Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Given emissions have gone up under the Albanese Labor government, how does the Prime Minister expect Australians to take this government seriously on climate action?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I give the call to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Order! The minister has the call. The manager was heard in silence. I'm going to show the same respect to the minister.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We on this side of the House welcome that question. You know, 'chutzpah' is a wonderful word, and we've seen a wonderful example of it from the opposition today, a party and a coalition which presided over 10 years of denial and delay, which had 23 energy policies and couldn't land one, which can't tell the Australian people what its 2030 target is let alone its 2035 target and which argues that renewable energy should be paused and that we should rely more on coal and gas while we wait decades for nuclear to come forward. They have the temerity to ask this government a question about our policies. We have legislated the Climate Change Act, we have legislated safeguard reforms and we have legislated new vehicle efficiency standards, which the member for Bradfield tried to do and got rolled by his cabinet. We have done what he couldn't deliver. He said he would reduce emissions, but he couldn't get it done. We have gotten it done, and we are continuing to get those things done.

As the Prime Minister has foreshadowed this week, I will release the government's annual climate change statement in accordance with the act. That is world's best practice in terms of transparency and accountability when it comes to emissions reductions reports. I will be releasing the Climate Change Authority's annual progress report, which I've received and will table in the House. It will make clear, together with the government's projections—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Look, the question was broad by anyone's example, so the Manager of Opposition Business will be able to take a point of order but, if it is on relevance, you asked a question about how the government can be taken seriously on climate action and the minister is going through a detailed list of things about how the government is being on serious climate action and so it's going to be difficult to take it on relevance, but I will hear the point of order.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is on relevance. The fact is that emissions have gone up. Can the minister—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call the Leader of the House.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order, Mr Speaker: that was clearly an abuse. You advised that the minister was already relevant. He then took a point of order on relevance and then added nothing but a comment. It added nothing to consideration of standing orders at all. It was complete abuse.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This behaviour has been creeping in more and more. You can't have a situation where you go, 'I don't like the answer, so I'm just going to jump up and say something.' That's never the way question time has been run, and it's not going to run that way now. I like to give everyone a fair go. People are entitled to take a point of order, particularly for the high office that the manager holds. But that's just taking the mickey. So the manager is now warned, just as I warned the Leader of the Opposition last week. We're not going to have that. It's not fair on everyone. The minister is in continuation.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All these things the government has done, in addition to the Capacity Investment Scheme, which is underpinning 32 gigawatts of new renewable dispatchable energy, have been opposed by the opposite and all of which are contributing to emissions reductions in Australia, as will be outlined in the Climate Change Authority's advice and the forecast we'll release this week. I look forward to the opposition's detailed policy response, which will outline, no doubt, the full costings of their nuclear plan and the emissions under their nuclear plan. I look forward to all those details from the opposition on Thursday. They have had plenty of opportunities.

The member for Fairfax will have a lengthy opportunity to respond. I'm sure it will it be jam-packed full of policy detail.