House debates
Tuesday, 12 September 2006
Questions without Notice
Climate Change
2:30 pm
Phillip Barresi (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is addressed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Would the minister update the House on Australia’s international action and cooperation to address the issue of climate change?
Alexander Downer (Mayo, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I thank the honourable member for Deakin for his question and for his interest, because I know he has a serious interest in these issues and he shares the view that all members of the government share that obviously the issue of climate change is one of the issues the international community needs to address. This government believes that issues should be addressed not by left-wing ranting but in a sensible and practical way. One of the things that really amuse me about the political Left in this country is that they seem to think they have a solution to the issue of climate change. Their argument is that, if you sign the Kyoto protocol and ratify it, somehow that will solve the problem of climate change. If I may say so, this is a deceit. It is deceiving the Australian people to argue that if Australia signed the Kyoto protocol somehow that would solve the problem of climate change. It is quite wrong.
The government have not ratified Kyoto, not because we do not think the issue of climate change needs to be addressed, but for two reasons. First of all, Kyoto will not have any significant impact at all on the issue of climate change. It is estimated that if the 2010 targets are met by all those countries that have set targets—and I think it is highly unlikely that those targets will be reached—global emissions will be 40 per cent higher than they were in 1990. If there were no Kyoto protocol, those emissions would be 41 per cent higher than they were in 1990. You cannot argue that that is going to have a significant impact on climate change—or, to put that another way, if these targets are met, by the year 2100 global temperatures will be cut by just 3/100ths of a degree—
Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Public Accountability and Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. On the question of relevance, the minister was asked to tell us what—
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The member for Wills will resume his seat.
Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Public Accountability and Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Kelvin Thomson interjecting
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
When the member for Wills is asked to resume his seat, he will.
Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Public Accountability and Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Kelvin Thomson interjecting
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I warn the member for Wills! The minister is in order.
Alexander Downer (Mayo, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
What is particularly significant is that Kyoto does nothing to address the issue of emissions from developing countries like China, Brazil and India. The second objection we have to Kyoto is that it puts all the burden on countries like Australia and none of the burden on the developing world, which means in the end that you are proposing to export jobs from our own country to the developing world—to China and Indonesia.
Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Tanner interjecting
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order! The member for Melbourne is warned!
Alexander Downer (Mayo, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The government believes that the great challenge for the world is to do two things. One is to address the issue of climate change, and the other is to do so in a way that does not destroy jobs and does not destroy the ambitions of developing countries to achieve higher living standards. That is why the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, AP6, is such a sensible proposal.
That great intellectual giant, the Leader of the Opposition, says that the officials cannot persuade anybody in the States to support it. The Americans will be participating in the working groups along with the Chinese, the Indians, the Koreans, the Japanese and, of course, the Australians. We will be participating in working groups in South Korea during the course of next month, when we will consider 90 different projects dealing with the question of transfers of technology to developing countries, the introduction of new technologies and issues such as cleaner fossil fuels and support for renewable energy. This is a practical way of addressing an important issue without destroying jobs and without undermining the capacity of developing countries to improve living standards.
Kyoto does nothing to address this issue. The Labor Party is trying to convince the Australian public it cares about climate change, so it says it would ratify Kyoto. But the fact is, as I have explained, it will not address climate change and, as we know from statements the member for Grayndler has made, Labor has not supported the AP6 initiative.
2:35 pm
Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is to the Prime Minister. Has the Prime Minister seen comments by Al Gore on last night’s The 7.30 Report, responding to those who are sceptical about scientists’ so-called gloomy predictions on climate change, as follows:
It’s not a question of mood. It’s a question of reality. ... there’s no longer debate over whether the earth is round or flat ...
Does the Prime Minister acknowledge that the scientific consensus about climate change is accurately reflected in the documentary An Inconvenient Truth, or does the Prime Minister agree with comments by the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources—
Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The standing orders and practice clearly state that long and protracted preludes to questions are out of order. This is merely a resuscitation of a television program last night and is out of order.
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The member will resume her seat. The member for Grayndler will come to his question.
Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Does the Prime Minister acknowledge that the scientific consensus about climate change is accurately reflected in the documentary An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore, or does the Prime Minister agree with comments by his industry minister dismissing the documentary as ‘just entertainment; that’s all it is’?
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The answer to the question is: no, I have not seen the movie. I will possibly, at some stage, see the movie. But on the subject of seeing movies—
Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Albanese interjecting
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The member for Grayndler is warned!
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I have heard a lot of what Mr Gore has said. It has been hard to escape Mr Gore on the ABC over the last 24 hours. He has appeared on just about every conceivable program, but I will just make that factual statement. I heard him—I think it was on Radio National—this morning. It is interesting—
Arch Bevis (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Aviation and Transport Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Bevis interjecting
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
that he was asked about seeing movies. He was asked whether he had seen the Path to 9/11, and he said, ‘No, I haven’t seen it.’ It is interesting, of course, because the Path to 9/11 was mildly critical, in various stages, of the policies of the administration that Mr Gore once belonged to. He was at pains to make the point that these movies are not always factual and they have an obligation to be factual. I think that is right.
Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer and Revenue) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Like your interest rate pledge!
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Gore and I actually had quite a pleasant but short telephone conversation yesterday, which he initiated. I think it is fair to say—
Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Ms Burke interjecting
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
that, in relation to this issue—
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order! The Prime Minister has the call and the Prime Minister will be heard.
Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Albanese interjecting
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The member for Grayndler is on very thin ice.
Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer and Revenue) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The ice is melting as we speak!
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The argument in relation to this issue is not an argument about whether or not—
Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer and Revenue) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order! The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The member for Hunter will remove himself from the House.
The member for Hunter then left the chamber.
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The argument over climate change is not whether there is a threat posed by climate change; there seems to be broad agreement on that, although there is a lot of legitimate debate about the speed of that change and the nature of the threat, and I do not think it is right to say that there is total unanimity about that in the scientific community. But that is one part of the debate. The other part of the debate is how best to respond to it. I have made it very plain on behalf of the government that we do not intend to sign a protocol which would export Australian jobs to other countries. Those from the other side who interject so vociferously do not include the quiet, contemplative member for Batman, whose views on this subject are a little closer to reality than the man who sits immediately on his left—that is, the spokesman on this area. This is what the member for Batman correctly had to say on this issue—
Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and International Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
You’ve already signed it!
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
He said in the Australian of 13 January 2006:
It’s time to abandon the political correctness espoused by the green movement. Let’s be real: without getting business on board we cannot achieve anything.
… … …
... the Asia-Pacific Partnership ... offers Australia not only an opportunity for economic growth, but also allows us to be part of the solution to the environmental consequences of what is happening in our region ...
They are the sorts of arguments—
Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr Pyne interjecting
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order! The member for Sturt is warned!
John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
that I would play back to the former Vice President of the United States. They are the arguments that I would use in response to the shadow minister. They are the arguments of one of the few people on the front bench of the Australian Labor Party who has an interest in preserving Australian jobs. He wants Australian jobs; the rest of them want them to go to China or Indonesia, but we agree with the member for Batman.