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

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Shortland proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Federal Government's continuing failure to take action on climate change in light of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, and the impact of this inaction on job creation and the environment.

I call upon all those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It has been a pretty hard day for people today. If you think about it, people who watched the press conference at 11 am this morning got the shocking news about the New South Wales cases, and that followed on from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's working group report, which was very depressing. It was a sober wake-up call for a nation and a world that didn't need one, to be quite honest.

But we can't ignore the truth. The truth is that scientists are observing climate changes in every region and across the whole climate system. Many of the changes already observed are unprecedented in thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of years. Modelling of all five trajectories that they looked at has average temperatures at more than 1.5 degrees Celsius higher by the 2030s, a figure we were hoping to avoid until much later in this century. The report finds that, with 1.5 degrees of global warming, the impacts will include changes to rainfall patterns, with impacts on agriculture; continuous sea level rises, contributing to more flooding; increased permafrost thawing, melting of glaciers and ice sheets and loss of summer Arctic ice; and changes to the ocean, dramatically affecting the ocean ecosystems.

The good news is that the report finds that human actions still have the potential to limit climate change. We should never lose sight of that fact. It is not too late to change this and avoid the worst of climate change. But it will require strong, rapid and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, including getting to net zero emissions.

That's why Labor have been consistent in our support for strong action on climate change. We are the only party of government that have ever taken real action on climate change. We are the only party of government that have legislated a hard cap on greenhouse gas emissions. We've taken strong climate change policies to every election since 1993. Since 1993 we've had strong policies on climate change. We do this not just because it's the right thing for the environment but because it's the right thing for the economy. It's the right thing for the economy because the economic impact of unconstrained climate change will be disastrous for Australia. Conversely, if we seize the economic opportunities that come with the move to decarbonise the world, Australia can benefit more than most, if not every other nation on the earth.

This is a story people are familiar with. They understand in their guts that we have the privilege of being on the continent with the greatest solar radiation in the world. If anyone can seize the opportunities of solar power, it's Australia. We've also got great wind resources both onshore and offshore. That means that we can have a burgeoning supply of solar and wind power not just to power Australia but to power South-East Asia. That's something that's really exciting. It's something that the private sector is seizing right now.

We have all the key inputs into renewable energy manufacturing and battery manufacturing. We can also manufacture batteries. We've seen great proposals both at Townsville and in the Hunter, in the member for Paterson's own electorate, that can have a huge impact on local communities. There's also no reason why we can't manufacturer electric vehicles in this country. The one I'm most passionate about is hydrogen and energy intensive manufacturing. If we can just grab 6½ per cent of the global green steel market, we could have 25,000 manufacturing jobs in places like Newcastle and Gladstone making green steel. I'm passionate about the steel city becoming the steel city again.

These are the opportunities, and these are the opportunities that Labor has supported throughout its period. That's why under Anthony Albanese we've announced the $20 billion Rewiring the Nation fund. That's why we've announced a $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund. That's why we've announced $200 million for community batteries and $200 million for electric vehicles. We are the party that's committed to taking strong action on climate change to help the environment and to seize the economic opportunities that come with it, because, unlike those opposite, we won't bury our heads in the sand.

In the time remaining, I'm going to give people a little foretaste, a taste, of what they're going to get from the minister for emissions reduction. He will give us 10 minutes of mendacity—10 minutes of a numbers soup where his entire strategy is just to throw numbers at you until you're entirely confused about what has gone on. The first number I predict he'll use—and I'm doing a bit of fortune-telling, but, based on what the Prime Minister said yesterday and today, I've got a good chance—is in bragging about the fact that Australia has reduced its emissions by 20 per cent since 2005. And that's true. But how did we get that 20 per cent reduction since 2005? Well, in the first two years, between 2005 and 2007, under John Howard, emissions actually increased by 2.4 per cent. They didn't go down; they went up. Under the Rudd and Gillard Labor governments, between 2007 and 2013, emissions fell by a massive 14 per cent—14 per cent. And what's happened since then? Between 2013 and 2019, under the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government, annual emissions fell by four per cent and then, last year, emissions fell by another four per cent.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wonder what happened last year!

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Exactly, and I'll come to that, Member for Moreton. So there's been a 20 per cent reduction since 2005—14 per cent by Labor; six per cent by the Liberal-National party, and yet they brag about that. But, when you break down their six per cent, how do they get to the six per cent? Guess how much of the six per cent came from Labor's Renewable Energy Target that they've tried to abolish time after time? In fact, the member for Hume, the minister, got preselected and then elected to his seat on an anti-wind-farm, anti-RET agenda. So, of their six per cent, guess how much came from Labor's Renewable Energy Target? It's five point seven percentage points—5.7 percentage points. And guess where the rest came from? The rest came from the first recession in 30 years, last year—the one that the minister was bragging about because it took cars off the road. He was actually using it as a bragging point! So, of their six per cent, 5.7 percentage points were from Labor's RET and the rest were from dropping us into a recession. I can't believe this minister can look at himself in the mirror, quite frankly, let alone come into this chamber and make the claims that he's about to make.

Their second claim will be that, in 2020, emissions under them were 100 million tonnes lower than they were under Labor. The truth is that, in 2013, emissions in 2020 were projected to be 656 million tonnes. The actual outcome was 499 million tonnes. So, on the face of it, the minister can make that claim. But those projections were revised down every year, basically, of the last decade—in 2016, 559 million; in 2017, 551 million; in 2018, 540 million; in 2019, 534 million. What caused these reductions in the projections of how much our economy would emit? Was it their strong action on climate change? Was it their stable and consistent energy policy? No. The government's own documents say these downward emissions projections were caused by the impact of the drought on the farming sector, by the decline of manufacturing emissions—because they closed the automotive industry—and by Labor's RET. So the three reasons emissions were 100 million tonnes lower are that there was a drought; they killed the car industry, destroying 50,000 jobs; and Labor's RET. That's the truth about all the numbers that the minister for emissions will throw at us in this debate.

The third claim—and the most offensive one, quite frankly, because the rest is history—and the worst one is that they will meet and beat their 28 per cent reduction target by 2030. Well, their own documents contradict that. Their own documents predict that, by 2030, emissions will only be 23 per cent lower than in 2005—only 23 per cent. So their own documents are surrender documents. Their own documents surrender and say they will not meet the target. The worst will be the 'technology, not taxes' line from the minister. Minister, unless you've got a money tree, the only way you promote technology is by creating incentives and subsidies. To pay for it, the government has to do what? It has to use taxes.

This is a government that is totally bereft on climate change. This is a government that is betraying not only future generations but the current generation by denying us the economic opportunities that are associated with taking strong action on climate change. Those on this side of the parliament, the Labor side, are committed to net zero emissions by 2050. We'll have strong medium-term policies announced before the next election and, more importantly, we've got a track record, when in government, of taking action on climate change, seizing the economic opportunities that go with it and not betraying future generations like those on the opposite side. They talk about family values, but they're undermining the Australian family as we speak.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a pleasure to speak on this motion moved by the member for Shortland. He is right to say that the report that came out at 6 pm last night is an important report. There is no doubt about that. It underscores the point that countries around the world, including Australia, need to do their bit to bring down emissions. But it's going to require a globally coordinated effort to do that. Our consistent position has been that the way to ensure we have falling emissions and a strong economy at the same time is through technology, not taxes.

Importantly, that is not the member for Shortland's approach. He was a key architect of Labor's carbon tax. In fact, he claimed credit for it in the speech he gave a moment ago. It was that carbon tax that saw the jobs of hardworking Australians destroyed, including at the aluminium smelter.

Opposition Member:

An opposition member interjecting—

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So they're taking ownership of it—I'll take the interjection—including the aluminium smelter at Kurri Kurri in the Hunter Valley, not far from the member's electorate. And now, through our investment in Kurri Kurri, we are re-establishing an industrial site at exactly the place where they took the jobs out.

The member for Shortland goes further than that. One day, before I was about to give an interview on ABC regional radio, they were interviewing the member for Shortland. He was asked whether the Labor policy was a carbon tax. He said it was 'an implicit carbon tax', a sneaky carbon tax—and we know, one way or another, that that is the policy he supports. In fact, the president of the CFMEU's New South Wales energy and northern mining division said of the member for Shortland that 'he's running around the countryside supporting the Greens view of life'. Hear, hear! I don't often agree with the CFMEU, but I sure do agree with them on this one.

The latest IPCC report confirms the need for global action. Meeting these challenges is a shared responsibility, and we are playing our part. We met, and beat, our 2020 targets. We did that at the same time as we were building the largest LNG export sector in the world. We are reducing emissions in Asia. We accept the fact that that makes it harder for us. Indeed, as the member for Shortland pointed out, when Labor left government, their forecast of our emissions for last year were over 100 million tonnes higher than we actually achieved. Conveniently, he completely ignored the role of small-scale solar.

Mr Conroy interjecting—

I'll take that interjection. He needs to really understand the sector before he makes these sorts of interjections. But what do we hear from those opposite on this issue? A failure to acknowledge Australia's achievements. They'll talk Australia down at every opportunity they get. They haven't had much to say about the vandalism we saw this morning—defacing iconic public buildings. That is not the way to do it; technology is the pathway to reducing emissions. They have no 2030 target, they have no plan, and there is nothing but deafening silence on these critical issues from those opposite. They come in here and talk about jobs. Meanwhile, they have voted against the expansion of ARENA for the Technology Investment Roadmap—$80 billion of combined public and private sector investment and 160,000 jobs. For the Labor Party, there are only their preferred ways to bring down emissions. It's ideological. When it comes to the practical questions of bringing emissions down, they will pick the ways they prefer.

Fortunately, the member for Shortland has already stolen my thunder with Australia's extraordinary performance on reduction of emissions; he acknowledges that we've reduced emissions by 20 per cent since 2005 and that our achievements include reducing emissions by 100 million tonnes lower than those opposite forecast. He failed to acknowledge, though, that that is a performance that beats Canada, New Zealand, the United States, Japan and the OECD. In the electricity sector in particular, in the NEM, we've seen very sharp reductions, including 5.6 per cent in the last year alone.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Mr Conroy interjecting—

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith and the member for Shortland!

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's 7,000 megawatts in the last year alone on new renewables, dominated by small-scale solar, and we have the highest amount of those installations in the world.

Those opposite like to crow about their achievements when they were last in government. Their greatest achievement was the carbon tax. But let me tell you: we've provided 7,000 megawatts in renewables in one year, which is more than the entire time when Labor were in government. Indeed, the year before, it was 6,300 megawatts in a single year, which is, again, more than the entire time that Labor were in government. We've deployed renewables eight times faster than the global per person average and four times faster than Europe or the US. We are getting on with the job.

When I was a teenager, the first cassette I ever bought was Billy Joel's Greatest Hits. It included great songs, like 'Piano Man'. But the best stuff I've seen lately isn't Billy Joel's Greatest Hits; it's Joel's greatest hits! Just across Lake Macquarie from the member for Shortland he's getting missiles on a daily basis. He said recently:

… after 14 years of trying, the Labor Party has made not one contribution to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in this country.

The member for Hunter doesn't agree with the member for Shortland's rendition of the world, but he goes further than that. Again, across Lake Macquarie, he sent a little missile. The member for Hunter has rightly pointed out that the member for McMahon's decision to vote against the government's ARENA expansion is just plain 'stupid policy and stupid politics'. Labor doesn't listen to him, though. Last month on 2GB, the member for Hunter said:

… Labor should just back whatever the government puts on the table. To do otherwise is to suggest we are not genuinely committed to action on climate change. And we've got to back the things the government is prepared to support, from renewables right through to carbon capture and storage.

But, again, sadly and tragically, Labor didn't listen. So we get more hits from Joel! In May, he warned that the 'excessive progressives think they can afford to cut the coalminers loose and still win'. But, again, they didn't listen.

The member for McMahon and the member for Shortland think that they know best. The member for McMahon has bragged about being the key architect of Labor's failed climate policies that they took to the last election. He, of course, has never seen a tax he didn't like. I suspect the member for Shortland hasn't seen a tax he didn't like. The member for McMahon loved Labor's original carbon tax. When he was Treasurer, it got to the highest level it had ever got to. He was the Treasurer when that happened. You name it; he'll tax it, and that includes carbon. The difference is, on this side of the place, we're for technology, not taxes.

You only need to look at their efforts in the last few months to see all of this in action. We've seen their opposition to technologies they don't like. One of them, of course, is carbon capture and storage. The member for Hunter has pointed out that those on his side need to start backing this technology. Indeed, he had to write an AFR opinion editorial—

Mr Conroy interjecting—

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Shortland is warned.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He had to write an op-ed to correct the incorrect views of those on his side of this place. No doubt talking to the member for Shortland, he said, 'To be taken seriously, climate change activists need to jettison their fundamentalism.' But it's not just the member for Hunter; it's also the former Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel, who said, 'The role of CCS is being promoted by the IEA, the United Nations and the Biden administration.' And yet, sadly, Labor votes against it. We are getting on with the job—practical action that Australians can be proud of.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today has certainly been a very difficult day for Australians because we have been, as we have been for a very long time, bearing the twin crises: the COVID crisis and the climate crisis. People from across my electorate and from across this country have a deep anxiety inside them that has been really coming through today in the wake of a couple of things. In the COVID crisis, it's been in the wake of the member for Dawson standing up in this chamber and disgracing this House by claiming that masks don't work and that lockdowns don't work. In the climate crisis, of course, last night we had the IPCC report in relation to climate change. It's been very disappointing that the government have been dodging, weaving and ducking in trying to avoid all responsibility in climate change as they do with every issue. It has not been surprising that the same man who was in this place claiming that masks don't work and that lockdowns don't work is the man who has been running conspiracy theories that the climate change data of the Bureau of Meteorology has somehow been faked. He uses social media to promote this disinformation and of course the government, led by the Prime Minister, gives these deliberate acts of disinformation tacit endorsement by turning the other cheek, by looking away and by refusing to condemn these words.

When it comes to the climate crisis, ideas that somehow climate change is made up, that it's not true, are dangerous. They're dangerous because they are a disincentive to real action. Fortunately for all of us, we have, against this very fringe mentality that is, as I said, given tacit endorsement by the leadership of the government who do not openly condemn these sorts of disinformation programs, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and their report from last night. That report makes very clear the significance of the challenge that the world is facing in relation to climate change. It pulls no punches. It says Australian land areas have warmed by around 1.4 degrees Celsius. It says that annual temperature changes have emerged above natural variability in all land regions. It says heat extremes have increased, cold extremes have decreased and these trends are projected to continue. It says that the frequency of extreme fire weather days has increased and the fire season has become longer since 1950 at many locations across Australasia. It says that the intensity, frequency and duration of fire weather events are projected to increase throughout Australia and New Zealand. Heavy rainfall and river floods are projected to increase and an increase in marine heatwaves and ocean acidity has been observed and is projected. Sandstorms and dust storms are projected to increase throughout Australia.

There is much more in this sobering report, and it's this report that is really giving voice today to the fears of Australians, the fears that this country lacks the leadership it needs to take real action on climate change at home and to take real leadership on the international stage. It's giving voice to the fears about what sorts of lives our families will have, we ourselves will have and our fellow Australians will have in the mid-2030s, if we hit 1.5 degrees across the world. People are genuinely afraid, and what they're looking for from this government is leadership. But what they are not getting from this government is leadership. They're getting ducking, weaving and dodging, and we just saw it again from the minister who had been so ably demolished by the shadow minister, the member for Shortland, in advance. I thank the member for Shortland for a terrific speech that I'm sure will resonate across Australia. We know that people have this fear, and it's a legitimate fear. It's a legitimate fear because we are going through these massive crises at the moment and we do have a leadership vacuum at the top of our country. What can we do about it? It's very clear to me: we need and we deserve a government that will take real action on the COVID pandemic—timely, thoughtful, considered, rapid action—and a government that will take real action on climate change. You've heard from Labor multiple policies on climate change. We will win the economic argument and we will bring people with us because, at the end of the day, this is a massive crisis and Australia deserves a government that will lead.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party, Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I always enjoy coming to a debate led by the member for Shortland. The member for Shortland is always focused and he's passionate and he's disassociated from reality—and he's also wrong. These are the challenges for the member for Shortland.

The facts are these. We have reduced emissions by 20 per cent. That is what we have done. If you compare that with other countries, you see that that is significant and substantial compared to the noisemakers. If you compare it to New Zealand, for example, which has excluded agriculture from its numbers, we are doing better than New Zealand. We're doing better than the US, South Korea, Japan, Canada—the numbers keep racking up.

We took a proposal to the Australian people at the last election. We made commitments to 2030, and we are delivering on those commitments. The phrase 'technology, not taxes' is not just a line. I met with Chevron in recent days. Their Gorgon CCS unit out in the north-west is just past five million tonnes. That sounds pretty successful to me. That is what success looks like—companies out there investing their hard earned and getting a result.

The MPI talks about inaction on job creation. I'm not sure where those opposite have been, but in my portfolio the results have been magnificent, absolutely magnificent. They have gone from roughly 240,000 Australians directly employed to 279,000 directly employed, at the last set of numbers. Unemployment is under five per cent. This is what success looks like. This is a sector which is doing its part, which is carrying the Australian economy, and it has made some very significant commitments and sacrifices to make that happen during the COVID pandemic. Like any number of Australians, those in the resources sector have been away from their families for many weeks, for many months—for long periods of time—because it was necessary. Those results have resulted in a record set of Australian exports, at $310 billion for the last financial year, and forecasts of $344 billion for the next financial year because of projects like Narrabri, over 900 jobs expected; the Barossa announcement up in the Darwin LNG life extension, over 600 jobs; Scarborough, WA, 3,200 jobs; and the Beetaloo basin, where we expect more than 6,000 jobs to be created over the next 20 years as we bring that gas basin online. We have a strategic plan worth over $220 million to make sure that that happens.

However, there are some challenges. One of those is that Environment Centre NT has applied to the Federal Court, seeking a review of my decision to prescribe the Beetaloo Basin Cooperative Drilling Program and award grants under the program. Environment Centre NT is supported by the Environmental Defenders Office. Given this is a matter before the courts, I won't be making comments on that specifically. However, in general terms, this is the format that those people use. When I say 'those people', I mean those who are out there using environmental or green lawfare to stop legitimate projects in this country that help deliver jobs and help deliver stronger economies, particularly in areas like the Northern Territory.

If we look at what those opposite are putting forward, former senator Nigel Scullion, who left the Senate at the last election, very famously said in the Nationals party room before the election: 'Get off the twitterer.' 'Get off the twitterer,' was Mr Scullion's comment, 'Get out to the pubs, get out to the coffee shops, get out to small business and talk to real people.' I say to the former senator: unfortunately, it's on the 'twitterer' where you find Labor's policies. Labor's election commitments at the last election included an announcement around a $14 million funding package for—guess who—the Environmental Defenders Office. Those opposite will sit there and sometimes say they support the resources sector and other times say something different, whether they're in Melbourne or Moranbah. It is Moranbah, not Mooranbah, as was outlined by the Leader of the Opposition a couple of days ago. So $14 million was the commitment from those opposite to support individuals who want to stop the government's policies to deliver jobs. That is what they put forward. That is the proposition from those opposite supporting the Environmental Defenders Office. What's next? They'll be out supporting those individuals who were vandalising Australia's Parliament House this morning. This is their policy and this is what's been put forward by those opposite.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to reiterate the need for strong action on climate change. My electorate has been hit hard by concurrent natural disasters for years now. People across Eden-Monaro will never forget the bushfires that devastated our region. Many communities across the electorate are still recovering and rebuilding, all while trying to process the mental toll of the bushfires and cope with the uncertainty of the pandemic.

But, for us, bushfires aren't the only natural disaster to hit Eden-Monaro. We had prolonged drought, bushfires, floods and then a pandemic hit our communities. According to the data from our six local council areas, we've been impacted by 28 declared natural disasters in the last three years alone. During that time we have faced more than 18 major floods and at least six bushfire events, which culminated in over a million hectares of land being burnt across the electorate in the Black Summer fires. Every few months over the last three years, constituents in parts of my electorate had to stop whatever they were doing and prepare for the worst. They've had to sandbag properties, evacuate themselves and evacuate livestock, often while having to make painful decisions during evacuations about what to save and what to leave.

Having read the IPCC report, I worry about what more is to come if more action isn't taken. It is clear—heat extremes have increased in Australia, and the intensity, frequency and duration of extreme weather events are projected to increase. We've battled through a terrifying summer of bushfires, and I can't imagine—and I don't want to imagine—how we would get through a more intense or longer bushfire period. We need to do more to prevent this from happening again. It's not good enough to stand at the lectern and laugh about a resources sector when people are really struggling in their day-to-day lives because of these events currently happening. We have had eight years of inaction by this government. It's past time that this government started delivering.

Stabilising the climate requires rapid and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reaching net zero emissions. All our states and territories and all leading business, industry and agricultural groups are on the same page, committing to at least net zero emissions by 2050. But the Morrison government is refusing, even at the bare minimum, to do that. We've got a prime minister who refuses to see what's obvious to so many across this country and so many people across my electorate. We've got a government so divided on the basic science of climate change that it's unable to see that the disaster unfolding in front of us could also be Australia's job opportunity. The Morrison government is failing to see all the reasons why action on climate change must start now. Enough flying blind; it's time to open your eyes and see what's right in front of you.

The world is going to move rapidly towards renewable energy. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity for Australia to jump ahead of the pack, with Australian renewable energy made by our workers and our technology here at home exported to a world hungry with demand. By investing in renewables we could create thousands of jobs in growing industries and more jobs in existing industries, and make power cheaper for homes and businesses. Good climate policy is good jobs policy. Good climate policy benefits individuals, families, businesses and communities. Good climate policy is needed for a prosperous Australia.

We've already lost 10 years to coalition scare campaigns against climate action, and we can't afford to lose another 10 years. The climate wars need to end. And this government's term is rapidly coming to an end. Australia cannot afford to waste any more time. My communities cannot afford what happens when we don't act. There is a couple in my electorate who, after 20 months, are still living in a caravan, and they're not the only ones. They're in their 80s. Jim and Enid are at their wit's end. They're in their 80s and they have said that they have never seen things so bad, that the bushfires they experienced were horrendous. They've seen bushfires before, and they have said directly that this is a result of climate change. The eight floods they endured after those bushfires 20 months ago are the result of climate change.We need action and we need it now. We need it for our communities and we need it for jobs.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a privilege to be able to speak on this motion, which is on one of the most significant challenges that we face not just as a country but as a global community. The challenges of climate change are an existential threat to the health and viability of people and of the planet overall. But it is important to make sure that we focus on what it is we can do in making sure that we confront that challenge.

There is no community that is unaffected—even the federal electorate of Goldstein. Even though we are only 55 square kilometres in the metropolitan part of Melbourne, we face every day the challenges of the impact of sea levels and what those do to coastal erosion and the importance of our viable and most beautiful Port Phillip. We have challenges, like many communities do, around the urban heat island effect and the importance of developing and investing in urban canopy to make our community more resilient against the challenges of a changing climate and what that means for water management. We see that locally in the efforts being made by councils in areas from waste reduction through to the investment in our local flora, fauna and parkland.

And, of course, this is of utmost importance as an issue that reminds us of the importance of acting purposefully and with focus. The Prime Minister has said today, rightly, in the context of COVID-19, that there is no solution that is based on Australia just protecting itself and then not taking concern for other countries and what they do, both in aid and supporting them but also in asking them to accept their responsibility too. Australia must accept our responsibility; responsibility belongs at home. The principle of stewardship starts by people taking responsibility. It happens in terms of people taking responsibility for getting themselves vaccinated and their community getting vaccinated, when it comes to COVID-19, and also in cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the context of Australia as well as other countries who seek to do so. We should encourage them to do so.

But, as responsible legislators, we have to make choices. We have to make choices understanding the urgency and the challenges that we face, and make sure that we have a plan that has integrity. We often get told, 'We just want Australia to commit to net zero.' The fact of the matter is that, under the Abbott government, we committed to net zero in the second half of this century. That was done in the Abbott government. What we are seeking to do as a government—and what we should do—is develop a plan with integrity to deliver that.

I talk to constituents regularly about this important issue. Periodically I hold listening posts, as many members no doubt do throughout their communities. I held one in Highett a few months ago. A young woman came to talk to me about the importance of climate change and the impacts she saw for herself and for her family. Once we got through the issues that she wanted to raise, I said, 'Okay, what is it that you're looking to do about it?' She had very strong opinions on what the government was doing—and we're doing a lot; I'll get to that. I asked her what she wanted, and her solution was a carbon tax—just like Labor and the Greens introduced when they were in coalition previously. I made it clear that one of the most important things to drive climate change policy is to make sure that it's sustainable policy—that it not be introduced on the basis of a lie and that it not be done against the will of the Australia people.

What we as a government are seeking to do is drive reform that takes the Australian people with us. That's so the next generation of Australians don't see climate change just as a threat but as an opportunity where we get to build the future of this country and to build a sustainable economic future for this country. That's why the focus is squarely on what we can do around technological development and deployment to build the future of Australia. That's so we're not driving an agenda—as Labor, the Greens and other political parties may want to do—which is a trade-off between the economy and the environment. It's about how we can use the economy and the environment to enhance and build potential for the future of Australia.

That's why the technology road map has been so critically important. What it focuses on is what we can actually do to cut emissions and create jobs—where we can invest resources to build job opportunities for the future of Australia while also cutting our greenhouse gas emissions. One of the best things about it is that we're focused on a technology-neutral way so that we can harness the power of science and technology to build that future. Whether it's investment in hydrogen or, of course, in hydroelectric power, solar PV cells, battery technology or technology that's still experimental and still needs time to mature, we are prepared to back it every step of the way, because that is how you deliver sustainable policy and that is how you take the Australian people with you.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the fires in Greece, the heatwaves in Washington state, the floods in Germany and the breaking apart of icebergs weren't enough, I could understand the fear and the sense of hopelessness that the latest IPCC report has triggered in people. To the grandparents who are worried about the world they're leaving their grandkids, to the new parents or those thinking of being parents who are worried about what this means for the future of their kids, through to the youngest people themselves, who, with the clarity of children, can see what's ahead of them and can't fathom the lack of action to deal with it, I want to say that, yes, it's scary, but it isn't hopeless.

The facts, not open to dispute or opinions or personal views, written by 234 scientists, backed by 14,000 pieces of peer-reviewed research and then approved by 195 countries, including Australia, are breathtaking. They are proof that Australia has already warmed by around 1.4 degrees Celsius and could be just 10 years away from heating by more than 1.5 degrees. This is the level of warming that the world agreed in 2015 we would try to avoid. It is the level Australia agreed to take action to prevent, yet the failure of our actions has seen us ranked last among 200 countries.

The consequence of the current and future warming, described as code red by the United Nations, is dire. The frequency of extreme fire weather days has increased and fire seasons are longer. Now, that's not news in the Blue Mountains or the Hawkesbury. The intensity, frequency and duration of fire weather events are projected to increase, as are heat extremes, heavy rainfall and river floods, all of which have the potential to wreak havoc on the hills and the lowlands that I represent. Marine heatwaves are already happening and increasing. Snow cover and depth are decreasing and are projected to decrease further. There are sandstorms, dust storms and drought. How predictable but how soul destroying it is to hear the spin from the Morrison government on these facts and its boasting about its meagre efforts.

I was struck by the words of a climate scientist from the University of Melbourne, former scientific adviser to the German government's climate negotiators and one of the IPCC report authors, Dr Malte Meinshausen, who said:

I think everybody in the international community would laugh if they would hear that Australia thinks they're doing enough. Of course they're not doing enough …

They neither have upped their targets for 2030 nor have they put a net zero target onto the table. They are not invited to many of the talks where international climate diplomacy is now going on because they are seen—and rightly so—as a laggard.

The IPCC report is another clear sign that the rest of the world is going to move rapidly ahead toward renewable energy, and we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to jump ahead of the pack. Australia's achievements to date, including in solar on rooftops, is thanks to state government priorities. Our renewable energy, made by our workers, and our technology here at home could be exported to a world that we know is hungry with demand. The world's climate emergency is our jobs opportunity. By investing in renewables, we can create thousands of good-paying jobs and growing industries, making power cheaper for homes and businesses. But we have a government divided, even on the basic science of climate change, let alone able to deliver the opportunities that are before us.

Australians deserve better than a government that tries to spin its way through the rest of the world as the rest of the world decarbonises. We have to act now. This needs tangible actions from a government with a track record on acting, and, of course, that means it needs a Labor government. We need things like offshore wind power, hydrogen and green steel. We need to use the lithium and the rare earths that we have, not just for export but to have our own battery-manufacturing powerhouse. We need to train young Australians for the new energy jobs of the future. We need good policy for electric vehicles so that we can give families more affordable choices. We need to get the grid rewired so that the renewable energy can get from where it is to where it needs to be. And we need things like community batteries—we want to see a start of 400 across the country—so that we can really optimise that solar energy we have. I want to say to young people that there is hope. There are two things: there is hope for the future of the world, and it's not too late—but only if we act now. (Time expired)

James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I appreciate the opportunity to address the House on this matter of public importance, and I start by commending the contribution of the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. In fact in question time, in his answer to my question, he reminded me of the visit we made together to the Tonsley precinct in my home city of Adelaide. It's a project that the Commonwealth is investing in with Australian gas networks and other industry partners to look at blending hydrogen into the natural gas network in the surrounding suburbs of that precinct—a very practical example of the sorts of things this government is investing in to progress technological solutions to the challenges of emissions reductions that ensure we also have a bright economic future to look forward to as we undertake this transition to decarbonise our economy in an economically responsible way.

I want to touch on a very exciting announcement that the government made recently that I was quite closely involved in lobbying for—again, it's in my home state—which is the HILT CRC. Minister Porter announced it was successful in receiving a little over $40 million in funding from the Commonwealth government—HILT CRC being the Heavy Industry Low-carbon Transition Cooperative Research Centre. It's a project put forward with lead partners including Adelaide university; industry partners such as Fortescue, Alcoa and Roy Hill; and, of course, other eminent institutions like the CSIRO.

A huge number of industry partners are working together on one of our major challenges, which is how we're going to find a future pathway for our heavy industries that, at the moment, are very high emitters—of course, they must exist into the future—and how we crack the code of understanding how we can continue to have those industries, particularly the steel industry, whilst pursuing technological solutions to the high CO2 intensity of those sectors. There is no future without industries like steel, like aluminium and like cement. We accept these are high-emitting sectors, and we need technological and scientific solutions to ensure we can continue to produce steel, aluminium and cement—but, of course, hopefully in a way that reduces their CO2 footprint.

This is actually something that presents an enormous opportunity for this country. Green steel is an example. Through the HILT CRC developing commercial technologies to allow us to produce green steel, it could see an enormous job creation opportunity right here in this country. We all know we've got the raw material, we all know we're an enormous producer and exporter of iron ore, but can we, in fact, have a green steel export industry right here in Australia? Of course, green steel is going to involve the processing of iron ore in situ, meaning here in continental Australia.

The HILT CRC is a great example of us investing in finding technological solutions that not only address the challenges of needing to reduce our CO2 emissions but grow our economy in the process and recognise that the future does involve solving these problems. But, rather than exporting jobs out of this country and going it alone by setting targets that will only see industry leave this country to go other countries that don't put in place the same punitive measures—and, perversely, see an increase in CO2 emissions globally—it doesn't matter what CO2 emissions are in a particular country, a particular state; it matters what they are planet wide—we need to do our fair share as a country. We need to make sure that we're not doing things that are unnecessarily and pointlessly punitive to the Australian economy and, perversely, have no impact or benefit whatsoever in reducing the net CO2 emissions of the planet. So solving these sorts of challenges and investing in the other sorts of things that we are doing as a government are going to see that dual benefit of reducing emissions but also protecting jobs in our economy and growing jobs in our economy.

In my home state of South Australia we're doing important things in this regard, like the interconnector with New South Wales. That is going to see an enormous increase in the already high investment in renewable energy generation in South Australia because we will have export markets to other states through investing in that infrastructure. These are the practical things that we're doing as a government, and they are going to pay much more significant dividends than any of the rhetoric that we hear in this chamber from those opposite, which is not backed up by any concrete plans to achieve anything whatsoever.

Anika Wells (Lilley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In September 2019 the Prime Minister warned against fuelling needless anxiety among Australian children about the danger of climate change. He said:

And I think it's important that we give them … confidence that they will not only have a wonderful country and pristine environment to live in but they'll also have an economy they can live in as well.

He then said:

… the worst thing I would impose on any child is needless anxiety—

on any Australian child, and yet Australian children were then rescued by the Navy off the beaches of Mallacoota in Black Summer in some of the worst bushfires, which had driven them out of their own town. Australian children were hospitalised in record numbers because of asthma and respiratory illness and heat stroke as a result of those environmental conditions from that same Black Summer. It is Australian children who have had to sue their own government to prove that they are owed a duty of care. They sued the Morrison government, and they won.

In May the Federal Court found there was a new duty, a duty it has never found before, that the environment minister owes a duty of care to Australian young people not to cause them physical harm in the form of personal injury from climate change. The court warned in its written judgement:

It is difficult to characterise in a single phrase the devastation that the plausible evidence presented in this proceeding forecasts for the Children … The physical environment will be harsher, far more extreme and devastatingly brutal when angry. As for the human experience—quality of life, opportunities to partake in nature’s treasures, the capacity to grow and prosper—all will be greatly diminished. Lives will be cut short. Trauma will be far more common and good health harder to hold and maintain. None of this will be the fault of nature itself. It will largely be inflicted by the inaction of this generation of adults, in what might fairly be described as the greatest inter-generational injustice ever inflicted by one generation of humans upon the next.

To say that children are vulnerable is to vastly underestimate their predicament. Clearly there are worse things that a PM can impose than needless anxiety, because, after all of that, and after today's IPCC report, the Prime Minister has chosen to dig in—the Prime Minister who always talks about the cost of others, but never talks about the cost of his own inaction, of his own failure to act on climate change domestically, not just in dealing with extreme weather events but also in the cost of tariffs that other countries are now considering imposing upon us.

Our constituents are crying out for this parliament to act. Constituents like John and Chris and Clive have already written to me today about the IPCC report urging us to act. My high-school geography teacher, Mr Fitz, who has now sadly passed away, used to teach me to think globally but act locally. We need to back technologies like offshore wind, hydrogen, green steel and others not only to get the energy we need to keep the lights on but to create a jobs boom in new industries, in local supply chains and in export. In Lilley we have a proud local manufacturing history that we could reinvigorate with Labor's policies like Rewiring the Nation and Power to the People. The cost of climate change will come to every Australian neighbourhood, if it hasn't already.

I said in my first speech that many big debates are not right versus left. They are short term versus long term, and we cannot prioritise one at the expense of the other—even at a time when the news cycle, the electoral cycle or the bills coming in all draw us to short termism. It must never be beyond us in this place to get the long term right too. But for eight long years it has been beyond this place to get the long term right. Under the Morrison government, it seems well beyond us and, Prime Minister, that is on your watch. That is your complacency. That is your failure to pull the levers of power because of your party room. Perhaps the scariest thing of all is your delusion that you are doing an adequate job. Now you are the cause of our anxiety!

Gladys Liu (Chisholm, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yesterday's IPCC report confirms one thing, and that is the importance of a coordinated global effort to reduce emissions. The report bluntly provided an update on the latest physical science on climate change and the likely trajectory of global warming. There are many challenges, and overcoming these challenges is a shared responsibility.

Australia is doing its bit. We have a strong 2030 target and we are going to beat it. This is in contrast to many other nations. This government is committed to the Paris agreement and its goals. I want to see Australia achieving net zero emissions as soon as possible and I also want to see it done before 2050. We had a target for emissions in 2020 and we beat that target by 459 million tonnes. We are now on track to beat our 2030 Paris emissions target as well.

As a nation, between 2005 and 2019 our emissions fell faster than many comparable countries, including Canada, New Zealand, Japan, Korea and the United States. Unfortunately, more than half of G20 nations saw their emissions rise. Meanwhile, Labor has walked away from their 2030 target. They have walked away from the Paris agreement. The opposition has no plan, no policies and no idea: that is clear. We have practical plans; they have nothing. Last week we saw Labor's Senate team vote against the technology investment road map. They voted against technology. We all know that Labor is dying to add a big fat tax to every Australian's weekly bill. Of course, if it's not technology it's taxes.

In sharp contrast, this government is backing the next generation of technology that will deliver lower emissions and lower costs and create more jobs for Australians. We are backing Australian ingenuity and innovation, not taxing Australians more. This government is delivering lower emissions by investing $20 billion in new energy technology by 2030, driving $80 billion of total public and private investment over the decade. We plan to support 160,000 new jobs. The way the Morrison government is doing this is by reducing emissions without destroying jobs, taxing hardworking Australians or adding any new costs on households, businesses and industry.

I am so proud to be part of a government that has achieved so much on this issue. Our record is one of delivering. We beat our Kyoto-era targets by 459 million tonnes and we are going to beat our Paris targets too. Latest data shows that our emissions are 20 per cent lower than 2005 levels and emissions are lower than in any year under the previous Labor government. What a disappointing record from those opposite! In 2020 a record seven gigawatts of new renewable energy capacity was installed in Australia. That is more renewables in one year under the Morrison government than under the whole period of the previous Labor government. Again, what a disappointing record.

When it comes to emissions reduction, our record is one of delivery and achievement that Australians can be proud of. For example, as a nation we now have the highest solar PV capacity installed per person in the world. The Morrison government's technology led approach to reducing emissions will see Australia continue to play its part in the global effort to combat climate change, without compromising our economy or jobs. We deliver when it comes to emissions reduction; Labor just taxes hardworking Australians.

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion has concluded.