House debates
Tuesday, 22 June 2010
Building Energy Efficiency Disclosure Bill 2010
Second Reading
6:52 pm
Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Hansard source
The purpose of the Building Energy Efficiency Disclosure Bill 2010 is to create a national scheme requiring disclosure of information about the energy efficiency of large-scale commercial office spaces when offered or advertised for sale, lease or sublease. The scheme provides that corporations must not offer to sell, lease or sublease premises without a building energy efficiency certificate. Corporations must not advertise premises without a valid and current energy efficiency rating. This is all very nice, but I look at the Queensland government and I ask myself: how in heaven’s name could they have gone from spending $8,000 million—which we spent in 1990 when our government fell—to spending $42,000 million? Here is your answer—the BEEC. I thought it was not a bad idea that we give a guarantee on buildings in Queensland, and we were assured that the government guarantee would mean that if there was a shonky building the money would be put aside and the guarantee scheme would be accessed. I thought the government guarantee scheme on all new buildings in Queensland was a good idea.
Arguably, 25 per cent of the cost of a house in Queensland goes in government charges. It is quite extraordinary that once again we are putting a charge on everything: for example, $6,000 for the assessment of office space in Cunnamulla or in my own area in Julia Creek. This is quite ridiculous. In some of these places the office space itself would not be worth $6,000. But, even if it was in the city, don’t you realise that every one of these things costs somebody money? At the end of the day there is only so much money to go around. So, if the Queensland government—to use them as an example because the figures are available to me here—are spending an extra $30,000 million a year, where is it going? It ain’t going on health. Everyone in this place would agree that state governments are not meeting their health requirements. It ain’t going on roads. There is no-one in Australia who would claim that the state governments are spending it on roads. So where the hell is the money going?
The last government increased their spending by over 100 per cent and then had the hide to call themselves a conservative government. A conservative government is where someone like Bjelke-Petersen tells you have two per cent maximum growth in your budget and that is it—‘Don’t whinge, don’t complain and don’t explain because that is it.’ You had a two per cent increase in your budget and you made do with that. You thought intelligently and you got things done in a different way.
Up to date I have been pretty fascinated by the federal government. They really ask for trouble. In many ways I have found them much more approachable than the last government, and I hope that the representative of the opposition here takes that remark into account. That this government has been much more approachable than the last government has been my experience. Having said that, there has been more hot air in this place over the last three years about carbon emissions, renewables and trading and all of these things than I have ever heard on any other subject in my time in this place or in the state house in Queensland. I have never seen such a concentration on one single issue.
Let us ask ourselves the question: has there been any reduction in carbon emissions in Australia in those three years? No, there has not been the slightest reduction. The government leave themselves open. If I can help the government out and give them a little bit of advice after 36 years as a member of parliament, if you keep talking about it and you do nothing about it then don’t be surprised when the Green vote goes through the roof. If you are saying it is a serious problem, then the answer is the Greens, not you. It was not remotely surprising that I heard some of the biggest ratbags in my public life when I was advocating for the removal of what we call buffel grass, which is an introduced species in North Queensland. I said: ‘That is a great idea. You will probably wipe out about three million kangaroos because there was no grass at all before this grass came along. So, if you believe in wiping out three million kangaroos, it is a good idea. Go right ahead. I don’t know how you’re going to do it. You’re going to send dozers in everywhere, are you?’ This ratbag element is getting a terrific head of steam up. According to the last poll, the ALP will lose two seats, and arguably four, to the Greens. So stop talking about renewables and do something about it. You say you are doing something tonight. No, you are not; you are imposing $6,000.
No comments