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

I too rise to speak on the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Bill 2007. The Democrats support the objectives of the bill, which are to centralise and standardise the reporting requirements, to reduce the burden and the bureaucracy associated with reporting and to make public greenhouse and energy data available while maintaining confidentiality.

There is a crucial need for data and reporting on both greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption in order to effectively inform policy development and energy market reform. This data is essential for the evaluation of government policies and programs and for the government to be able to measure and assess the performance of policies and evaluate if these policies are achieving the objective of a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

The initiative is long overdue. The government is very late to the game of collecting data on greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. The state governments, on the other hand, already require energy consumption reporting in order to administer their own greenhouse and energy programs. The initiatives of the state and local governments outreach the climate change policy initiatives of the federal government. Some of those state initiatives include: the Victorian renewable energy target, the Victorian energy efficiency target, the New South Wales Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme and the South Australian feed-in tariff. State initiatives would not be required if the Australian government were taking genuine action on climate change.

The government’s climate change policy is not informed by accurate data. It is also not informed by economic modelling and, therefore, is not strategic. A recent survey undertaken by the Australian Industry Group revealed that only one out of 10 Australian companies knew the volume of greenhouse gas emissions they were producing and felt they knew enough about climate change to manage the risks to their businesses. Only a quarter of these companies have tried to save water. The companies surveyed admitted that they were poorly informed about how to cut their greenhouse gas emissions or how climate change might affect their business. Seventy per cent of companies surveyed believed they had a responsibility to reduce their greenhouse pollution and were willing to use their own money and to increase the cost to their business. As the Chief Executive of the Australian Industry Group, Ms Heather Ridout, points out, there is a need for industry and the wider community to understand their obligations to be socially responsible, but the risks to industry competitiveness must also be managed.

Australia is one of the biggest wasters of energy in the world. Our demand for electricity is growing unchecked by almost 2½ per cent a year. By 2010 greenhouse emissions from the stationary energy sector are projected to be 153 per cent above 1990 levels. Australia’s energy consumption is projected to double by 2050. There is an urgent need for an annual investment of $6 billion in infrastructure—money that would be better spent in other areas if we achieved even modest levels of energy efficiency and reductions in energy use. Energy efficiency can make deep and cost-effective cuts in our fossil fuel use and our greenhouse gas emissions, and it could reduce the high levels of energy waste.

If our energy demand continues to grow unchecked then renewable energy and clean energy development chase a receding target. A one per cent energy efficiency target reduces the need for eight coal fired power stations and could permanently defer the need for nuclear power stations.

The European Union have just set a target of 20 per cent energy efficiency by 2020. If Australia adopted this achievable target, we could permanently defer the need for any nuclear power stations, reduce our greenhouse emissions, pay less on our electricity bills and cost-effectively transfer to renewable energy. Not only that but energy efficiency increases jobs, lowers inflation and improves our economy.

The current energy market framework does not serve this outcome. We still have a 1990s market and an energy market that rewards ever-increasing energy demand and does not address waste. We must remove barriers to and allow participation of energy efficiency and distributed generation in the energy market. Energy efficiency is a clear front-line climate change policy and the lowest cost greenhouse gas abatement action available, but not even the simplest actions and policies are being implemented by the government.

There is a clear market failure with regard to greenhouse action, energy efficiency and renewable energy. The state governments and even the environment groups are well ahead of this government in undertaking cost-benefit economic modelling for greenhouse action. This bill represents a step in the right direction, and the Democrats look forward to the data being used to inform government policy so they can at least catch up with the efforts of the states on greenhouse action.