Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Moreton for his question. Of course, the foundation for a genuine climate change policy is respect for the science, and mainstream scientists are telling all governments internationally that carbon pollution is contributing to warming, and that is related to climate change. The fact of the matter is that the science is overwhelming, and the Australian government respects the science.

There is an interesting opinion piece in today’s Australian by John Gummer, a former member of Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet, which said the following:

… in Britain, scepticism is confined to the extremes. The political parties embracing it are way out on the edge of the spectrum with views on most other matters that few of us would embrace.

That is an interesting contribution. One wonders what Mr Gummer would have to say about the comments of the Leader of the Opposition a short period, a week or so, ago in Perth, when he said:

I don’t think we can say that the science is settled here.

…            …            …

… whether carbon dioxide is quite the environmental villain that some people make it out to be is not yet proven.

Of course, what we have here is someone who does not respect the science, who is a sceptic about it, who is a denier of the scientific evidence—but who wishes, for politically opportune reasons, to be respected on some level and so rushes out a day or two after making these comments to confirm that he does in fact respect the science. He has had so many different positions on this that it is completely confusing. One day he denies the science, the next day he says it is credible and the next day he takes something off the One Nation website. First he listens to Senator Minchin, and then he pays attention to Senator Bernardi. As the member for Wentworth said about the Leader of the Opposition, on this issue he is a weather vane. Of course, many Australians disagree with Mr Abbott. They accept the science, they respect it and they want action on climate change.

There has been plenty of public debate and assessment of opinion about these issues recently. One poll, led by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member for Curtin, is particularly interesting. On her website last Wednesday night, in answer to the question, ‘Do you support a carbon tax or not?’, 76.6 per cent of respondents poll strongly supported a carbon tax. That was by about 11 o’clock at night. Within 20 minutes—I think after a staffer or someone had had a look at the website—a couple of thousand new entries had been made, bringing the issue back into some balance, and that was immediately followed by the closure of the poll and the website.

This is the quality of contribution that comes from those opposite on all of these issues. Mr Gummer is right to say that those denying the science and opposing action on climate change are at the edge of the political spectrum. Across Europe, mainstream parties on the left and right of politics all respect the science and all support tackling climate change; they do not dodgy up polls about the issues. The coalition’s position on this issue is the crudest opportunism that one could imagine on this issue. Across the world governments respect the science, but not this coalition led by the Leader of the Opposition. The responsible position in the national interest of this country is to respect the science and have a credible response to it, something that this leader of the opposition lacks.

See this speech in context