Mark Butler (Port Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. In a press conference immediately after deposing the member for Warringah, the Minister for Foreign Affairs said:

… we've already announced climate targets for Paris in December and I expect those targets to continue.

But The Australian reports today that the Prime Minister will tell the Paris conference that there is scope to consider more ambitious targets. Exactly what is the position of the government?

Mr Simpkins interjecting—

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

The member for Cowan will cease interjecting.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister reiterated, in Paris and to The Australian newspaper, that the targets of 26 per cent to 28 per cent will not be negotiated at the Paris climate change conference. I have a mandate from the Australian government that was passed by the cabinet and endorsed by the party room for 26 per cent to 28 per cent. That is our target. That is the target that the Prime Minister was speaking about. He was not changing government policy. Government policy remains the same. Our target is 26 per cent to 28 per cent.

What he was referring to—if the member had bothered to read the article—was that it is government policy to look, in 2017, at the question of the use of international units. That has always been our policy. It is also government policy to consider reviews for all countries that sign on to reducing greenhouse gas emissions reductions in five years time. In fact, I said last week, in answer to a question here, that we believe countries should review their targets every five years. If they are not meeting their target they can change their action. If they are exceeding their target they can raise it. It can be calibrated every five years. This has been government policy since August.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Will the minister update the House on the government's approach to the Paris climate change conference and Australia's contribution to global efforts to respond to the challenge of climate change? How does this compare with other proposed approaches?

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for La Trobe for his question. The government is, as he knows, taking strong and effective action to reduce our contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions. We will meet and, indeed, exceed the existing 2020 target. We have put measures in place to support the uptake of new technologies to improve energy efficiency. We will meet our 2020 target; indeed, as the Minister for the Environment said, we will exceed it. We have committed to reduce emissions by 26 to 28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030. This compares well to other countries. On a per capita basis our emissions will be reduced by half. It will reduce emissions per unit of GDP by two-thirds.

Australia accounts for just over one per cent of global emissions and, therefore, we should be part of a coordinated global agreement that includes the major emitters, our major trading partners and, indeed, developed and developing countries. Any agreement must set a common basis for all countries to take action to reduce emissions, to provide transparency and accountability—and that is what we will be negotiating in Paris—and to set five-year reviews to monitor global progress.

The coalition has adopted a target that is environmentally and economically responsible and one that we are confident we will achieve. The opposition has taken the opposite approach. They have plucked a figure out of the air—a reckless, pie-in-the-sky target of 45 per cent—that will be a huge hit to the Australian economy. The opposition has no idea how they will achieve their target other than through a supercharged carbon tax.

Mr Thistlethwaite interjecting—

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

The member for Kingsford Smith will cease interjecting.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Under the opposition's plan Australia's income per person would be around $5,000 lower—

Mr Thistlethwaite interjecting—

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

The member for Kingsford Smith is warned.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and wholesale electricity prices would be about 80 per cent higher by 2030. That is what the opposition are proposing. The 45 per cent target that Labor is putting forward would cost Australia's economy billions of dollars. Labor would need a carbon price of $200 a tonne to meet its 45 per cent target—10 times Labor's failed carbon target. The Climate Change Authority modelling commissioned by Labor itself in 2013 indicates that a target of around 45 per cent would cost the economy over $600 billion. That is Labor's way. Labor's target of 45 per cent is absolutely fanciful. This government is committed to real and effective global action that will reduce emissions with a strong achievable target that will not cost jobs and will not hit the economy with a $600 billion tax.

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

Before I call the member for Sydney, I remind the member for Kingsford Smith that he was warned. The member for Hotham is also warned. The member for Griffith will not interject, particularly while she is not in her seat, and the Leader of the House will not interject while I am addressing the House. The member for Sydney.