Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Reform (Closing the Hole in the Ozone Layer) Bill 2022 and related bills are important legislation. They're important because they update legislation and regulations that have been in place for nearly four decades and that reduce the hydrofluorocarbons that are released into the atmosphere. These bills are important because they not only streamline the process for businesses and makes compliance a lot easier for them but also add some additional enforcement measures that are needed as a result of changes over the last four decades.

As other speakers have quite rightly pointed out, hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, are dangerous greenhouse gases that are around 4,000 times as harmful to the environment as carbon dioxide. As a driver and signatory of the Montreal protocol, Australia has a responsibility not only to enforce the agreed protocol standards, which have had a positive effect in closing the damaging hole in the ozone layer, but also to ensure that we are on track to meeting the objectives of those standards. However, the reality is that, whilst we have done pretty well over the last four decades with respect to applying the standards and closing the hole in the ozone layer, we can't be complacent. That's particularly so when there is ongoing considerable use of HFCs and therefore increasing threats of changing climate and more frequent natural disasters associated with extreme weather events. As we see the climate change and the risks increase, it's more reason why we should make sure that whatever measures we have in place are as effective as they can be and as effective as they were four decades ago.

Understanding and accepting that climate change is real, the Albanese Labor government has set an emissions reduction target of 43 per cent and also increased investment in renewable energy whilst at the same time—as we saw recently—taking a very active role on the world stage in global discussions with respect to climate change and in the initiatives that arise from those discussions. In fact, the Conference of the Parties that was held in Egypt only a couple of weeks ago highlighted that Australia is again back at the table raising these issues and taking a leadership role with respect to them. International unity is undoubtedly required if we're ever going to do what we should be doing with respect to the response on climate change, and global efforts have to be embraced by everybody. It's only through global efforts that we will get the outcomes that I think all of us would like to see. My view is that there are also extensive opportunities for countries that embrace the changes that need to take place.

Labor also understands that many of our near neighbours are particularly at risk of the effects of climate change and that Australia, along with the other countries, has to show some leadership with respect to this issue, particularly when one considers that Australia, according to a very recent report that I saw, has the world's highest per capita rate of emissions. Therefore, as a country with a higher per capita rate of emissions, we should be the ones setting an example of what needs to be done—albeit I accept that, in the scheme of things, there are others who will argue that our total emissions only amount to just over one per cent of emissions throughout the world. That might be so, but the fact that we have a higher per capita rate still puts an incredible onus on Australia to do the right thing.

COP27 concluded, and a long list of recommendations arose. Many of those recommendations have never been talked about, but I went through them. It is a long list and I commend all of the participants at the conference for coming up with those recommendations. It's my view that there is overwhelming global consensus that climate change is real and that those countries that want to live in the past and let others do the heavy lifting will be left behind. My view is that fossil fuel technology is yesterday's technology and, whilst fossil fuels will continue to be used during the transition years ahead, the countries that do not transition will quickly find themselves isolated and sidelined. Most countries, I believe, understand that and, overwhelmingly, corporate business, investors and the finance sector understand that.

We know that HFCs are predominantly used in refrigeration, and refrigeration is essential in the world today. Economic growth, food production, transport and storage of food, and household and workplace demand will cause a growth in the use of refrigerants unless new technology is developed. If new technology is developed, then we might see a decline. So a global phasing down of 80 per cent of HFCs by 2047 in accordance with the Kigali amendment to the Montreal Protocol will be a real challenge. There's no question about that. It is a big ask because, in addition to the 80 per cent reduction, there is a projected 25 per cent increase in the world 's population by 2047. That's an extra two billion people. That additional two billion people will add to consumption throughout the world, and a growth in consumption per person also adds to the additional release of hydrofluorocarbons and greenhouse gases more broadly into the atmosphere, and that is compounded by a growing middle class. I think it puts into perspective the real challenge we all have ahead of us with respect to managing the volume of greenhouse gases that gets into the atmosphere. Yet, at the COP and looking at the recommendations, I saw very little said about rising consumption and population growth.

Sustainable Population Australia put out a discussion paper that was prepared by Ian Lowe, Jane O'Sullivan and Peter Cooke. It was launched only last week. I commend it to members of this House as something worth reading because it does, in my view, beautifully summarise the impact that additional consumption and population growth will have on climate change. Of course, we can be a lot smarter in the way we live and the way we produce food, in terms of the processes that we use, how we preserve food and so on. I have to say that, in this respect, Australian farmers have shown great leadership and I commend them for that. I believe that they are, in many cases, ahead of the rest of the world in those matters. But a reduction in emissions whilst global population and consumption are growing is extremely challenging, and meeting those targets will require lifestyle changes, innovation and commitment from all parties concerned. The State of the climate2022 report was launched just last week by the minister, who is in the chamber with us now. Again, I think it beautifully summarises the state of our climate right now. It was prepared by the Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO. It highlights the climatic changes we are confronted with, the devastating effect of those changes and the risks to humanity and the environment if we fail to respond. I will quickly summarise some of the key points of that report.

Firstly, concentrations of greenhouse gases are at the highest levels seen on earth in at least two million years. Australia's climate has warmed by an average of 1.47 degrees since 1910—in the last century, effectively. Sea surface temperatures have increased by an average of 1.05 degrees since 1900. Snow depth, snow cover and the number of snow days have decreased in alpine regions since the late 1950s. Global mean sea level has risen by about 25 centimetres since 1880. Half of this rise was in the last 50 years alone, since 1970. Ocean acidification around Australia continues to rise. Again, we've heard the comments and reports about the Great Barrier Reef in particular in recent days. In south-east Australia, there has been a decrease of about 10 per cent in April to October rainfall. All of this changes the way we need to live on this planet.

In closing, my view is this: the facts are now clear, the risks are clear and indifference to the reality of climate change will create greater devastation in the years ahead. A multipronged response is required, and this legislation, in my view, is a critical part of that response. For that reason I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context