Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Wills for his question. The Rudd government is committed to a prudent and responsible course of action for addressing the challenges of the future, and that includes a significant implementation of substantial energy efficiency measures as part of the Nation Building and Jobs Plan. Critically, that also means bringing through the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme to begin reducing Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions at least cost as we address the significant challenge of climate change with a $4 billion investment in Energy Efficient Homes, a package that is already supporting jobs and that has supported jobs since the day it was announced—3 February—and there is more to come.

The opposition blocked this plan and, in doing so, they were blocking ready-to-go jobs. But, unlike the opposition, Australia’s insulation and solar hot water industries were on the starting blocks ready to go. The Prime Minister has referred in question time to the CEO of the Insulation Council of Australia and New Zealand, who has said:

Making energy efficient homes more affordable and accessible to all Australians is vital for the prosperity of our industry and has far reaching flow-on benefits for Australia.

The fact is that installation and distribution provide the biggest intensive labour application for installing insulation in the ceilings of homes. This was the package that the opposition blocked, and they continue to run it down.

Energy efficiency remains a key plank in the government’s overall approach to addressing climate change. It is an approach that is built around a consistent and coherent policy position. When we look to the opposition, they seem to have fractured into a coalition with about six or seven positions on one aspect of dealing with climate change, the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. They are contradicting one another, they are contradicting themselves. I note that the opposition leader, who started off supporting emissions trading, as recently as 15 December described the government’s emission reduction targets as ‘a very significant cut’. He said:

I wouldn’t be misled by the fact that five per cent, for example, looks like a low number.

I note that some commentators have picked up on the fact that on the 23rd of this month he said that the CPRS would be ‘an ineffectual scheme’ because the cut in emissions is going to be very low. So he has gone from ‘very significant’ to ‘very low’ in two months.

Then there is the opposition spokesman on emissions trading, the member for Goldstein. He has a famous view on climate change, given that he regards it as a communist conspiracy. Who could forget his remarks in 2006 that climate change was:

… a leftist fad that will divert resources away from other more needy areas of the economy.

After the fall of communism, it [global warming] has become a cause celebre for the left.

More recently, only on 19 February, the member for Goldstein was floating the idea of a carbon tax.

See this speech in context