies for a liability transfer certificate from ACCRA, in which case the subsidiary will not be incurring the liability as a result of a change in law but as a result of its purely voluntary decision to apply for the certificate.

Another problem with this liability transfer mechanism is that the minority shareholders in a partly owned subsidiary (such as an incorporated joint venture) will have little incentive to agree to the subsidiary assuming a liability that would otherwise be borne by the majority shareholder's group and so, to the extent they have a veto right, they are likely to exercise that right to preclude the subsidiary from applying for a liability transfer certificate. This is so even though (economically speaking) the subsidiary is best placed to manage the facility's emissions and to pass through the associated carbon cost to its customers.

These issues arise because, unlike other emissions trading schemes such as the European Union scheme, the CPRS Bill imposes primary liability not on the entity that has operational control over the emitting facility but on that entity's controlling corporation. The Government's approach in this respect seems to derive largely from the national greenhouse and energy reporting scheme, where reporting liability is imposed on the controlling corporation. However, while it may make administrative sense to consolidate reporting obligations at the controlling corporation level, it does not follow that this approach is appropriate for the imposition of the potentially substantial liabilities that will arise under the CPRS. An alternative solution, which the Government unfortunately seems to have rejected, is for the CPRS Bill to require a subsidiary that has operational control over a facility to apply for a liability transfer certificate unless the controlling corporation otherwise agrees. This would result in the costs associated with the CPRS liability being imposed by law on the subsidiary, thereby enabling it to take advantage of any change in law provision in its sale contracts.

The Government's failure to address these issues has potentially serious implications for the ability of corporate groups to pass through carbon costs to their customers under existing contracts.

Transfer of CPRS liabilities to financial controller

The exposure draft legislation enabled a corporate group member to take a transfer of the CPRS liability associated with a facility where the facility is under the operational control of a non-group member and the corporate group member has 'financial control' over the facility.

The CPRS Bill extends the kinds of entities that may take a transfer of liability in these circumstances,¹⁷ and provides for the controlling corporation of a group member that accepts such a transfer of liability to give a statutory guarantee for the payment of any unit shortfall or late payment penalty.¹⁸ However, the CPRS Bill does not address the issue that there may potentially be more than one entity that has financial control over a facility. This possibility arises because each of the entities on behalf of whom the operator operates the facility under a contract is considered to have financial control over the facility.¹⁹ Indeed, changes made in the CPRS Bill explicitly acknowledge that each member of an unincorporated joint venture or partnership will have financial control over such a facility if they share equally in the economic benefits from the facility.²⁰ There may therefore be considerable uncertainty as to which entity is entitled to assume the CPRS liability for the facility.

Perhaps more fundamentally, the CPRS Bill contemplates that the liability transferee will accept all of the CPRS liability relating to the facility. While the participant in an unincorporated joint venture that has the greatest share of the economic benefits from the facility will be entitled to take a transfer of the CPRS liability from the operator, it is unclear why it would choose to do so, eg it is unclear why a 60 per cent participant would assume 100 per cent of the CPRS liability.

A different issue arises where it is the members of the unincorporated joint venture, rather than an operator, that have operational control over the joint venture's activities. In such a case the joint venturers must nominate one of their number (who is not a foreign person eg a company incorporated outside Australia) as the 'nominated person'. The nominated person will be taken to have operational control over the activities and so it (or its controlling corporation) will bear all of the CPRS liability for those activities. If the joint venturers fail to nominate such a person they will be liable to a civil penalty and will share equally in the CPRS liability for the joint venture's activities.²¹ This is a sub optimal approach as a nominated joint venturer is exposed to the credit risk of the other joint venturers and it may be genuinely difficult for the joint venturers to agree on a nominated person. Moreover, the default position may result in smaller joint venture participants bearing a disproportionate share of the CPRS liability. A better solution would have been to impose CPRS liability on each of the joint venturers in proportion to their joint venture interests.

Supply of fossil fuels and the obligation transfer number scheme

Under the CPRS Bill, producers and importers of untransformed fossil fuel (eg natural gas, liquid petroleum fuel and coal), and the manufacturers of transformed fossil fuel (eg brown coal briquettes, liquefied natural gas and coke oven coke), are liable for the potential greenhouse gas emissions embodied in those products where they supply those products to another person or apply them for their own use. Under the exposure draft legislation the export of fossil fuel other than liquid petroleum fuel was not exempt from this liability. This obvious anomaly has been rectified in the CPRS Bill, but only in so far as the producer or manufacturer supplies that fossil fuel to another person who then exports it.²² A producer or manufacturer which itself exports the fossil fuel does not appear to have the benefit of such an exemption from liability, which seems inappropriate.

The Obligation Transfer Number (OTN) scheme is a mechanism by which importers, producers, manufacturers and resuppliers of fossil fuels can transfer their liability for embodied greenhouse gas emissions to purchasers who quote an OTN. The CPRS Bill contains a number of modifications to the OTN scheme, including removing the distinction between supplies under contracts entered into on or after 1 July 2010 (where the OTN quotation had to be made before the contract was entered into) and supplies under contracts entered into before 1 July 2010 (where the OTN quotation had to be made before 1 July 2010). Under the revised OTN scheme, an OTN holder may make either a 'one-off' quotation in relation to a supply or a 'standing quotation' in relation a class of supplies, which must (in either case) identify whether it is a mandatory or voluntary quotation.²³ Once the quotation is made and acknowledged by the supplier, it cannot be unilaterally withdrawn by the OTN holder (at least in the case of a standing quotation) unless the OTN itself is cancelled or surrendered (in which case the supplier has a seven-day grace period in respect of supplies where it has not been notified of the cancellation or surrender).²⁴

Accordingly, supply contracts where a service or product is supplied over a period of time (eg gas supply agreements)²⁵ will need to include repricing provisions to cater for the possibility that a supply under an OTN (which attracts a carbon exclusive price) may subsequently cease to be a supply under an OTN (and therefore should attract a carbon inclusive price).

Emissions-intensive trade-exposed activities

The CPRS Bill, like the exposure draft legislation, leaves most of the detail of the EITE assistance program to be set out in regulations. However, on 4 May 2009 the Federal Government announced that the levels of assistance for EITE activities would be increased for the first five years of the CPRS (2011-12 to 2015-16), through the incorporation of a 'global recession buffer', to 94.5 per cent (for EITE activities that are eligible for the 90 per cent assistance rate) and 66 per cent (for EITE activities that are eligible for the 60 per cent assistance rate). While the rate of assistance will still decline by 1.3 per cent per year, the Government has also stated that the continuation of this buffer beyond its five-year term 'will be reviewed in light of domestic and international economic conditions and other relevant factors'.²⁶

Landfill facilities

The exposure draft legislation provided a time-limited exemption from CPRS coverage (until 30 June 2018) for greenhouse gases emitted from the operation of landfill facilities to the extent those emissions were attributable to pre 1 July 2008 waste. Under the CPRS Bill this exemption has been broadened so as to provide an absolute exemption for legacy emissions – namely, emissions from landfill facilities that are attributable to pre 1 July 2011 waste.²⁷

In addition, landfill facilities that are closed after 1 July 2008 will be subject to a coverage threshold of 25ktCO₂-epa irrespective of their proximity to other operating landfill facilities²⁸ (under the exposure draft legislation they were potentially subject to a lower threshold of 10ktCO₂-epa for 10 years).

Other changes

The CPRS Bill and associated legislation contains a number of other more minor changes to the exposure draft legislation. These include:

• Provision for the Australian Energy Market Operator (in the case of the National Electricity Market) and the Independent Market Operator (in the case of the West Australian electricity market) to certify, on application by a registered generator, that if there were to be a reduction in nameplate rating or a cessation of registration in respect of a specified generating plant there would be unlikely to be a breach of power system reliability standards at any time within the following two years.²⁹ This will enable generators that are considering reducing the capacity of, or closing down, such plant to do so with some certainty as to whether or not they will continue to be entitled to receive the balance of the free AEUs to which they would otherwise be entitled under the coal-fired electricity generation transitional assistance scheme.
• An extension of the period for applying for a certificate of eligibility for coal-fired electricity generation assistance from 90 to 180 days (and up to a further 30 days at ACCRA's discretion).³⁰
• Considerably more detail as to the matters that must be reviewed by an expert advisory committee in the five yearly reviews of the EITE assistance program.³¹
• The exemption from CPRS liability of supplies of natural gas into a prescribed wholesale market (such as the Victorian wholesale gas market or the proposed short term trading market that will apply to hubs in Sydney and Adelaide) on the basis that it is not possible for a supplier of gas to these markets to determine the purchasers of its gas. Conversely, the resupply of natural gas supplied out of such a market will attract liability.³²
• Provision for ACCRA to extend the final surrender date for AEUs (15 December in any year) where there is a fault or malfunction in ACCRA's computer systems, or in the telecommunications network, that precludes the surrender of AEUs by that time (AEUs only being able to be surrendered electronically).³³
• The removal of ACCRA's power to alter the Australian National Registry of Emissions Units so as to ensure that the registry accurately records the 'legal ownership' of units. This power was problematic because entry into the Registry confers legal title in the units on the relevant account holder and so it is unclear how ACCRA would deal with competing claims of legal ownership. Rectification of the Registry in these circumstances will now be a matter for the Federal Court on application by an aggrieved person or ACCRA.³⁴
• Provisions relating to the transfer (for insolvency and inheritance law purposes) of registered Kyoto and non-Kyoto international emissions units that mirror those that apply to AEUs.³⁵
• Expanded information publication requirements on ACCRA.³⁶
• Recognition of the use of refinery grade propene and ethane (as well as LPG) as a feedstock for the purposes of the mandatory quotation of OTNs.³⁷
• Defining the degree of negligence or recklessness that an executive officer must manifest in relation to a contravention of the CPRS Bill by a body corporate so as to attract personal liability for that contravention³⁸ – these definitions make it clear that only a substantial lapse of judgment will attract such liability. In addition, the provision in the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 (Cth) that exposes the chief executive officer of a corporation to personal liability for a contravention of that Act by the corporation will be replaced with a provision that exposes all the corporation's executive officers to such liability on the same terms as under the CPRS Bill.³⁹
• Capping the daily penalties that apply for most continuing contraventions of the CPRS Bill at 5 per cent of the maximum penalty for the contravention. Under the exposure draft legislation, the daily penalty could be the same as the maximum penalty for the contravention.⁴⁰
• Requiring entities that are liable under the CPRS to be registered under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007.⁴¹
• Expanding the reporting requirements under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 to accommodate the CPRS.

In the CPRS Explanatory Memorandum, the Government also foreshadows a number of amendments that will be proposed to the CPRS Bill during its passage through Parliament.

Voluntary emissions reductions

One issue that has attracted particular attention is the perception that the CPRS reduces the effectiveness of voluntary action to reduce emissions: the imposition of a national emissions cap means that businesses and households that reduce their emissions simply 'free up' AEUs for use by other entities to increase their emissions.⁴² The CPRS Bill merely provides that, in setting the annual CPRS caps, regard 'may' be had to voluntary action to reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.⁴³  However, the Government has indicated that it does intend to take accredited GreenPower purchases above 2009 levels into account in setting the CPRS caps five years into the future.

In addition, the Government has set aside $25.8 million to establish an Energy Efficiency Savings Pledge Fund which will assist small businesses and households to calculate their energy use and potential cost savings, and under which individuals can make tax deductible contributions (eg based on their saved energy costs) that are used to purchase AEUs that are then retired.⁴⁴ However, this does not really address the disincentive effect of the CPRS on individual action: not only will individuals need to pay for their energy-saving initiatives but they will also have to pay for the AEUs that are to be cancelled.

Funding initiatives

Finally, the Federal Government has recently announced some climate change-related funding initiatives. These include:

• the provision of $50 million over five years in seed funding for an Energy Efficiency Trust that will cover the upfront capital costs of businesses undertaking energy efficiency investments, with this amount being repaid (with interest) as energy cost savings are realised;⁴⁵ and
• $2 billion over nine years to assist in the construction of between two and four CCS-fitted coal-fired power stations and $1.5 billion over six years to assist in the construction of up to four large-scale solar projects (the Federal Government will contribute up to one-third of the cost of each plant).

The next step

The CPRS Bill and associated legislation face a rocky path through Parliament, and we will keep you updated as developments occur. If you would like any information relating to the CPRS please contact any one of the people below.

Footnotes

1. The delayed introduction of the CPRS has already reportedly contributed to Bluescope Steel deferring plans for a co-generation plant at Port Kembla that would generate electricity using the greenhouse gases produced by its iron and steel blast furnaces: The Age, 'The dangers of a carbon licence to spill', 11 May 2009.
2. See The Age, 'Climate rethink fails to woo Libs', 5 May 2009; The Australian Financial Review, 'Heat's on coalition to state its climate position', 14 May 2009.
3. CPRS Bill, cl.3(4), (5).
4. Joint Media Release by the Prime Minister, Treasurer and Minister for Climate Change, 'A New Target for Reducing Australia's Carbon Pollution', 4 May 2009; see also CPRS Bill Explanatory Memorandum, pp.15-17.
5. Australia's net greenhouse gas emissions in 1990 (the reference year for the international 2020 target) and 2000 (the reference year for Australia's domestic 2020 target) are reasonably comparable, being 552,648kt (1990) and 552,813kt (2000).
6. Joint Media Release by the Prime Minister, Treasurer and Minister for Climate Change, 'Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme: Support in Managing the Impact of the Global Recession', 4 May 2009.
7. CPRS Bill, cl.103.
8. CPRS Bill, cl.195(3), 209(8).
9. CPRS Bill, cl.89.
10. CPRS Bill, cl.103A, 103B, 129(5A).
11. CPRS Bill, cl.191(2A).
12. CPRS Bill, cl.14(1)(a), 129(6A), 133(1), 282(2A), 293(8), 294(8). There will also presumably be little point in auctioning 2012 vintage AEUs.
13. CPRS Bill, cl.89.
14. CPRS Bill, cl.353(1)(ea).
15. CPRS Bill, cl.69 to 72.
16. par.1.256. The corresponding statement in the CPRS Bill Explanatory Memorandum (par.1.254) is considerably weaker.
17. CPRS Bill, cl.73 to 76.
18. CPRS Bill, cl.138. The exposure draft legislation already provided for a controlling corporation to give such a statutory guarantee where its liability is transferred to a group member.
19. CPRS Bill, cl.81(1)(b).
20. CPRS Bill, cl.81(1)(eb) – (d).
21. CPRS (Consequential Amendments) Bill, new s.11B to be inserted in the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007.
22. CPRS Bill, cl.33(4), 35(4).
23. CPRS Bill, cl.51, 51A, 51B.
24. CPRS Bill, cl.51BA, 51D, 51F, 51G, 64A, 64B; see also s.51C.
25. See CPRS Bill, cl.6.
26. Media Release by the Prime Minister, 'Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme: Support in Managing the Impact of the Global Recession', 4 May 2009.
27. CPRS Bill, cl.20(8), 21(8). However any legacy emissions will still be taken into account in calculating whether a landfill facility meets a liability threshold.
28. CPRS Bill, cl.20(13), 21(13).
29. CPRS Bill, cl.189A, 189B.
30. CPRS Bill, cl.177(1), (8).
31. CPRS Bill, cl.353(h).
32. CPRS Bill, cl.33(fa), 33A; CPRS Bill Explanatory Memorandum, par.1.135.
33. CPRS Bill, cl.143A.
34. CPRS Bill, cl.159.
35. CPRS Bill, cl.278A to 278G.
36. CPRS Bill, cl.122A, 122B.
37. CPRS Bill, cl.55.
38. CPRS Bill, cl.323(2), (3).
39. CPRS (Consequential Amendments) Bill, revised s.47 of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007.
40. CPRS Bill, cl.338(3).
41. CPRS (Consequential Amendments) Bill, new s.15A to be inserted in the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 (see also new ss.15B, 15C, 18A).
42. CPRS Bill, cl.14(5)(c)(iv).
43. CPRS Bill Explanatory Memorandum, par.2.27 (see also pars 2.28 and 2.29 for the possible treatment of other emissions reduction and energy efficiency initiatives).
44. Joint Media Release by the Prime Minister, Treasurer and Minister for Climate Change, 'Helping all Australians do their bit on Climate Change', 4 May 2009.
45. Joint Media Release by the Prime Minister, Treasurer and Minister for Climate Change, 'Helping all Australians do their bit on Climate Change', 4 May 2009.

Published 19 May 2009

For further information, please contact:

• Grant AndersonPartner, Melbourne
  Ph: +61 3 9613 8928
  Grant.Anderson@aar.com.au
• Anna CollyerPartner, Melbourne
  Ph: +61 3 9613 8650
  Anna.Collyer@aar.com.au
• Ben ZillmannPartner, Brisbane
  Ph: +61 7 3334 3538
  Ben.Zillmann@aar.com.au
• Matthew SkinnerPartner, Singapore
  Ph: +65 6535 6622
  Matthew.Skinner@aar.com.au
• Jim ParkerPartner, Sydney
  Ph: +61 2 9230 4362
  Jim.Parker@aar.com.au
• Darren MurphyPartner, Singapore
  Ph: +65 6535 6622
  Darren.Murphy@aar.com.au
• Campbell DavidsonHead of Greater China M&A, Hong Kong
  Ph: +852 2840 1202
  Campbell.Davidson@aar.com.au
• John GreigPartner, Brisbane
  Ph: +61 7 3334 3358
  John.Greig@aar.com.au

Return to top

---

Tweet or bookmark with What are these?