Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I stand tonight to place on record my opposition to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009 and related bills and to make a few brief comments about the reasons why.

Senator Xenophon has just noted that this is one of the most impacting pieces of legislation ever to come before the Australian parliament. The legislation is effectively a tax on good and services and it is to reflect the damage done from CO2 emissions and its effect on our environment. But the ETS and the legislation before us is poorly framed and it is too important to rush. The government is rushing this legislation for political purposes, and, I believe, inappropriate reasons are at the heart of the government’s objectives in regard to these bills. We must get this legislation right; it is too important not to. The timing is critical. Here we are, in August, debating this legislation and the government wants it passed and rushed through, yet the largest economy in the world, the United States, still has not passed its similar ETS legislation, and nor have we had the Copenhagen climate conference, which is scheduled for later this year. Why would we be leading the world in such a way with the fear that we might get it wrong? We must get it right.

I quote from the executive summary of the Frontier Economics report that was released just yesterday:

In terms of the breadth and magnitude of economic effects, the CPRS is arguably the most significant policy change in Australia’s history. As such there is a substantial onus on the Government to demonstrate that whatever policy is introduced it is the best that can be developed.

We know, not only from the Frontier Economics report but also from numerous other commentators and experts in the field, that the government has not got it right. Let me say at the outset that I am not an expert, I do not have the background or expertise in science, but I have read the various papers and reports about these matters and I base my views on those and on my own experiences as a Tasmanian senator. I also note that the opposition supports a properly framed and carefully put together emissions trading scheme and other measures to ensure that the consequences and damage to our environment of the CO2 emissions is taken into account. I will come to those shortly.

It should be noted that it was actually the Howard government that first introduced the emissions trading scheme—in fact, under the former minister, Malcolm Turnbull. Mr Turnbull should be commended for his foresight and vision, as he has been demonstrating in more recent times regarding this matter. In terms of renewable energy of course, we remember the initiative and the leadership of Dr David Kemp, the former minister for the environment, who together with the Howard cabinet, put together the mandatory renewable energy target, which was some 9,500 gigawatt hours by 2010, which essentially was an initiative to encourage renewable energy. It really kick-started the various renewable energy initiatives all around Australia.

As a Tasmanian senator, I know only too well the importance of hydropower and wind power and other senators know the importance of renewable energy more generally, whether it be solar or whatever. So why isn’t the government willing to sit down to negotiate, to consult and to discuss with the opposition and indeed others their contributions to get it right? Clearly, the government has not got it right and I think it demonstrates hubris and arrogance on the part of the government that it is willing to insist that this be an express effort that must be rushed through. It wants to ram this legislation through the Senate and through the parliament when it should really do the right thing: withdraw the legislation and work with the opposition and with experts in the field to ensure that we get it right and that the timing is correct so that the contributions of the Copenhagen climate change conference can be taken into account.

I also note that the government has floated the idea of a double dissolution, with threats as to the possibility of that. I am not afraid of that. I say to the government over this issue to bring it on, because we know that the government’s legislation will increase power costs for the average Australian family and for small businesses and large businesses alike. This will be a jobs destroyer for Australia. In fact, this will be less green and will provide fewer benefits as to the environment than other models that have been drafted and put forward. So the government has got to pull back and get this legislation right.

There are three parts to addressing the concerns. Obviously, there is the emissions trading scheme, the renewable energy measure—a 20 per cent measure by 2020—needs to come into place and there are energy efficiency measures. They are three key broad initiatives that need to be undertaken by any government and any community to ensure that we get this right. The Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Penny Wong, said the Frontier Economics report was a mongrel of a report. That is a shocking overreaction from a minister.