Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move together:

(1) Schedule 1, page 7 (after line 15), after item 26, insert:

26A At the end of paragraph 22XJ(1)(b)

Add:

but does not exceed:

(i) for the financial year beginning on 1 July 2023—100,000 tonnes carbon dioxide equivalence; or

(ii) for a later financial year—such lower number specified in the safeguard rules for the year, which must decrease over time to no more than 25,000 tonnes carbon dioxide equivalence by 2035.

(2) Schedule 1, page 7 (before line 16), before item 27, insert:

26B At the end of section 22XJ

Add:

(3) Despite subsection (1), if a facility is a designated large facility for the financial year beginning on 1 July 2022, the facility is a designated large facility for all later financial years, regardless of the total amount of covered emissions of greenhouse gases from the operation of the facility during the later financial years.

(3) Schedule 1, page 7 (before line 16), before item 27, insert:

26C At the end of section 22XJ

Add:

(4) For the purposes of this Act, a facility is also a designated large facility if the Regulator declares the facility to be a designated large facility under section 55B.

(4) Schedule 1, page 24 (after line 16), after item 46, insert:

46A At the end of Division 2 of Part 6

Add:

55B Regulator may declare facility to be designated lar ge facility

(1) The Regulator may declare that a facility is a designated large facility on application by the registered corporation that has operational control of the facility.

(2) An application must:

(a) identify the facility for which a declaration is sought; and

(b) include any other information required by the regulations; and

(c) be given in a manner and form approved by the Regulator.

(3) The Regulator must notify, in writing, an applicant under subsection (1) of a decision under subsection (1) to declare that a facility is a designated large facility or to refuse the application.

(5) Schedule 1, page 24 (after line 27), after item 48, insert:

48A After paragraph 56(ib)

Insert:

(ic) refuse an application under section 55B;

(6) Schedule 4, item 1, page 49 (before line 6), before subsection 20C(3), insert:

(2A) The Regulator must not enter into a carbon abatement contract under section 20B if the carbon abatement contractor for the contract is a project proponent for an eligible offsets project that involves carbon abatement of emissions from a fossil fuel facility (including, but not limited to, a coal, oil or gas facility) that:

(a) commences operations on or after 1 July 2023; or

(b) is expanded or extended on or after 1 July 2023.

The amendments I'm moving today to the Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 do two things to address some of the shortfalls in the bill. Whilst I'm grateful for the engagement with the minister and his staff to improve this bill, I need to be really clear that, in its current form, the safeguard mechanism bill continues to leave my community unconvinced that this government is truly prepared to do what we must to transition our economy rapidly. This bill is not bold enough and, as it leaves this House, it is not ambitious enough. And, while this House has been given assurances that positive changes will be made in the Senate, that leaves us here with no clear line of sight on the final shape of this legislation when it returns to the House from the other place.

Never has a government had such a clear mandate to take faster action on climate. The truth is that this government and this parliament can reshape our country's future but the government must be prepared to do that in both houses of parliament. To do that, we must be prepared to lead ambitiously and bravely, and to break a cycle that has seen many climate and energy decisions over the past three decades made just on the basis of legislating for the term rather than fundamentally investing in and shifting our economy. The amendments I'm moving today would do two things to drive climate ambition. Firstly, they would prevent new or expanding fossil fuel projects from accessing government funding to pursue abatement, and, secondly, they would bring more polluters into the mechanism over time.

On my proposal for an amendment to the Powering the Regions Fund: the government has announced it will support the decarbonisation of existing industries and create a new clean energy industry through the $1.9 billion Powering the Regions Fund. While there are many examples of industries that will undoubtedly need this support and are much wanted in our economy, including green cement and green steel, there are also emissions-intensive trade exposed facilities, including many fossil fuel extraction projects, that arguably will be less desirable in our future economy. The safeguard transformation stream within the Powering the Regions Fund should explicitly state that it is not available to new fossil fuel projects or the expansion of existing licences, with this legislation instead doing everything it can to ensure these projects all find their way to net zero as soon as possible.

Secondly, to my amendments on expanding the coverage of the scheme: I note that, whilst there has been a lot of discussion around overall emissions reduction targets, the pathway to achieving the net zero goal remains unarticulated. To address this, and in line with previous recommendations by the Climate Change Authority, I propose the government legislate to progressively lower the coverage threshold for the safeguard mechanism from the current 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions to 25,000 tonnes. The ratcheting down over time would send a strong investment signal and set a clear trajectory to net zero for industry.

Working alongside the reduction in the threshold, the bill should also incentivise a broader section of the industry to reduce their direct emissions, by allowing them to opt in to the scheme and, thus, opt in to generating safeguard mechanism credits. This opt-in stream would have the dual benefits of increasing the number of polluters who will reduce their pollution whilst also increasing the supply of SMCs so those in the harder to abate sectors will have access to a larger number of higher quality SMCs from within the safeguard mechanism.

Then, to enhance the anti-avoidance measures outlined by the minister, the bill should be amended to stipulate that facilities which are covered by the mechanism at the commencement of the act will remain covered even if they reduce their emissions below 10,000 tonnes. Together, these measures would ensure genuine emissions abatement and reduction by the broader section of large emitters.

Mr Speaker, the fact remains that, as legislation moves through this House, we need to be assured that when it returns it will come in a form such that we can stand and say we proudly represented our communities' voices in its creation. I am very mindful that as this legislation leaves the House of Representatives my community's ambitions are not being met. That puts me in a very difficult situation. I am grateful for the engagement with the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and his team, but the reality is that this legislation could be stronger. I urge the government to ensure that any piece of legislation that leaves this House is as strong as it can possibly be before it even gets to the Senate, rather than asking us in this House to continue to rely on amendments which we have no line of sight on or control over being moved in the Senate.

See this speech in context