Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I often start my speeches in this place with a brief reflection on the coalition's track record whilst we were in government. I do this not because I want to reminisce about the glory days of when I was sitting in that chair, for example; I do it because I want to remind members, and those watching, that the coalition delivered.

The coalition did take action on climate change. We support real action. We didn't just speak about it. We got on with the job. We're not just an opposition shouting out, making promises or arguing for argument's sake. We had a plan; we delivered on that plan. The safeguard mechanism was our policy. It was a core part of the plan to drive down emissions while backing innovative technologies. We will support the government in delivering a balanced approach to reducing emissions, addressing pollution and ensuring Australia remains a strong, prosperous and independent nation. But, unfortunately, the Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 does no such thing.

Our balanced plan delivered real action on climate change because we are the party of direct environmental action. We are the party of the National Heritage Trust. We are the party of water security, landcare and clean energy technologies. Those opposite so often shout, interject and browbeat about the coalition's environmental record, but the facts speak for themselves. After nine years in office, we had grown our economy by 23 per cent in the face of natural disasters, COVID-19 and an economic crisis. At the same time, we left office on track to exceed our 2030 Paris target, headed for a reduction in emissions between 30 and 35 per cent. That was better than Canada, it was better than Japan. it was better than New Zealand and it was better than the United States. Australia led the way on the 2020 Kyoto targets, beating them by more than 459 million tonnes. We reduced 20 per cent of emissions on our 2005 base level, and we were headed towards net zero by 2050.

In our last five years alone in government, we invested $40 billion into renewable energy. Renewables now make up one-third of Australia's energy generation. This led to the creation of as many as 160,000 jobs. We supported over 6,900 clean energy projects in Queensland through the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. In 2021 we installed 6.1 gigawatts of renewable capacity, more than in the entire term of the previous Labor government. Let me say that again in case those opposite missed it: in 2021 we installed 6.1 gigawatts of renewable capacity, more than in the entire term of the previous Labor government. Nearly one in three homes, of course, have photovoltaic cells on their roof: the world's highest rate of solar rooftop panels. While Labor denigrated our farmers and our miners, we actually delivered on renewable energy. We invested $250 million into recycling modernisation and $3 billion into the Great Barrier Reef protection. We introduced the Threatened Species Strategy. We positioned Australia to be a true leader in Antarctic stewardship, science and security. We rolled out $52 million in the Digital Environmental Assessments Program. We invested $590 million into biosecurity measures and $200 million into the Environmental Restoration Fund. We balanced historic economic growth with record emissions reduction and environmental action. You really can have the best of both worlds, and we did it without taxes. Our agenda was, simply put, technology, not taxes; progress, not platitudes. We wanted measurable progress on emissions reduction without giving families and their businesses the bill. We got on with the job and we delivered, because that is what good governments do. They set a target and they achieve it. This was our approach.

The Albanese Labor government have not taken this approach. They have taken a very, very different approach, but it's an approach that Labor have trod before. They've chosen to reject a balanced approach, and Australian families and their businesses are now paying the price. Labor proposed to price carbon dioxide at $75 a tonne. Australia will have a price that is three times as high as the one set by the previous Labor government, and it is set to rise to $100 by 2030.

Let's not be mistaken about this. This is a carbon tax dressed in the garb of a safeguard mechanism. It's just another attempt to dismantle good coalition policy. After a decade of emissions reduction being balanced with economic growth, Labor is now rushing to impose drastic cuts on Australian businesses. The safeguard mechanism has been working well for years as a system to cap emissions whilst the economy has grown. But Labor cannot help themselves. They're now changing the purpose of the scheme from one that stops emissions by encouraging businesses and backing technology to a scheme that punishes businesses and imposes more and more taxes. It's as if they want to make Australian businesses uncompetitive. It's as if they want Australian businesses to become unviable.

This Labor government had the audacity to claim that industry supports this policy. This same federal Labor government claimed that industry supported its reckless and unprecedented industrial relations reforms because they attended the jobs summit it slapped together in 2022. Do you remember that—the jobs summit? You don't hear them talk about that much anymore, do you? The fact is that many, if not all, of the industries covered by the safeguard mechanism have strong concerns about many aspects of this Labor government's policy. Key Australian industries are incredibly worried. Think about critical mineral resources like copper, coal, gas and iron ore. We are world leaders in clean minerals processing. I know you know this, Mr Deputy Speaker Buchholz. Yet Labor want to dissuade investors and send them elsewhere. Most of our competitors do not have any national carbon pricing scheme in place at all. Just think about that. What cruel government would squander Australia's natural competitive advantage by taxing hardworking Australians and their employers? What strange, self-sabotaging government would surrender one of Australia's core economic strengths and discourage global investment? I'll give you a hint. It's those members on that side.

Producers of cement, steel and aluminium—large employers—once again have been ignored by Labor. Labor's ignorance, incompetence and indifference in pursuit of this policy will drive up the cost of construction and manufacturing. On the Sunshine Coast, construction accounts for 18,123 jobs. It's about 12½ per cent of the local workforce. As I said, it has a value-add of around $1.9 billion to our local economy. Manufacturing accounts for 8,024 jobs, or 5.5 per cent of the labour force. It has a value-add of around $890 million to our economy. These are crucial sectors for employment and economic growth on the Sunshine Coast. Labor's failure to address the cost-of-living crisis, as well as its obsession with red tape and wacky climate policies, is going to cost many in my community their livelihoods.

Think, Mr Deputy Speaker, about rail and transport. Think about the logistics. Think about utilities and infrastructure development. Think about agriculture, forestry, fishing, retail, health care and technology. It's all of these industries that are going to suffer. It's not just the mining and energy sectors at risk from Labor's poorly packaged green tape that we're debating here today. Labor's sneaky carbon tax will affect almost every industry, every household and every Australian.

Perhaps most egregiously, they've put this policy on the table without any modelling. I know if people are listening to this they're thinking, 'No; surely they haven't introduced this policy without any modelling to see what sort of damage this is going to cause to the economy.' Those opposite make bold and untested promises to gain power, and then they present half-baked policy experiments to the Australian people, hoping that feel-good photo ops distract them. Recently, in Senate estimates, it was confirmed that the government has not undertaken any assessments of impacts of this policy. The government has not analysed how some of these severe emissions reduction targets—the most severe in the world—will deliver Labor's aspirations of a 30 per cent reduction by 2030.

Labor did not model the economic impacts of its policy on investment, on jobs and on household budgets. Let's not be mistaken—it will be Australian households who will pay the price, and that is happening now. In question time, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy was trying to argue that because those opposite, the government, put in place caps last year, Australians should be jumping for joy—that we've never had it so good because instead of an increase of 50 per cent they're only paying an additional 30 per cent. Well, you try telling that to the average punter at home. I think the average punter at home will have a very different view about what's good for them from what this government says is good for them. Let's not be mistaken. As I said, it will be Australian households who pay the price.

There's no modelling of the expanding credit market the government wants to use and no assessment of demand for carbon credits or their price. We do know that if demand for carbon credits exceeds supply then businesses will be lumped with a penalty of $275 per tonne of CO2. They promised 97 times that power bills would be cut by $275. Now, without warning, they're imposing a $275-per-tonne tax onto Australian businesses. In this last-minute climate policy, we have a litany of unanswered questions. Will businesses pay that $275 per tonne? Will they just suck it up and say, 'Oh, you know, we won't worry about that; we'll take that off the bottom line'? I don't think that's going to happen. We all know that businesses are going to pass that down the line. It will be consumers that pay the price, and ultimately it will be businesses that pay the price, because this policy, make no mistake, will result in businesses having to close their doors because they cannot compete on a world stage. Those members opposite should reflect on that—that this policy, which has not been modelled, will close businesses and people will lose their jobs.

See this speech in context