Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister stated in 2009:

I will not lead a party that is not as committed to effective action on climate change as I am.

But this week RepuTex has confirmed that not one company will be required to reduce its pollution levels under the Liberals' Direct Action Plan. Why is the Prime Minister sticking with such an ineffectual policy to tackle climate change?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition have trawled through the political archives. They are obviously working back from today. Yesterday, we were being asked about the 2014 budget; now we are going back to 2009.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Jagajaga and the member for Isaacs.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He has got a way to go to catch up with the member for Watson. Was it 1993?

Ms Butler interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith!

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are waiting to hear from Stanley Melbourne Bruce's election manifesto. That will undoubtedly be raised soon.

But let me say this. The honourable member says—the Leader of the Opposition says—that the government is not committed to action on climate change. The government is absolutely committed and will take to Paris a 26 to 28 per cent cut in emissions, which is comparable to other countries similarly situated. What the honourable member objects to is that the government does not have as one of its measures an emissions trading scheme. And that is true—we do not. It was repealed. It used to be coalition policy; it is not anymore. But the point is, as I have said many times in the past and am happy to say again: an emissions trading scheme is no more than one mechanism to reduce emissions. It is a means to an end; it is not the end. It is a piece of economic plumbing. And there are many ways to cut emissions. There is regulation of different kinds. There are a range of measures. There are renewable energy targets. If you look right around the world, different policies are being used and the only question that matters is: is it going to cut emissions?

An emissions trading scheme that does not cut emissions is no good. A regulatory system that does cut emissions is very good, because it does the job. The fact is that emissions trading schemes have worked better in theory than in practice over the last six or seven years. That is undoubtedly correct. The mechanisms we have in place and which the environment minister has carefully assembled and carefully explained in this chamber will result in Australia meeting the commitments we are taking to Paris: 26 to 28 per cent cuts in emissions. We will meet those targets. We will meet them with the measures we have. We will review our measures in 2017, and if they need adjustment—

Ms MacTiernan interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Perth!

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

then we will adjust them. But our commitment to those targets is absolute, and honourable members opposite should get used to the fact that we are committed to cutting emissions.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith is interjecting again. She interjected at least seven or eight times after I asked her to cease interjecting. The next time the member for Griffith interjects will be a time that will see her ejection from this place.