Arch Bevis (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts. Will the minister outline the importance of a comprehensive approach to tackling climate change? What is the role of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in this comprehensive approach?

Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Brisbane for his question. As the Prime Minister has just pointed out to the House, it is absolutely critical that we have a comprehensive approach to dealing with climate change, and that includes having a price in the market which comes about as a consequence of a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. We need this approach because it is clear that greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to increase, and because the impacts of climate change are increasingly well understood. One example of this is reports this week which show that we have projected increased ocean acidification as a result of greenhouse gas emissions, and with ocean acidification coral reefs are at risk, food security is at risk and local economies are at risk as well. That risk is very relevant to Australia, given the importance of the Great Barrier Reef to our national and regional economies. It is an employer of some 60,000 Australians—a fact that opposition members conveniently ignore in their contributions in this House. By the way, I pay due regard to the contributions by government members in the debate thus far.

Three weeks ago I attended the Coral Triangle initiative at the World Ocean Conference in Indonesia. That initiative points out how critical it is that we take action to address dangerous climate change because of the dependence of people in that region, some 240 million people, on food security and on a healthy ocean in and around the Coral Triangle. We need a comprehensive response to tackling climate change because of the opportunity for green collar jobs. We have seen analysis from the Climate Institute showing that more than 26,000 jobs could be created if all planned energy projects went ahead. Of course, projects rely on a strong and certain market so that the possibilities and opportunities for businesses to invest in clean energy can be taken up. By refusing to support the government’s CPRS the opposition is refusing to begin to reduce our carbon pollution. I notice a remark from the United Nations Secretary-General when he was speaking to a business summit on climate change recently. He said:

For those who are directly or implicitly lobbying against climate action—

read ‘a number of members in the opposition party room’—

I have a clear message: your ideas are out of date and you are running out of time.

I notice also the release from Bradford Insulation welcoming the final insulation guidelines that were announced recently. In that release Bradford point out something very important, and that is simply this: they see it as a scheme that the government has brought forward ‘as an excellent boost to the economy and the environment’, and they go on to say:

Combined with other Federal and State government stimulus packages such as the Schools Program, Public and Defence Housing and the First Home Buyers Grant, we are experiencing tremendous demand for insulation products driving jobs in the industry and economy generally.

The fact is that this is the way in which we do drive jobs in our economy. We drive jobs in our economy not only by having targets but by having a plan. So I call on the Leader of the Opposition to stop pretending. There is a lot of confusion in the party room about what his position ought to be. It is time to start being serious about addressing climate change. Australians are demanding it, our economy needs it and our environment is dependent on it. At the moment, only the Rudd government has a comprehensive plan to tackle climate change; it is time the opposition leader got on board.