Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Hansard source

The disallowance motion before this House is really a very simple proposition: do you support the government's focus on low-emissions technologies or don't you? Do you support a technology led approach or do you support a taxation led approach? We know that the member for McMahon only has one tool in his toolkit, and that's a tax. That's what he took to the last election. He said to the Australian people, 'You make up your mind whether you like it or not.' Well, they did and they will continue to do so, because they know a tax driven approach has always been Labor's preferred approach. But it's not the Australian people's preferred approach. Let's be clear, this is not a question of legality. The Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Implementing the Technology Investment Roadmap) Regulations 2021 were always envisaged to adapt to changing technology requirements. When they were established in the first place, they were always envisaged to ensure that, as the range of technologies that bring down emissions expand, the regulations would adapt to those technologies. In fact, the regulations have extraordinarily broad based support. Whether it's the BCA, Ai Group, the Minerals Council, the NFF, the Investor Group on Climate Change, the Australian Industry Greenhouse Network, over 20 peak bodies are all in support because they understand we have to use every technology available to reduce emissions.

That's exactly what we are doing in this country, and it's working. Emissions are down by 20.8 per cent on our 2005 level. When we left government and the Labor government, with their carbon tax, the member for McMahon's preferred tool in his toolkit, were doing their forecasts, the forecast for last year, 2020, was over 630 million tonnes. Do you know where it ended up? Around 530 million tonnes, more than a hundred million tonnes lower than their forecast. That's because technologies are working. We're seeing record levels of investment in household solar and utility solar across this country, with seven gigawatts of new renewable capacity last year—that's the equivalent of four large coal fired power stations in a single year. In a single year we saw more investment in renewables, 5.4 gigawatts, than we saw in the entire time that Labor was last in government. And the year before was exactly the same. This is world-beating stuff, and yet they say: 'No, we can't use any other technologies. We have to ignore the fact that our emissions in electricity are only 30 per cent of our total emissions. Let's ignore the other 70 per cent.'

The first and most important point I'd make about this motion is that Labor is showing its true colours. They're not interested in technologies; they're interested in taxes. They find lots of ways to impose taxes: sneaky taxes, implicit taxes, shadow prices—you name it. They do it through mandates. They force consumers to buy things because they believe that consumers don't know what's in their interest. Consumers don't know what kind of car to buy; governments need to tell them—that's how the Labor Party thinks. They're making the phone calls to the old Soviet central planners, dusting them off and saying, 'It's time to come in and take control of the economy, tell consumers what kinds of things to buy.' This is the Labor Party way, because they don't trust the Australian people. They didn't trust them to get vaccinated. They were going to spend billions because they thought you'd have to bribe them to get vaccinated, you'd have to tell them. They were wrong about my electorate, and the member for McMahon has seen some pretty high vaccination rates in his own electorate. In parts of my electorate we're seeing 99 per cent-plus double-vaxxed. The Australian people make their own choices; they don't need a Labor government to tell them what choices to make.

The second thing I would say about this is quite remarkable because is it tells us how Labor is thinking about net zero. They are not focused on net zero; they're focused on zero. They want to wipe out the mining industry in this country. They want to wipe out the beef industry in this country. They want to wipe out the natural gas industry in this country. Labor want them gone. They've wanted them gone for years. We saw that with the RSPT and all the taxes Labor wanted to impose on them. They've always hated those industries, because not enough of them vote for the Labor Party. It's purely politically motivated.

They want zero emissions. They want the technologies that support those foundational industries of this great country—the competitive advantage that has made us one of the wealthiest countries on earth—gone. They want them gone, whether it's in agriculture, resources or heavy manufacturing. They used to support the workers in heavy manufacturing, but not anymore. We saw how the people of Gladstone felt about that at the last election. They had had enough. The so-called blue-collar workers that the Labor Party supported turned out to be white-collar workers in the inner cities. That's their focus. They couldn't care less about the regions—and that shows in their approach to this very question in front of the House today.

The Labor Party are crowing about 2030 targets—and they don't even have one. They haven't got one. They want to wander off to Glasgow without a 2030 target. Well, let me give them a bit of news: the Paris agreement requires a 2030 target. Labor abandoned theirs from the last election because the Australian people said no, and they now have no idea where they stand. Meanwhile, their focus is on getting technologies out of the portfolio. They don't want them there. They only want their preferred technologies, the ones that politically align with their ideological views. But not everyone in the Labor Party agrees with this. I'm very much looking forward to seeing who turns up from the Labor Party when we have a vote on this later this afternoon. I will be intrigued by who's absent, who doesn't turn up.

The Labor Party can't work out where they stand on any of this. That's why they have no plan. They have a target without a plan. That's what they had at the last election—a target without a plan. That's the Labor Party way. They have a divided party room on this. On one side they've got the barbecue stoppers who want to see the end of the iconic Australian institution of the barbeque. They want to see the end of it. There's the member for Cooper handing out leaflets in her electorate saying gas has got to go—'Your gas cookers have got to go.' They want them gone. Labor no longer supports those traditional industries that have been the bedrock of this great country.

The intriguing thing about this is that this regulation will also support investment in crucial technologies like low-emission vehicles. It will allow investment in technology for charging, which those opposite, for some reason, seem to oppose. It will allow investment in industrial energy efficiencies, but those opposite are not interested in that anymore. Industry is not their focus anymore. They couldn't care less. We know where Labor are going on all of this. The Labor Party simply don't know where they stand on technologies. They are choosing some that they really like and others that they really hate. It's purely ideological. But the one thing they fail to focus on is what's going to bring down emissions in the most efficient way for all Australians that doesn't destroy jobs, that doesn't raise the price of electricity and that doesn't take away this great nation's great industries, our great sources of competitive advantage.

If Labor ever succeed with what they're proposing to do here—with the Greens, of course; they've teamed up with the Greens on this one—the real losers will be Australian workers, Australian farmers, Australian industry and Australian miners, because the Labor Party want those industries wiped out. Their position on this regulation demonstrates what they really think—teaming up with the Greens as they always do in the end. They pretend that they are for the Australian worker, but it's the Greens that they ultimately support when it comes to the crunch. An expanded mandate for ARENA will provide support for those great technologies for our great industries and ensure that we are able to bring down emissions and maintain a strong economy.

See this speech in context