Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to speak on this very important bill, the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Bill 2007, in the parliament today in my capacity as the federal member for Ryan—a beautiful part of the western suburbs in Brisbane. I have the great honour of representing the people of that electorate and those suburbs and I will continue to do that with much energy and much enthusiasm. I look forward to working with them in the weeks ahead and discussing some of the very important issues that concern them.

Among those important issues, of course, are the state of our environment and climate change. There is no doubt that climate change is an issue that has captivated the minds of Australians and indeed people around the world. I will state on the record that I have great anxiety about the impact of climate change. It is important that the government does all it can to address the potential impact of climate change on our environment. I know that climate change is something that very deeply concerns the people in my electorate of Ryan. The University of Queensland is in my electorate, and there are many people in my electorate with lots of qualifications and experience in this area. They have given me the benefit of their thoughts and experiences on this issue. There are also many schools in my electorate, and they are well represented by young Australians who think seriously about the future. As a very good local member—I like to think I am, having been re-elected and having increased my majority at the last election—it is very important for me to listen to their concerns. I hosted a school here in the parliament only a few days ago, and very serious policy issues were raised by students about what the government is doing on not just climate change but a whole range of important issues.

But being concerned about problems is not enough. Being concerned about this specific issue of climate change alone is not enough. We need solutions, but we need solutions that are genuine, practical and can work. The Ryan electorate tell me as their local member that what is in the best interests of them as individuals, their families and future generations of Australians as well as the rest of the world is solutions that can work. At the end of the day, this is a global problem and a challenge for not only Australia as one member of the international community but also the rest of the world, and we must all come together as nations of the world to address this problem. That is the only way that a meaningful and substantial impact will be made on this problem. In Australia, we could take initiatives overnight that would mean that we do not have any emissions at all. The global impact of that would be very minimal indeed. That is not to say that we should not do our bit, because, as part of a philosophical approach to problems, we as a country and as individuals must do our bit The Howard government is working very hard in a very practical way to make an impact. I want to address that through talking about this bill.

I thought I might initially in my remarks to the parliament give some examples of emissions from individuals and put some figures to that conduct because I thought it might give some flavour to the challenge we face. For example, every year the average Australian in driving their vehicle produces 3.78 tonnes of CO₂ emissions. For those of us who have the privilege of taking flights on aeroplanes and have travelled from Australia to Europe, that flight produced the same amount of CO₂ as a vehicle emits in two years. One year of lighting for the average sized home in our country produces some 400 kilos of CO₂ emissions.

For those of us who like Aussie beef—and I certainly count myself as one who very much likes to dine on Australian beef, and I would suggest that many in this parliament also enjoy a good steak—one kilo of beef cooked and ready to eat produces 3.7 kilos of CO₂ emissions. One kilo of prawns produces eight kilos of CO₂ emissions. I know that prawns are very popular amongst Australians, and those who come from Queensland enjoy prawns very much indeed. One bottle of champagne produces 1.7 kilos of CO₂ emissions as well.

So what can we do in Australia? Should we not eat any prawns or beef at all? Should we stop drinking? I am sure that many of those who sit opposite enjoy a fine glass of champagne. The hardcore greens, extremists and radicals in our society and in political parties might call for such absurd action as banning all dining on prawns and beef. I am sure that some even think that we should not even hop on aeroplanes. That is the extreme view of the world that some would take—but that would be going back to the Dark Ages. We are not going to destroy our coal industry. We are not going to eat only vegetables. We have to be realistic about what we can do. We have to be practical and pragmatic.

I am certainly very critical of the Leader of the Greens, Senator Bob Brown, who, as many will know, flagged the idea of destroying our $25 billion coal industry pretty much overnight by closing it down. Of course, that would render obsolete some 30,000 jobs. I would like to think that the wiser heads in the Labor Party do not support that kind of very hardcore dark-green philosophy—which is the way I would label it. We need to be smart in how we approach this problem. The effect of climate change is potentially very damaging to our world, so we have to come together in a very strategic fashion to address this problem not only locally but also globally. But we are not in the business of saying, ‘Damn our economy. Damn jobs. Damn the economic security of Australians who work in industries which are critical to the economic prosperity of our country.’ We are not in the business of accepting environmental vandalism and environmental extremism. All those who claim that that could be a solution really should hang their heads in shame.

The Howard government offers a number of very practical solutions. One that I am very supportive of is the $1,000 rebate for solar hot water systems. We have also heard about the replacement of inefficient light bulbs with energy-efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs and the offer of $50,000 green vouchers to schools to improve their energy efficiency. I want to pay tribute to my wife here because, long before it became fashionable, she changed all the light bulbs in our home. So, as a good husband, I want to pay tribute to the boss in the house. She made sure that, in our small way, we made our contribution on this very important issue.

I want to talk a little about the green vouchers for schools. The Australian government has offered some $50,000 for every school in the country to install hot water systems and rainwater tanks to improve energy and water efficiency. All Australian primary and secondary schools are eligible for this funding. Rainwater tanks above 10,000 litres capacity and solar hot water systems, along with their associated infrastructure and fittings, can be purchased with this grant. This will cost the Australian taxpayer some $336-plus million. It is something which I will encourage all the schools in the Ryan electorate to take up.

I have already approached school principals to let them know about this. Some have been very receptive and very enthusiastic. At those who have been less than enthusiastic, I express my astonishment. I express my dismay that some principals would try to remain at arm’s length from my overtures in promoting this wonderful Australian government policy which really does make a difference. I say to those principals: ‘Get off your backsides and promote this policy amongst the P&Cs and amongst the school community, because this is good for the schools, good for the kids in terms of their education and of course will make a real impact. Take the politics out of it. This is something that is making a difference. Put your politics aside.’ The fact is that I, as a federal member, will make phone calls to schools to draw this green voucher to their attention. It is important that this voucher is acknowledged as one tool in the toolkit for addressing climate change. I regret very much that time is getting away from me. I will return to the very important broader topic of this bill, rather than focusing only on this very good initiative of green vouchers for schools.

The Australian government has invested $26.1 million to establish a new greenhouse and energy reporting system under this bill. For the first time this will create a national reporting scheme for business and industry. Under the current arrangements, hundreds of Australian corporations must issue multiple reports, using the same data, to each state and territory in which they operate. Needless to say, this is an inefficient and wasteful arrangement, given that each state and territory has different legislation and different reports must be produced. This bill supersedes the patchwork of separate state and territory reporting arrangements, cutting red tape and drastically reducing the costs of duplication, which are estimated at some $1.7 million. It establishes a single national framework for reporting greenhouse emissions and abatement actions by businesses from 1 July 2008.

The reporting scheme will improve the data so that it covers over 70 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions in those sectors covered by the analysis, compared with the current coverage of 61 per cent. This will streamline the reporting of data into one organisation which will use it as the basis for informing the Australian emissions trading system. The new statutory position of a greenhouse and energy data officer will be created under this bill to oversee and administer the scheme. The robust reported data will allow informed decisions to be made on the Australian emissions trading scheme, rather than the uninformed blanket carbon targets set by the opposition, which are really pie-in-the-sky targets and bear no relation to reality at all. So this robust reporting data that will allow informed decision making is very important.

The bill makes it mandatory for businesses which exceed the appropriate thresholds to annually report their greenhouse gas emissions and energy use. The thresholds for the scheme have been set at a level which will capture a significant proportion of Australia’s emissions. However, at the same time the bill remains small business friendly, as no report is necessary for those businesses which do not exceed the thresholds. The thresholds at which companies will be obliged to register and report will be phased in over three years from 2008, which will allow businesses which currently do not report under the existing patchwork scheme to prepare for the new, nationally consistent scheme. In order to ensure that a national reporting system can obtain information from the state and territory governments, the bill establishes data security and confidentiality protection arrangements.

This bill, as I have already indicated, is the foundation for the Australian emissions trading scheme, which will be a very comprehensive scheme that I think we can be very proud of. This world-leading scheme includes all large emitters, industrial energy and mining emissions and transport and other fuels emissions, which covers some 70 to 75 per cent of Australia’s total emissions.

The trading scheme is a key initiative of the Australian government to combat climate change in a very practical but still pro-business, pro-investment and pro-growth manner. The trading scheme will, of course, rely on confidence in the market. This bill provides the basis of that confidence via its rigorous compliance and enforcement arrangements. The creation of the Australian emissions trading scheme will allow for the market to price carbon, allowing companies to take into account externalities. For instance, coal is currently a very cheap source of energy because the negative externalities—namely greenhouse gases—are not borne by the producer. If the market sets an appropriate price then the impetus for the coal industry to invest in new clean coal technology will be there all the more. It will make clean and renewable technology more competitive, as the start-up costs are usually higher, although there are very few externalities. The Australian emissions trading scheme will also take into account offsets: certified emissions abatement from activities outside the trading scheme, such as reforestation in Australia or in other nations.

On the setting of carbon prices, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth report makes it clear that climate change is a very serious problem; however, our challenge is to manage this serious global challenge with as few economic consequences as possible. That is the clear distinction between the two sides of politics in this country. We think we can make a major impact without damaging our economy—without damaging jobs or industries that clearly provide economic sustenance to the people of Australia. I think we are going about this in a realistic fashion, whereas the opposition are just trying to be idealistic. Of course, they are in opposition, so they can make comments and throw out statements without any consequence whatsoever, but I think that once one is in government one realises that one cannot be so irresponsible.

One of the suggestions is to price carbon and other greenhouse emissions, which is what the Australian government’s trading scheme seeks to do. By allowing the market to price greenhouse gas emissions, as opposed to government taxes, it will allow flexibility in the market for quicker reductions in emissions. Those businesses or industries which are better able to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions can sell their permits to firms or industries, such as the coal industry—which we must acknowledge will take longer to adjust—without any detrimental impact on both the industry and the overall economy.

I would like to remark on a couple of points concerning my electorate, Ryan, that are relevant to the renewable energy industry—a $5 billion industry in Australia that is clearly going to grow in the years ahead. I want to pay tribute to a handful of Ryan constituents who are making an impact in their own way. Mr Murray Craig of Solar Centre in the Ryan electorate very generously donated a solar hot water panel, valued at some $3,500, to the Jamboree school fete that was held several weeks ago. I was pleased to be able to make the presentation to another Ryan resident who had the good fortune of winning that solar panel. I want to pay tribute to Mr Craig’s spirit of community in the Ryan electorate and his support of the school. Being a resident of the Ryan electorate, he gave the school a solar panel from his business. I am sure that solar panel was well received by the winner and the school appreciated the purchase of the tickets for the prize.

I had the privilege of launching a small business called BFA Solar, established by Dane Muldoon and his father, John Muldoon. They set up this business to become part of the solution, in a sense, by offering solar. It is another business that, I guess, is a competitor to Murray Craig of Solar Centre, but BFA Solar are also going gang busters with their solar product.

I regret very much that time is getting away from me. I just want to finish up on the point about this being a global issue. We in Australia emit some 1.8 per cent of emissions. I think it is important to keep this in perspective. I know that a lot of people get very excited about this issue and that they think that if we end all our emissions we will save the world. Let us just note the contribution of the big nations of the world. A powerful country such as the United States makes a contribution to emissions of 24 per cent, followed by China, with some 14 per cent. Both countries are, of course, members of APEC. India is not a member of APEC, but its contribution to global emissions is some 4.2 per cent. Russia’s contribution is even more, at 6½ per cent. Developing countries will account for almost 70 per cent of carbon by 2050 and we must come to a result that is global in nature.

In Australia, it would be wonderful if we could press a button or flick a switch overnight and all our emissions would disappear without compromising our economy and our prosperity. I remind the good people of Ryan who have very kindly approached me that we are one player in the world. It requires all players to come together. Of course, better technology will be a big part of the solution. I am a strong supporter of solar technology and all the options, including wind and biomass. I am a big supporter of nuclear as well. I praise the British government and the new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, for putting nuclear on the table. We cannot just bury our heads like ostriches and automatically take away one tool in the kit. I commend this bill very strongly to the parliament. (Time expired)

See this speech in context