Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To the Prime Minister, I refer to my question last week: to have a balanced sheet in order in the future, has your government now assessed the economic impact of a three-degree warmer world to jobs and to coastal and regional communities and, if you have, what are those costs?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Because of the prospect of a warmer globe, we are taking action on climate change as a government. That is why we need no motivation other than the reality that we understand: that we know we need to take action on climate change. That's why we took to the last election the plan and the commitment to a 26 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030. Those emissions have now reduced by 13.1 per cent on 2005 levels. That's stronger than we've seen by other countries like New Zealand and Canada. We have a plan and a commitment, which we put to the Australian people, to meet that target by 2030. In relation to the member's question, while the government is taking action to 2030 and is making great progress to achieving that target based on our plan, those opposite do not have a 2030 view about emissions reductions that they can actually share with the Australian people. Not one!

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

The member for Warringah on a point of order.

Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Relevance: the question went to modelling of costs, not to alternate plans.

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

Yes. I'll say there are two issues there. It's very similar to a point of order I've just ruled on. It did have a specific question, but it also referred to the question last week. Whilst I haven't memorised it, I remember you raising a point of order on that, and my point was that had a long preamble. But I do say to the Prime Minister it didn't ask for alternatives either.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member again for her question, because the question probably would be better put to the Labor Party, who do not have a 2030 target. They want to talk about 2050, and they can't even tell you what they want to happen by 2030. Let me tell you what we're going to do by 2030 and what we're going to do by 2050. What the government is doing is putting a technology road map, which is what you need to ensure that you can reduce emissions not just now but over the next 30 years to address the very issue that the member has raised.

Now, those opposite have a 2050 target. The member herself may have a 2050 target. She may have a 2050 target and the Labor Party has a 2050 target, but I'm not aware of either the member or the Labor Party having a plan as to how to achieve it. What we have is a plan to reduce emissions not just now but into the future. A key part of our plan is to reduce emissions without putting a tax on Australians, without putting up their electricity prices and without undermining the industries and the jobs that so many members on this side of the House represent in their constituencies right across this country. I'm not going to sell out the jobs of those constituents who depend on those industries. We're going to, recognising that to take action on climate change is necessary, get emissions down by the smart process of having a technology plan that sees us reduce emissions into the future. We've got a plan. It's focused on technology. They've got a target, and all it means is higher taxes.