Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am not speaking in opposition to the private member's motion before this place, but not because it injects into the ongoing discussion or negotiations any new ideas or issues, or indeed any creative approaches. It simply iterates some of the state of play regarding the EU ETS and aviation, and it also calls upon the Australian government to take action—and a lot of the action in the private member's motion is action that has already been taken. Particularly, there is point (c)—I have some reservations about that which I shall address in my contribution today.

The private member's motion sets out some actions already taken, as I said, but it does so in scant form. The Australian government's actions in this regard through the responsible minister, the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister Albanese, are that it has undertaken robust advocacy that protects and promotes Australia's interests. I would expect no less from the responsible minister, Minister Albanese. Amongst other things, I would like to have on the record here that the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport met the EU climate change commissioner in Leipzig and made it very clear that Australia does not support the inclusion of international aviation in the EU ETS. Specifically, that was to do with Australia's interests.

Just by way of background to this issue—because it is an issue that the government and the minister are seized of and undertaking very robust advocacy on—the Australian government has made clear its opposition to the European Union's unilateral action on international aviation. It has made it very clear on a number of occasions and in a number of forums. The Australian government has done this through meetings and letters between respective Australian government and European Union ministers and through the Australia-European Union senior officials talks. Those talks are specifically on climate change, and this matter continues to be a matter of ongoing dialogue between Australia and the European Union.

The International Civil Aviation Organisation—ICAO, as it is referred to—is the key forum in which countries have been negotiating an agreement towards limiting emissions. At the most recent meeting of the organisation Australia made the Australian position on the European Union emission trading scheme and its application to the Australian airline industry very clear. They could not make it any clearer: the Australian government urged the European Union to hold off on their expansion of the European Union emissions trading scheme to international aviation. The Australian government also made it very clear and said, correctly, 'We want to work together with all ICAO members, including the European Union, towards a binding, global sectoral agreement for the industry.' The proposal was to do this, again correctly, through a market based mechanism.

Australia continues to support the development of a global approach to market based measures for international aviation. The Department of Infrastructure and Transport is working with a range of ICAO representatives to seek resolution of this issue. They include representatives from Brazil, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Nigeria, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and the United States, as well as European and industry representatives. This position has been made clear in communications with the European Union since this meeting. Australia made it clear that the market based sectoral approach for this industry is the best approach and that the Australian government will continue to work towards this in negotiations that are ongoing this year. The honourable member for Flinders made his contribution just before me. I note that as recently as December last year the honourable member had this to say on global agreements on ABC24 Breakfast, 6 December 2011. He said:

In the interim what we are looking for is sectoral agreements. What does this mean? It means that you take a sector such as steel, cement or methanol and you try and get a common approach across the globe. You won't get 100 per cent but you might be able to get 80 per cent, and that is the way to get over the issue of boundaries and borders which has been a huge barrier to international action.

That is precisely what the government is doing in terms of the negotiations on this issue vis-a-vis aviation. On the government side they have been working constructively through the official channels, the appropriate channels, to make representations on behalf of Australian industries, and Australian industries are well informed, well briefed, on this matter. Australia in this area has to lead, not follow, and using ICAO not to sit on hands but to push for a more global approach. Australia has considered that to be more constructive than adding one more voice to the existing group of originally I think 26 nations opposing this particular European Union ETS.

Some other specific representations have been made. Senior Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency officials raised this issue at the Australia-European Union senior officials talks on climate change in Brussels on 27-28 February this year. This issue will be canvassed again at the forthcoming meeting on 4-5 June this year. There were letters from Ministers Albanese and Combet to the European Commissioner for Climate Change dated 25 January this year expressing very clearly the preference for an agreement with the ICAO. Australia's intervention to the International Civil Aviation Organisation council meeting in November 2011 was another representation where we were opposing the unilateral measures and proposing action as well in Australia. My information is that European officials have responded to Australia's constructive stance trying to do it through the appropriate body and channels and with sector agreement and have undertaken to work cooperatively with Australia through ICAO, and the issue will be canvassed again under a part of that 4-5 June meeting.

I would like to make a few other points. As I said, I am not speaking in opposition to the honourable member's motion, but it is a motion that iterates actions that have already been undertaken in this regard but in more scant form than what has happened with the advocacy of the Australian government. It also calls on the Australian government to undertake a range of actions that the Australian government has already undertaken, plus some. I have a reservation on point (2)(c), where it says 'join any international action'. 'Any international action' is very broad, calling upon the Australian government to commit to any international action, and I have to express my reservation at the broadness and the vagueness of that particular phraseology and say that the Australian government is committed to the ongoing advocacy through ICAO.

See this speech in context