Ian Macfarlane (Groom, Liberal Party, Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources) Share this | Hansard source

The member for Dawson is opposing that and supporting the people in her electorate who derive an income from the coal industry and the steel industry. The people who are going to fix this are those in the Howard government. The reality is that the government is doing something about lowering emissions in Australia. The government agrees that there are real issues to be dealt with and there are real challenges to be overcome. But who has laid out the clear, well-enunciated strategy on dealing with this?

We get more from the opposition. Yesterday, the member for Grayndler sat in his seat—continually interjecting as he always does—and pointing the finger and saying that we, the government, are doing nothing. What sort of suggestion is that? What sort of suggestion can ignore the energy white paper handed down in June 2004—more than two years ago—which is a clearly enunciated policy, or ignore the fact that Australia has seen 58 per cent economic growth while at the same time the government has put in place emission-lowering policies which have seen emissions rise by only 2.3 per cent? By any measure, this white paper and the government actions that go with it are extensive responses to the lowering of greenhouse gas emissions.

In our suite of programs there is a $123 million expansion and extension of the Renewable Remote Power Generation Program, a $100 million Renewable Energy Development Initiative, a $75 million Solar Cities program, a $51.8 million Photovoltaic Rebate Program, a $20 million advanced electricity storage initiative and a $14 million advanced wind-forecasting capability. Coming after this and on top of all of those things is the centrepiece: a $500 million Low Emissions Technology Demonstration Fund. When you add that all up, you are approaching $1 billion. If you add to that the specific programs run out of the Department of the Environment and Heritage by my colleague Senator Ian Campbell, that brings you to almost $2 billion. The Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate is a partnership which could do more—in fact, 26 times more—to lower greenhouse gas emissions than Kyoto; modelled by ABARE, the AP6 approach could in fact see global emissions reduced by up to 26 per cent by 2050.

This is about a partnership. It is about involving the large emitters of the world. It is about involving countries like the United States. It is about involving countries like China. It is about involving countries like India. It is about involving countries like Japan and Korea. With those countries, Australia has not only a very strong and important role to play but also a trade relationship that it needs to be mindful of. We are in a situation where the Labor Party are trying to claim some sort of inaction by the government, and yet here you have $2 billion worth of policies costed, announced in the budget, backed up by a white paper, backed up by the conference that we saw at the beginning of this year, the Asia-Pacific partnership. These are real programs achieving real gains in reducing emissions while the Labor Party cling like men at sea on a life raft to Kyoto. If we are going to have a meaningful answer to global emissions, we need to have the technology to do it.

The second mistruth promoted by the Labor Party is that we have somehow fallen behind in technology. We have lost a decade or more, they say, in lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Let us just get a few facts on the table in this regard. Australia has double the renewable energy percentage that the United Kingdom has—as admitted this morning by David Miliband on AM. Our percentage of renewable energy is eight per cent. On the UK’s percentage, David Miliband admitted on AM this morning:

... our current level is four per cent, so you can draw your own conclusions.

Secondly, in terms of the meetings that Australia is having at the moment, countries like the UK and including—

See this speech in context