Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Pollution has gone up under this government. Despite all the rhetoric, despite the pretense now, the new strategy from the government is no longer to overtly deny that climate change exists. The new strategy is to say, 'Oh, we accept it, but don't worry; we have everything under control.' Pollution is going up year on year on year. In the time of a climate emergency, where we are being told that the Paris commitments are not good enough and that we need to do three to five times as much by 2030 if we are to have any chance of stopping dangerous global warming, pollution as going up and up and up under this government. No amount of spin can hide that. Pollution is going up. Part of the reason is that the climate denialists on the backbench have now finessed their talking points. They are dictating what the front bench does, and the climate denialists on the front bench are dictating what the cabinet and the Prime Minister do. So we have no coherent policy to cut pollution, because pollution is going up and up.

Even if we ignore the dodgy accounting tricks from the government—the dodgy accounting tricks that no-one else in the world is using—and even if we ignore the fact that we found out at Senate estimates that, when the Prime Minister says, 'We are going to account for every tonne,' most of it is from stickers on fridges and technological solutions that haven't been invented yet, it is becoming rapidly more apparent by the day that they have no plan. Even if you ignore all of that for a moment and accept that the government is going to meet its paltry targets, that is not enough. We've been told that, and Prime Minister would have found that out, had he bothered to go to the UN climate crisis summit.

We are not on track to stop dangerous global warming, and this government does not have global warming under control. Farmers who are living through record drought know that this government doesn't have global warming under control. People who live in towns where they are being told to expect water to be trucked in because they might run out of it know the government doesn't have global warming under control. The 400,000 signatories to the largest-ever electronic petition in this place know that the government doesn't have global warming under control, and they want it to declare a climate emergency. The people from all walks of life who are marching in the street know that the government doesn't have global warming under control. What they are all begging for from this government is a plan to bring down pollution and address the crisis in global warming and the climate emergency, but also address the crisis in the energy system, which the government has broken. Because of the government's intervention in the energy system, it's worth noting one fact: this comes from the government's independent Australian Energy Regulator; not from the Greens, not from the commentators but from the Energy Regulator.

Power bills are now higher under this government than when the carbon price was in place. People are paying more for power under the government. Their electricity bills are higher than they were when the carbon tax was in place and we were reducing emissions. It takes quite a feat to make electricity more expensive than when the carbon price was in place and increase emissions, but the government has done that. Why? Because it has had, as its sole aim, to stop the growth in renewable energy and to stop the phase-out of coal. We need to phase out coal and replace it with renewable energy if we're to have any hope of stopping global warming. What the scientists told us last year is that the world would need to be two-thirds out of coal, on average, by 2030 to have a chance of staying below 1½ degrees. That means that about 10 of the coal-fired power stations on the eastern seaboard would need to close and be replaced with renewable energy—basically, about one a year between now and 2030. That's what we've been told, and that's the policy that needs to be implemented if the government wants to stop dangerous global warming and keep us below the Paris Agreement targets.

To do that, you'd need some legislation that says, 'Let's work out a way of pulling out coal, pushing in renewables and doing it all in an orderly fashion so that we can bring down pollution, bring down power prices and keep the lights on.' That is doable, if that's what you want to do. But the government wants to actually do the opposite. The government's sole intention is to stop coal-fired power stations from closing and stop new renewables from coming online, and this bill is part of that. You would expect it from a climate denying government. You would expect a bill like this from a climate denying government because they want to send, and continue to send, a shiver of uncertainty through the energy industry so that people don't have the confidence to bring on the new renewables, which are now cheaper because the fuel is free and the technology is now advanced enough that they are now cheaper. To stop even the basic law of economics applying, the government comes up with a big stick, and it's a big stick that is aimed squarely at the renewable energy industry and squarely at keeping coal-fired power stations open. The government's aim is to make the whole energy sector so uncertain that it keeps coal there for longer and keeps renewables out for longer.

Interestingly, the cat has just been belled in the last few contributions from both the opposition side and the government side, because it's clear that what they want to do is use this legislation to stop companies like AGL, who have said that they want to retire some of their old coal-fired power. They have said that they want to replace an ageing old power station—and, if you haven't been there, you should go and have a look at it, because it is being held together with sticky tape and string—with a mix that includes renewables. The government said, 'No, we don't want it,' and the government said, 'What are the weapons that we can use to stop you doing it?' They set up a taskforce and they hounded out the CEO. Then they set up a taskforce to oversee it, and now they've got this legislation as well. The Liberals and Labor admit that this legislation is in part about keeping coal-fired power in the system for longer, including Liddell. The last speaker just gave a very eloquent speech against the bill, because it is a bill that is being put forward by a climate denying government that wants to keep coal in for longer and keep renewables out for longer.

Why would you help the government pass this bill that is only going to make global warming worse, make it harder to bring more renewables into the system for longer and make it easier to keep coal in the system for longer?

The government has said it wants this legislation so that it can keep Liddell open for longer, even as the company is trying to close it. The government even said before that they want this legislation so that they can go and reorganise the Queensland energy sector. They have been explicit about what they want this for. Yes, it is good if there has been some change around privatisation. That is something we raised before and we're hopeful that there'll be some safeguards here, but we're not that optimistic. But absolutely nothing has been done in any of the amendments negotiated that deal with the question of keeping coal-fired power stations, like Liddell, in the system for longer, and that is because—and I repeat this—the last contributors from both sides of the chamber have just said that this bill is in part about making sure that coal-fired power stations, like Liddell, stay there for longer.

If we have legislation that does that, we can kiss goodbye to stopping dangerous global warming because, as I said, we need to be pulling them out at a rate of about one a year and replacing them with renewables between now and 2030. If, instead, the net contribution of the Liberals, with Labor's support, is to put in place legislation that allows the minister to wave a big stick over the Liddell Power Station and the company that owns it and say, 'You'd better keep this running for longer,' we will have made it much less likely that we stop dangerous global warming and that Australia contributes to it fairly. We will have just given a climate-denying minister a big stick to keep coal in the system for longer.

The Greens will stand up to this climate-denying government, but we're getting a bit sick of having to do it by ourselves and of watching the opposition time and time again say to the government, 'Just tell us what you want and we'll give it to you.' We've seen it on free trade deals that give corporations more rights than workers and government. We saw it when Labor supported the Liberals to rip $4 billion out of public education. We saw it when Labor supported the Liberals to give tax cuts to millionaires. And now we're seeing it on climate change legislation as well. There's no point in bipartisanship if that bipartisanship makes global warming worse. For legislation, we need to look no further than what the members on the government side have said they want it for—they want it to keep coal in the system for longer, and that is what it is going to help them do.

When it gets to the committee stage, I'll be moving amendments to fix this legislation, and I hope those amendments get support. The first thing that we need to do is move amendments to say: in the time of a climate emergency, we should not be using public money to keep coal-fired power stations open for longer or, heaven forbid, build new ones. Public money should be going to schools and hospitals and making dental care available to everyone. It shouldn't be going to keep coal-fired power stations open for longer. This government has done everything it can to make global warming worse.

Farmers know that there's a link between the drought that they're experiencing and climate change. Every extra tonne of coal that this government burns sends another farmer to the wall. This government owes the farmers of Australia an apology. And, if they then add insult upon injury by saying, 'And, in fact, we're going to take your taxes and use them to make global warming worse by having more coal-fired power stations,' they should be indicted for that behaviour because it is a climate crime to use public money to make global warming worse. So I'll be moving an amendment to stop the government from giving one red cent of public funds to coal-fired power stations. That should be something that everyone in this place can support because putting money into building new coal-fired power stations or keeping existing ones open for longer is not something we should even be countenancing at the moment.

The second set of amendments deals with the issue that now Labor and the Liberals have both accepted as a purpose of this bill—that is, to deal with the situation where some companies have said, 'Actually, we wanna do the right thing and start replacing our coal with renewables.' The amendment that I will move will say that if there's a planned closure of a coal-fired power station, nothing in this bill can apply to it; the orders in this bill can't apply to it. That would give some certainty and some reassurance to places like Liddell that AGL operate, that they could continue to close in a quick and orderly fashion and replace with a mix that includes renewables without the government having a big stick hanging over them.

If we're in the business, as Labor seems to be now, of working with the government and letting them pass climate-denying legislation with the hope of getting a few amendments on the side then let's put this in the mix as well. Let's make it crystal clear that this won't stand in the way of Liddell closing, that Liddell can close and that other power stations can close and that this legislation won't be used as a barrier to it. Otherwise, we have the climate-denying government, aided and abetted by the opposition, passing laws that can keep coal in the system for longer.

I will repeat something that was said several times this week and that we're getting sick of saying: this government have only got a one-seat majority. They had to pretend to believe in climate change in order to get elected. They lost a member on the basis of climate change. They're out there pretending that they're going to take action. There will be a by-election during this parliament because there always is. This government could fall during this parliament. What we need to do is take the fight up to them on climate change, on energy, on tax and on education, not keep doing deals with them that help them improve themselves in the public standing, pass their agenda and implement their agenda to the detriment of the Australian people. It is time that we stood up to them. The Greens will stand up to this government. And, geez, it would be nice if at some point the opposition would join us in opposing this government's destructive agenda.

See this speech in context