Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Unlike the other member, I withdraw unconditionally. We have seen two interventions from the member for Paterson because he is ashamed of his actions on this topic—and he should be. But let us look at their scare campaign: Whyalla still exists; I am yet to find a roast that costs $100, despite the Minister for Agriculture's exaggerated action; and resource exports are still strong. Some 160,000 jobs were created in the first year of the carbon price despite the claims of those opposite. The climate change actions of those opposite are built on sand. It is the worst form of DLP style reaction. They reject market mechanisms and instead resort to a Soviet style command and control slush fund—and they cannot find a single reputable economist who supports it. This is a long way from where the coalition was a few years ago. In 2007 they went to an election promising an emissions trading scheme. The member for Paterson campaigned on an emissions trading scheme based on the Shergold report—which we picked up—called the CPRS.

Government members interjecting—

We have interjections from those opposite that somehow what happened at Copenhagen caused them to change their views. Nothing could be further from the truth. They changed their position well before the Copenhagen climate change conference. They changed their position in 2009 when Malcolm Turnbull was knocked off by Tony Abbott. Tony Abbott, a self-confessed weathervane on this issue, saw a political opportunity to knock off the member for Wentworth. So he reversed his position. He previously supported an ETS, and he also supported a carbon tax at other points in time. He saw the political main game and, with rank political opportunism, chose to knock off the member for Wentworth. So let's have none of this rubbish that they changed their position on the basis of circumstances overseas.

The truth is that every reputable economist in the world has found that a market based mechanism is the best way of combating the negative environmental externality of carbon pollution and climate change. An ETS is the best way of doing it. We have always supported a flexible price emissions trading scheme. We were forced to begin with a fixed price period because of the economic lunacy of those on the other side. But our stated policy is a shift to a flexible price emissions trading scheme as soon as possible. I am very proud to support an emissions trading scheme. Unlike those opposite, the Labor Party has had this as a longstanding policy because it is the best way of combating climate change.

People who are opposed to an ETS are not just taking political points, they are opposing concrete and efficient action on climate change. What they are saying to Australia is: 'We don't care about future generations. We don't care about taking advantage of the clean energy industrial revolution. We don't care about the fact that the countries that will succeed in the next century will be those that successfully decouple carbon pollution from economic growth and develop new technologies to take advantage of the future. We want to be a rustbelt economy.' That is what those on the other side are saying through their actions. They are not just pursuing cheap populist politics, they are condemning this generation and future generations to an environment and economy in worse shape.

I am proud of the stance Labor is taking on these bills. I am proud of Labor's environmental record. I will be able to look my daughter in the eye and say that I took action and stood up for this generation and future generations in combating climate change. I will be able to look my daughter's children in the eye and say I fought for current and future generations. Those on the other side stand condemned as reactionaries who put their narrow political self-interest above the national and global interest. When this nation has asked them to do the right thing from an economic and environmental point of view, they have been found wanting because of their cant, cheap populism and hypocrisy. I am proud to oppose this repeal legislation.

See this speech in context