Lyn Allison (Victoria, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

There are a couple of other things I want to mention. The minister keeps referring to the appliance-rating system as an example of the government’s energy efficiency measures. It is one of the recommendations that came out of the urban water inquiry that was conducted. For the record, I remind the minister that that was not a government initiative; it was in fact a Democrat initiative. The government came to us and said that they wanted to transfer some money out of a fund, which we were a party to negotiating, into other programs, and this was our suggestion. The point is that we did not sit around waiting for the appliance industry to do audits to see whether they would like to put rating systems on. They had shown no interest in this matter up to that point. It only happens when government acts and says, ‘This must be done and it must be done by this date.’ I hope that the mandatory labelling system that applies to appliances will soon move to a mandatory energy efficiency rating so you will not just see how many stars you have got but you can be sure that the appliance you buy meets minimum standards. That is where we need to be moving.

I think we have given big industry lots of time to look at their energy efficiency and where it might be going. Now is the time for us to move from what is a voluntary measure. They cannot possibly say that the government is not interested in reducing efficiency. Given Kyoto and the great debate there is around greenhouse, they cannot possibly say they have not noticed that this is an issue or that a lot of people in this country would like them to move to greater efficiency. To think that if they have an audit they will suddenly change their mind about this is ludicrous and laughable. That is the reason, Minister, that some of us in this chamber are talking about obligation and the need for the government to put in place that obligation.

I have a question. I am not sure whether I missed this in the debate. Regarding the 250 companies that are required to report that they have conducted audits, is there a reporting-back process that indicates when and if they accept those audits and go on to do the work which is demonstrated to be viable?