Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) the scientific evidence for both the existence of climate change and the anthropogenic factors that cause it is overwhelming and compelling and should no longer be held in doubt;

(b) climate change is projected to create serious risks to health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security and economic growth and that action on climate change is of critical importance to future generations of Australians;

(c) the Australian Institute's report entitled Climate of the Nation 2018 found that 73 per cent of Australians are concerned about climate change, up from 66 per cent in 2017, and that only 11 per cent of Australians do not think that climate change is occurring;

(d) in March 2007, the then Opposition Leader, the Hon Kevin Rudd, stated that 'Climate change is the great moral challenge of our generation.';

(e) in February 2010, the then Member for Wentworth, the Hon Malcolm Turnbull, stated that 'Climate change policy...is an exercise in risk management and no reasonable person could regard the risk as being so low that no action was warranted.';

(f) the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2018 special report entitled Global Warming of 1.5°C concluded that human activities are estimated to have caused approximately 1°C of global warming above pre-industrial levels;

(g) that same report concludes with high confidence that global warming is likely to reach 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels between 2030 and 2052 if it continues to increase at the current rate;

(h) climate related risks are projected to substantially increase with global warming of 1.5°C and seriously increase with global warming of 2°C or higher; and

(i) serious Government action on climate change in Australia has badly stalled; and

(2) calls on the Government to:

(a) maintain its commitment to the Paris Agreement and its targets; and

(b) take:

  (i) genuine and meaningful action to meet those targets; and

  (ii) significantly greater action to reduce Australia's greenhouse emissions, and as soon as possible.

The greatest policy failure of our current generation in Australian politics is climate change. Climate change policy captures the ultimate zeitgeist of the modern Australian political era. No other policy issue has been plagued by such partisan attacks, and no other policy issue has heralded the repeated fall of Australian prime ministers. Despite the heroic efforts of former Prime Minister Turnbull and Minister Frydenberg when he was the environment minister, the government has reincarnated their unshakeable groundhog day commitment to maintaining a policy vacuum. Extreme elements from both sides of the political spectrum have frustrated moderate centrist climate change policies, policies which not only find their greatest foundation in science but also have the most chance of achieving lasting bipartisan consensus.

The failure of the political class has become Australia's failure. It is the people of Australia and the generations that follow that will bear the burden of this inaction, and I must stress that this is not a left-wing, right-wing issue. The scientific evidence for climate change is compelling. What is lacking is action. It is for this reason that, from today, I am seeking to launch the Parliamentary Friends of Climate Action with my co-chair to be, the member for Wentworth. Together, we will use the group to foster progress on climate change policy and action. It's action where we are failing here in the parliament.

Most sceptical and cynical Australians should think of action on climate change as an insurance policy—insurance against inconvenient truths, predictions of disaster and everything in between. My goodness, if Rupert Murdoch says that we should give climate the benefit of the doubt, surely you'd think most in government would listen. Thousands of experts act as reviewers, ensuring the reports of the IPCC reflect the full range of views of the scientific community, yet those reports have fallen on deaf ears in the parliament. Warming caused by human activity will persist for centuries, perhaps millennia, and will continue to cause further long-term changes to the climate system, including a rise in sea level.

To put it into perspective, we are in trouble. Rainfall patterns in Australia are shifting and the severity of floods and droughts has increased. The area roughly between Adelaide and Brisbane has already experienced a 15 per cent decline in late autumn and early winter rainfall over the past few decades, and across the Murray Darling Basin stream flows have declined by 41 per cent since the mid-1990s. Warmer atmospheres can hold more water vapour, increasing the risk of flash flooding. A hotter climate dries out vegetation, creating a tinderbox for bushfires. We are seeing this the world over.

My own electorate is already feeling the effects of more volatile rainfall, with flash flooding being a regular occurrence. Our communities on the Lower Lakes know only too well the devastation caused by drought. However, the lack of large-scale government support for long-term environmental rehabilitation and futureproofing means we are doomed to see the same story of agricultural and environmental distress repeat itself. My coastal communities are increasingly concerned and affected by king tides, severe storms, coastal erosion and sea-level rise. My coastal councils are desperate for assistance because this is a problem that local government simply doesn't have the financial capacity or expertise to address. I and the Australian Coastal Councils Association have repeatedly called for the federal government to take leadership on this countrywide issue. Eighty-five per cent of Australians live on the coast, but the federal government refuses to step up and plan for their future. It's almost as if we are in a climate change denial parliament.

The call for action is clear. Bipartisan consensus with scientifically based policy in the sensible centre is critical to this. We can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. That's why it is just astonishing that the government threw out a prime minister based on the NEG, which was a relatively benign policy with respect to energy. It's just astounding that you do this to yourselves and to the nation.

If Australia is to carry its share of the global burden to face down the challenges of climate change, we need bipartisan consensus. We need action from this government today. I call on all members listening to this speech, in this chamber and in other chambers: please join the parliamentary friends for climate action, because, if the government's not going to do it, it will be another thing that the parliament will have to address alone.

Andrew Gee (Calare, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to speak on the member for Mayo's motion this afternoon. The member notes in her motion in paragraph (1)(a) that 'the scientific evidence for … the existence of climate change' is in, and ' should no longer be held in doubt'. To clear up any ambiguities, I agree with that. The science is in; the climate is changing. We only have to look at a recent paper, published in January 2014 in the journal Nature that said Australian tropical cyclone activity is lower than at any time in the past 550 years. We only have to go to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology and their numbers, and we see a declining trend in cyclones in this nation. In fact, for the season 2015-16, not a single severe cyclone struck Australia—not one. If we compare that to the season back in 1984-85, we had no fewer than 11 severe cyclones, yet in the other season there was not a single one. So, yes, the climate is changing; there are fewer cyclones affecting Australia. We see the same with tornados in the USA—a significant downward trend. This year likely has the lowest number of tornados in history—so, yes, the climate is changing.

We can look at the information on snowfall. The trend in winter snowfall in the Northern Hemisphere is actually increasing; we are getting more snowfall in winter in the Northern Hemisphere. The climate is changing. We are a land 'of drought and flooding rains'. The current drought is terrible, as I'm sure that you, Deputy Speaker, among all members in this place know. But, thankfully, if we look at the rainfall records, in many places in this country the drought was far, far worse back over 100 years ago. Yes, we are seeing all those climatic changes.

We hear also in this motion that the government should take serious action on climate change. I say that the greatest moral challenge that we face as members of parliament is to admit that nothing that we do in Australia will actually change the climate. This is not only what the science says, but what the Chief Scientist says. During questioning in estimates, Senator Ian Macdonald said to the Chief Scientist:

In Australia, we emit less than 1.3 per cent of the world's carbon emissions.

The Chief Scientist said:

About that.

Senator Macdonald asked:

If we were to reduce the world's emissions of carbon by 1.3 per cent, what impact would that make on the changing climate of the world?

In other words, if we reduced our CO2 emissions ,and CO2 equivalents, to zero, what effect would that have on the temperature? The Chief Scientist's answer was:

Virtually nothing.

The fact is, whatever we do here in policy will have no effect on the climate.

You may well argue: what if all nations worked together, like they are at Paris Agreement? If you do the numbers, and if we assume that every single nation meets its Paris commitments by 2030 and we assume that the computer modelling is correct, how much warming do we avoid? One-twentieth of one degree by the year 2100. That is what is achieved under the Paris commitment—one-twentieth of one degree. The greatest moral challenge that we have is to make those admissions to the Australian public and not virtue-seek on this issue.

Others have brought up the issue of Tuvalu and have said that Tuvalu is at imminent risk of disappearance. But actually, if you look at the peer-reviewed science and what the peer-reviewed science says about Tuvalu, Auckland University's Professor Kench has found that, since the 1970s, Tuvalu has actually increased in size by 2.9 per cent. The professor said:

The study findings may seem counterintuitive … but the dominant mode of change over that time on Tuvalu has been expansion, not erosion.

That is the peer-reviewed science.

When we talk about taking action on climate change, it is very important to remember that our electricity sector, which we all talk about with our solar panels and wind turbines, is only one-third of our CO2 emissions. I ask other members of parliament to please tell me this: what are you going to do in the spaces of agriculture, what are you doing in road transport, what are you doing in commercial aviation and what are you doing in the mining sector to reduce our emissions? The fact is that, no matter what we do, the reality is that we will not make a change to the climate— (Time expired)

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

I thank the member for Mayo for bringing this motion before the House. I saw her briefly outside and gave her that thanks personally, because she had to get to another chamber. I am very pleased to speak on the need for urgent action on climate change. It is an issue of the highest order. Climate change isn't a speculative theory anymore; it's a devastating reality that has very real, measurable impacts across the globe. The five warmest years on global record have occurred in the past seven years.

The brutal ignorance, or perhaps rank deceit, displayed by some members of the government about this fundamental scientific reality is one of the greatest travesties of politics today. The list of climate crimes by the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Liberal governments is long and shameful. Over the past five years, they have systematically set out to dismantle or shackle everything Australia had to reduce emissions and stem the dire impacts of climate change. They abolished the carbon pricing mechanism. They removed the cap on pollution and installed the dodgy direct action program, which paid polluters in the hope that they would somehow stop polluting. They defunded the Climate Council. They launched a savage war on the renewable industry, which saw investments plummet by as much as 90 per cent. They tried to axe the renewable energy target. They tried to shut down the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and ARENA, which had its funding cut anyway. They then set up a pathetically low climate target that all but guarantees that we cannot meet our Paris targets and obligations.

All of this was under the direction of the apparent real leaders of the government—that is, the very rabid but small number of right-wing fringe dwellers in the party room who have completely hijacked the Liberal and National parties in Australia. Shame on you. It has just been an ongoing disappointment for Australians everywhere that both of those party rooms seem unable to deal with this small minority rump that has hijacked climate change and effective policy responses in this nation for years and years.

This gross neglect of climate and energy policy has not even stopped the spiralling electricity prices. We've seen plummeting business confidence and investment. This neglect also having a direct and material impact on emissions. Under the former Labor government, carbon emissions dropped more than 10 per cent. Since the Liberals got into power, carbon emissions have risen year on year. The government's own data shows that, under its policy void, carbon pollution will keep rising all the way out to 2030, the furthest date of projections. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change starkly outlined the very real chance that we will exceed a temperature increase of 1.5 degrees by 2040. We use a lot of superlatives in this place, but there are no words strong enough to impress the grave threat that this would pose to our health, our food security, our water supply and, indeed, our very existence.

The time for climate denialism in our federal government is over. The time to end the war on renewables is here, and the time for real action on climate change is now. And it's not just Labor saying this. The roar of community dissent is becoming deafening: Australians want action on climate change and they want it now. Last week in my electorate I met with around 30 young people between the ages of five and 13 from Newcastle East Public School. They said that they're concerned about the impact of climate change on our animals, our plants and our oceans, and they entreated me to take their message to parliament. It is a sad state of affairs when primary school students are more informed than government members about the dire implications of climate change, but that is the sad reality. My message to those students and to young people across Australia is simple: Labor will not shirk our responsibility to future generations. We've committed to reducing carbon pollution in line with the 45 per cent emissions target by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2050. (Time expired)

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support this motion, and I congratulate the member for Mayo on the comprehensive nature of the proposition that she's put before the parliament this evening. It is common sense. We know that the precautionary principle means that we need to act on climate change; and that the sooner we act, the cheaper that action will be and the more benefit we will gain from that action. I've been here a while and, for a time, I was the environment and climate change spokesperson for the party. I wrote the policy with Kim Beazley, the climate change blueprint, back in 2006. We campaigned for that blueprint, which included an emissions trading scheme and a price on carbon. It included the ratification of the Kyoto protocol. It included measures to improve sustainability in housing and in transport. It included the policy supporting the Renewable Energy Target being lifted to 20 per cent by 2020. At the time we adopted that policy, the target was just two per cent, so it was a tenfold increase—an expression of the faith that we had in human ingenuity to develop technology that would make a real difference in terms of reducing our emissions, improving productivity and creating jobs at the same time.

It is important to remember that in 2007 John Howard changed his mind before that election—there had been a bipartisan position supporting an emissions trading scheme in the lead-up to that election. But, unfortunately, the coalition changed its mind when we proposed the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in 2009. It still would have been carried, had the Greens political party voted for that proposition in the Senate, and, if that had happened, I'm convinced that there would be a price on carbon still in place today that would have been doing its job and that would have made that transition to a clean energy future so much easier. The problem that we had wasn't just that the climate change sceptics got control of the coalition under the former Prime Minister and member for Warringah. It's that they became market sceptics as well, and opposed any market based mechanisms to promote change.

Since the change of government, we've seen the action on climate change go backwards. We've seen a government that has been unable to come up with a comprehensive energy plan. They had the emissions intensity scheme, then they asked the Chief Scientist to produce a policy and he came up with the clean energy target, which they abandoned, and then they had various versions of the National Energy Guarantee and, after it going through the party room not once but twice, they then abandoned their own policy. Now this government doesn't have an energy policy, going forward. The fact is that the private sector and the energy sector are saying that what they want is certainty. They need policy certainty so as to promote that investment, but they're not getting it from this government. They will have it from Labor. We'll put on the table our proposal to be prepared to support the NEG and negotiate with the government. We've put on the table our commitment to a 45 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030, net zero emissions by 2050 and 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030.

The fact is that we are the party of the future in terms of government and we're prepared to work with people of goodwill, such as the member for Mayo. I note the newly-elected member for Wentworth in the chamber this evening. We're prepared to work with people of goodwill who understand that climate change shouldn't be a partisan issue. It should be something that the whole parliament unites together on in order to achieve change. We're prepared to work cooperatively with members of the coalition of goodwill as well, because this is an issue that should be beyond politics; it's an issue about our future.

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate the member for Mayo on putting forward this very important topic. I'm going to start by saying that one of the premises of the motion was unfortunate, which is that the government's target was in some way adequate as a contribution to taking on climate change. The sad fact is that the government's climate change target of a 26 per cent reduction on 2000 levels by 2030 is woefully inadequate. It does not represent Australia taking meaningful action. It does not represent Australia making a contribution commensurate with our part in the global challenge. It's wildly out of step with what comparative countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany or other countries in Europe and Canada are taking. What's even sadder is that the government won't even meet their own inadequate targets. The government's own figures show that our 2020 emissions will be the same as those in 2000. Let me repeat that: our emissions in 2020 will be the same as Australia's emissions in 2000, and our 2030 emissions, based on current projections, will be only five per cent below 2005 levels. That is a damning indictment of this government's lack of commitment to taking action on climate change.

In fact, carbon pollution has risen in the economy for three consecutive years. Last year, it rose by 1.5 per cent alone. The only reason we will be meeting the 2020 Kyoto targets is the visionary policies of the Beattie-Bligh Labor governments to take action around land clearing in Queensland and Labor's carbon price, which in two years alone reduced carbon pollution by 14 million tonnes. They are the only reasons we will meet our 2020 targets. As I said, this government has no plan on how we'll meet 2030 targets. Their Emissions Reduction Fund is a dog. Half of the abatement isn't meaningful abatement, and we are seeing projects having to hand back their revenue. They have had six energy policies in two years; in fact, they've had four energy policies in 14 days. We had NEG 1, NEG 2 and NEG 3 and then the current energy minister's basic abandonment of any emissions reduction policy.

This government isn't committed to taking action on climate change, but I'm proud to say that the Labor opposition is. We've got a commitment to reducing emissions by 45 per cent by 2030. It is based on the best evidence from the Climate Change Authority that that is the appropriate level of emissions reduction for Australia, and we've got a solid plan to hit that. We released our policy in energy last week, with overwhelming stakeholder support, and we'll announce our policies in the other sectors to achieve that target. Labor will have a genuine alternative—a policy that will not only cut emissions in the energy sector but will also cut the cost of electricity, because renewable energy is the cheapest form of new energy, and will drive up to 71,000 new jobs.

In the time remaining I caution people who are passionate about this area to not repeat the mistakes of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, where a group of people in the Greens political party pursued policy purity and political opportunism at the expense of taking concrete action. The five Greens senators put the perfect ahead of the possible and voted with Tony Abbott, the member for Warringah, and the luddites in the Liberal Party to defeat the CPRS. They were the sole difference between the CPRS getting up or not, and that led to the nine years of climate wars which have continued to this very day. Think about it for a second: if the Greens had been willing to compromise and say, 'Here's an ETS that we can build upon, which will be effective and is supported by key stakeholders,' it would have been implemented in 2009 and would have demonstrated to the world that the sky would not fall in. We wouldn't have had comments about Whyalla being wiped out or comments from the member for New England about $100 lamb roasts. We wouldn't have had that silliness. We would have proved to the Australian people that we can take meaningful action to climate change and we could have scaled up from there. Instead they put their petty political self-interest ahead, and we're paying the price now. I urge those same people not to grandstand again—to go not for the perfect but instead for something achievable and practical that we can build upon, which is Labor's concrete plan to take action on climate change.

Kerryn Phelps (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of the notice of motion moved by the member for Mayo calling on the government to:

(a) maintain its commitment to the Paris Agreement and its targets; and

(b) take:

  (i) genuine and meaningful action to meet those targets; and

  (ii) significantly greater action to reduce Australia's greenhouse emissions …

The scientific consensus on climate change is in: climate change is real and we must act as a nation to do our part to help reduce its impact. In the recent Wentworth by-election one of the major issues people in the electorate raised with me was climate change. Unfortunately in Australia there has been a major disconnect between the desire of a clear majority of Australians for meaningful and immediate action on climate change and the current government's ongoing inability to produce any coherent policy to address it. As a nation and as global citizens we must embrace pathways to effectively cut greenhouse gas emissions while safeguarding national economic prosperity and affordable, reliable energy for all Australians. Implementing solutions that are effective, efficient and do not discriminate or create inequality is our real challenge in this debate.

In 2002 when I was serving as AMA president we held a summit on climate change and human health policy. There are enormous public health implications of climate change, such as heat related deaths and illnesses, vectorborne illnesses, waterborne illnesses like gastroenteritis, reduced food production such as reduced fish populations, and air pollution related illnesses such as asthma. The World Health Organization estimates there will be 250,000 additional deaths globally per year between 2030 and 2050 due to climate change. Those of us most vulnerable to these effects are children, the poor, the elderly and those who are already sick. It is clear that something needs to be done.

By listening during the by-election campaign I learned from the voters that they wanted action and I made it a key part of my platform. During the campaign I announced my intentions on climate policy: transition to 100 per cent renewable energy, 50 per cent by 2030; restore a credible scientific research based Climate Change Authority to inform government policy; oppose any federal government underwriting of new coal fired power generation; stop government subsidies of new fossil fuel developments, including the proposed Adani mine; meet our commitments under the Paris climate agreement as a minimum; ban political donations by fossil fuel companies; and establish a register to force all senators and members to disclose meetings with fossil fuel companies and their lobbyists.

Contrast this to the current government, which is dominated by climate sceptics. The former member for Wentworth and former Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, made this clear when he was speaking at the Australian Bar Association's annual conference in Sydney recently. Mr Turnbull reportedly said that a climate sceptic group within his own party held the line:

… if you don't do what we want, we will blow the show up …

He was quoted as saying:

The truth is … the Liberal Party and the Coalition is not capable of dealing with climate change.

This is simply not good enough when an overwhelming proportion of Australians are concerned about the effects of climate change. The latest UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report shows the urgent need for global action on climate change. The report is groundbreaking in that it looks at the impacts of keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to two degrees Celsius. It finds that reaching the lower target would lessen the risk of drought, floods and extreme heat. The authors of the report said urgent and unprecedented changes are needed to reach the lower target. The half-degree difference could prevent corals from being completely eradicated and ease pressure on the Arctic.

Solving the climate change crisis requires vision and leadership. The Prime Minister's thought bubble on the day the IPCC report was released of overturning the ban on building nuclear reactors in Australia was not and is not the answer. We saw how that worked out for the people of Fukushima. The people of Wentworth and of Australia generally want decisive action on cutting greenhouse emissions and a well-researched and deliverable plan for a just transition from coal to renewables. Australia must eventually source all our energy requirements from renewable sources in order to limit the effects of climate change. This will require Australia coming together around an agreed plan. I will be guided by experts on the timing and pace at which Australia can responsibly transition to 100 per cent renewals, but I want the experts on climate and energy to develop this plan.

One of the ways to drive a reduction in emissions is to shift away from coal. Coal is old technology that will never be able to become clean. Thermal coal-fired power generation needs to be phased out in an orderly way as renewable sources become more affordable and available. Taxpayers' money should be invested in creating the long-term, sustainable transition to renewable technologies, not propping up environmentally harmful fossil fuels. We have abundant natural resources to harness. Renewable solar and wind are now cheaper forms of electricity generation than new coal-fired power plants. The current lack of policy certainty is hindering investment.

Time is running out for an effective national policy to address climate change. The longer we wait, the more expensive and difficult this transition becomes. We can and we must all assume responsibility for supporting and embracing change for our children, for our land and for our planet.

Debate adjourned.