Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence Personnel, Materiel and Science and Minister Assisting the Minister for Climate Change. Why is it important, Minister, to have a coherent and unified position in combating climate change?

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Climate Change) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Earlier, the Treasurer made the case for the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme because of its importance in generating business certainty. The most significant barrier—the barrier to the passage of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme and the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in our economy that would follow—is the coalition. The fact of the matter is they are stuck in the past on this important public policy issue. After one year of leadership of the coalition by the member for Wentworth, the coalition still have no policy on this issue. In fact, the sceptics have gained ground and the evidence is that the coalition are splitting on this issue. In fact, the reports following the Nationals conference a couple of weeks ago demonstrate that none other than Senator Barnaby Joyce has assumed a leadership role on climate change policy in the coalition. This is what Senator Joyce had to say in establishing his claim to leadership on this public policy matter:

I am not sceptical about climate at all. I walk round in it every day. I breathe it, I know it is there.

At least it clarifies something: he does know that climate exists! But that is about as far as you can take it.

In recent times the Nationals have split from the Liberals on this issue by dumping any commitment to an emissions trading scheme. It is clearly the position of the Nationals that they are opposed to emissions trading. That is their stated position. Only two months ago the member for Wide Bay, the Leader of the Nationals, stood with the Leader of the Liberal Party, the member for Wentworth, and made a commitment to the government’s emissions reductions targets by the year 2020. The Nationals have now also dropped that commitment; they have abandoned that position.

And the disunity on that side of politics on this issue is getting worse. Only today the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator Minchin, and the member for O’Connor articulated three different and completely contradictory positions on the issue of amendments to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. Senator Minchin adopted quite an interesting stance, particularly given his experience as a parliamentarian. Senator Minchin’s position is that the government should formulate the amendments for the opposition and the opposition can then consider them. I will tell you what: we will give you an amendment. Just vote for it! Just stand up and vote for it; do the right thing. The Leader of the Opposition has a different position. He articulated what we understood to be the policy of those opposite, and that is that the Liberal Party will formulate its amendments and put them forward. We look forward to that position. I will come back to it. The member for O’Connor had another different position altogether—at the doors, of course. The member for O’Connor indicated that a majority of the coalition party room opposed the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, opposed the targets and opposed the emissions trading scheme and that it was all going to get voted down. They are a shambles on this important policy issue—a complete rabble.

Then we see the media reports today. The minutes of the coalition party room meeting were published, I think, in the Age today with all the lists of those who stood up and spoke against emissions trading.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minutes? What are you talking about?

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Climate Change) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They read like the minutes. The member for Menzies, who we understand to be the policy commissar for the Liberal Party, opposes it, we understand. The member for Tangney got up. We know him to be a sceptic. The member for Mackellar had a few things to say. She is not in the chamber at the moment, but she has advanced quite an interesting theory on these matters in the past. Apparently, she believes that the burning of cow dung is the principal contributor to emissions problems in the international economy and that we are to try to provide some kind of oven for those across Asia to address this issue. Their position is a shambles. What needs to happen here is some unity and some ordinary discipline demonstrated by major political parties on that side of parliament over this important issue. They need to sort out their position, articulate a policy, formulate amendments to government legislation, put the amendments forward, sit down with the government and negotiate a stance. Get your act together.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the absence of any answers, we should have at least a debate about this schools program. I seek leave to move a motion of censure against the Deputy Prime Minister.

Leave not granted.