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

My question is—

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation and Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dr Southcott interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Makin will resume his seat and the House will come to order. I am not sure what conversation the member for Boothby is in, but the member for Makin has the call.

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

My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister outline what action the government is taking to combat climate change and Australia’s water crisis?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Makin for his question. I know he has a particularly strong focus on the interests of his local community, as a former mayor. In fact, I have visited various projects which the honourable member has had running in his former municipality on local water conservation.

Climate change is a challenge for us all. It is a challenge for the future. It is a challenge which requires the nation to act nationally and internationally. That is why this government’s approach to climate change rests on three core pillars. Firstly, how do you reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Secondly, how do you shape a global solution which means being part of the Kyoto process, not pretending that it does not exist? Thirdly, how do you also adapt to climate change, which is of such a critical concern to so many out there in rural and regional Australia as well?

Our response to this—on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions—is what are the practical ways forward? The Treasurer has spoken to one in the parliament already today: a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. This is a very significant reform both for the environment and for the economy. It will be tough. It will be hard. It will require difficult decisions, but this government is determined to take those difficult decisions. The second way forward is: how do we go about boosting energy efficiency in our country? The government is developing an energy efficiency strategy to that effect. The third way forward is: how do we also boost the renewable energy role within the overall national electricity grid? Once again, the government is developing a strategy on that as well.

In the period ahead, however, we have got this huge challenge with coal-fired power stations. What are we going to do about emissions now from coal-fired power stations and into the period ahead? We have more than a passing interest in this—not just in terms of our domestic reliance on coal-fired electricity generation but, beyond that, in the critical role of coal exports for this country. We are the largest coal-exporting country in the world. We, therefore, have a particular responsibility given our national energy requirements, as well as our national export requirements, to deal with this challenge of ensuring that coal-fired stations in the future are as clean as possible.

That brings us to the question of clean coal technology and carbon sequestration. How do we deal with this effectively? Earlier today I spoke on legislation which has been introduced by the Minister for Resources and Energy concerning the regulatory regime for offshore sequestration sites for Australia. This is a world first. This is something which those opposite fiddled around with, but they never actually got their act together to bring the legislation through.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They did not. They had a lot of time to act on this but failed. Legislation has been put forward by us. It has been introduced into the parliament, and I commend the actions of the minister for energy in what he has done on this in making sure we have got something which works for industry but, critically, works for the national economy as well. CCS technologies are critical for the future.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would say this to those opposite, as they howl in interjection: we have an opportunity for Australia to be the world leader in CCS technologies. The question is whether the government is going to get behind industry on this or push industry to one side. This government intends to get right behind industry and work with them, because we believe it is absolutely critical for CCS to work. The G8 recently in Hokkaido came up with a proposal to have 20 demonstration projects, up to 250 megawatts each, in operation by 2020, capable of demonstrating that this technology works. The practical question for all of us is: how is that going to happen?

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those opposite find this enormously amusing. As Australia is the world’s largest coal exporter—I really find it interesting that those opposite find this so amusing—we are interested in protecting Australia’s long-term coal industry. We are interested in protecting Australia’s long-term coal exports. We are aimed at doing this both for our own economic interests and to make sure that we are doing the right thing by the global environment.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Morrison interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I remind the member for Cook of his status.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is why CCS technologies are so critical. Our government’s ambition is to become the world leader in this technology and its application. We will have more to say about this in the days ahead. I suggest to those opposite that, rather than carping and being critical about it, they should get on with the process of supporting the government’s actions.

The other part of the honourable member’s question goes to the impact of climate change on water. Here again we are confronted with a dilemma in terms of the posture of those opposite. We know that the Murray-Darling is suffering from enormous stress. That stress, contrary to what the previous Leader of the Opposition said, is partly the product of climate change. It is also the product of historical overallocation of water entitlements. Our challenge is: what are we going to do about it? Therefore, what we have done since coming into government—and I say ‘done’ since coming into government; we have not dreamt about it like those opposite did for so long—is begin to buy back water entitlements.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Turnbull interjecting

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The interjection from the Leader of the Liberal Party is that they brought in the Water Act. Twelve years it took you to bring in the Water Act. How many gigalitres of water did you buy back?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My interjection to the Prime Minister was: was the Water Act a dream?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order, but there is a lesson about interventions and interjections.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. And how did that rainmaking grant proceed—which was so enthusiastically embraced by the then Minister for the Environment and Water Resources? The Leader of the Liberal Party, when he was minister for water, had ample opportunity to buy back water entitlements. How many gigalitres did he buy back?

Government Members:

None!

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many gigalitres did the Liberal government ever buy back?

Government Members:

None!

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They had 12 years to buy it back and how much did they buy back?

Government Members:

None!

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

None. What we have done in nine months is begin the process of buying 35 gigalitres through the initial $50 million purchase which has been exercised by the Minister for Climate Change and Water and, secondly—and this is where the rubber hits the road for those opposite—Toorale station. Together with New South Wales, we have taken a decision to buy back the water entitlements associated with the purchase of that station—20 billion litres of water to the Darling, peaking up to 80 billion litres in flood times. What do we have from the shadow minister for water security on behalf of the National Party? His statement is that this is an ‘anti-rural Australia act’. So the view of the coalition—because he is the shadow minister for the coalition—is that they are opposed to our buying back 20 billion litres worth of water entitlements to the Darling and up to 80 billion litres in flood time.

I would say to the shadow minister and to the Leader of the Opposition: how does that square with people like the member for Sturt and the South Australian members here in this parliament who day in, day out call upon the government to buy back water entitlements in order to provide environmental flows down the Murray and to ensure that we can act in time to save the lakes at the mouth of the Murray? My challenge to the Leader of the Opposition is this: do you back the shadow minister for water or do you back the member for Sturt? Where does the Liberal Party stand on buying back water entitlements? In nine short months, we have acted on this. We have purchased 37 gigalitres. We have now purchased a station which possesses a potential to buy back another 20 and up to 80. Where does the—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Prime Minister has concluded.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Prime Minister misleads the House. He has bought back not 35 gigalitres but empty space in the dam.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is not a point of order. I will just get comfortable before I call the member for Kennedy! Has he got two pages?