James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the cognate debate on the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Reform (Closing the Hole in the Ozone Layer) Bill 2022 and related bills, which, of course, update and modernise the legislative framework that we have in place to ensure that we are meeting our objectives under the Montreal protocols. I will just start by reflecting on how significant that agreement was in 1987. I agree with other speakers: to my knowledge, it's probably the first really significant international agreement on the protection of the atmosphere. There are other agreements and treaties that were as significant prior to that, on things like the protection of Antarctica et cetera, but I think that this agreement was the first time that nations were coming together and agreeing that there was an environmental problem that needed action taken and that the nations signing up to that agreement would have to do significant and meaningful things to meet their obligations as signatories to that treaty.

So this was a real milestone moment, and I certainly acknowledge the role of the Hawke government, which was obviously in power in Australia the time. I also acknowledge the administrations of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Margaret Thatcher, in particular, doesn't get as much credit as she should for her achievements environmentally, and the Thatcher government's strong support and leadership on this was significant. Another legacy of the Thatcher government, around coal in the United Kingdom, which the Labour Party bitterly opposed in the 1980s, is probably seen as spectacularly prescient now, in the 2020s, but I won't digress into that debate.

It was a really significant milestone moment for global, mature leadership on an environmental issue: the discovery of the depletion of the ozone and holes in the ozone layer that had direct impact on Australia and, of course, an equally significant global impact, particularly around the Antarctic hole and with the risk at the Arctic as well. So it was a very significant thing for the government to sign up to, which, of course, the then opposition supported. I think what we've had in the 35 years since the signing of that protocol is one of the best examples of bipartisan policy in an important environmental area that, 35 years later, is shown to have been remarkably successful—not that the job is finished, but we are very happy with the progress that we've made. We're on track to achieve our objective by 2050, scientists indicate, at the current rates of the protocol's implementation. I think that in 2016 they observed some of the first positive signs of the closing of the hole seasonally. So that should take us back to a pre-1980s status for the ozone layer in 2050, and then I think we're on track by 2065 to have completely addressed the issues of ozone depletion that have come from hydrofluorocarbons through man-made industrial activities.

I think it's also important that those of us in the coalition, when we have the opportunity to speak on these environmental bills, reassert the very important point that it is an inherent conservative attribute to care about conservation and the environment. It is inherent within those of us who hold conservative views that the protection of the natural environment, in all its forms, is something that we should have as a very significant priority in policies that we develop and in debates that we have in this place and other places. It is very important for the Liberal and National parties, who are the conservative force in this nation, to also assert—and to meet those assertions with concrete examples and concrete actions—that we are committed to conservation, to the protection of the environment and to the protection of the future of all those who inhabit this planet of ours. It is an inherent conservative attribute to recognise that we have a custodianship over the planet and that the impact that humankind has, where it's a negative one, needs to be properly and adequately addressed. These challenges are global ones, and one of the most important things we can do is engage and participate in global efforts—the Montreal protocol was one of the first great examples of this—that see us as a planet meet some of these challenges.

The issues with ozone depletion were a very important precursor to the challenges that we have with climate change as well. That needs a global response, and other speakers have outlined some of the framework that is already in place and that needs to be in place for the future on that challenge. We strongly endorse these bills. They, of course, emanate from the previous government, and I commend Greg Hunt and the work that he did as the then minister in this area. I know that that's something that is not disputed within the chamber. We know that they will continue to make sure that the legislative framework in meeting these significant challenges is in place, and on that basis I commend the bills to the House.

See this speech in context