Julian McGauran (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I was quite happy to yield my position on the speakers list to Labor’s Senator McEwen in the hope that one on the long list of Labor senators to speak on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009 and related climate change bills would show some balance. I yielded because frequently Senator McEwen does show that sort of balance, but what a great disappointment that speech was. I was profoundly disappointed. She simply read from the old party script of extremism. She threw out the line that, if we have a three-degree increase in global temperature, this will follow. Will it? Is that what is predicted? Is that what she believes? Is that a scientific fact? No, it has just been set up as a straw man.

I say she read from the old script of extremism, the old language, which was no doubt handed to her by the ‘high priestess’, as she was dubbed last night by Senator Bernardi—the high priestess of climate change, Senator Wong. But I would point out to Senator McEwen that there is a new script going around by the New South Wales senators from her side of the house and from their New South Wales state colleagues also, who have woken up to just how damaging this bill will be to the economy for zero effect. So I started to doubt that I should have yielded my position to Senator McEwen because everything was blamed on climate change. Those who listened would have heard that everything was blamed on climate change. It was the old rhetoric. She has missed the shift in this debate. She has missed the shift in public opinion on this. She is still at the extreme end, the Senator Penny Wong end of it all, where forest fires are blamed on climate change. That has nothing, of course, to do with state forest management—it is all to do with climate change! And, of course, every flood and every drought are directly linked to climate change—it has got nothing to do with the fact that we are on the driest continent in the world and that droughts have been part of Australia’s history! It is all to do with climate change. If you are running late for the train, it is climate change. If Geelong does not win the Grand Final, it will be climate change.

This is the extremism and the language that we all dealt with just 12 months ago. I think everyone in this chamber would agree there has been a serious shift in this debate, but the government, or at least their leadership, have missed it. People are not buying that sort of extreme language anymore. They seek a more moderate position, a more sensible approach to the question of climate change and carbon pollution reduction. The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009 does not provide it. In fact, I would say this bill is the most economically damaging bill to go through the parliament, in modern times anyway, particularly at this time, during the global economic crisis. I could not quite understand the previous speaker’s point that this is a good time to do it, that everyone is going to ‘cop the pain’—to use her terminology, they are happy to cop the pain for the so-called gain. I should not just point out Senator McEwen; she was the previous speaker but it was the same with all the speakers on the other side. I do not think they know their own scheme, to tell you the truth. Not one of them have pointed out where the gain is. Sure, they think there is a lot of political gain in this—according to the press gallery, the ‘beltway’, as they call it—but they have not articulated the true gain to Australia whilst there is no international agreement.

Given the global economic crisis that we are in, just consider the $13 billion in permits, in the first year, that companies have to go out and purchase. They will have to borrow that money at a time when they are under extreme pressure. It is not as glowing as the previous speaker, reading from some survey, would have it. The fundamentals and the facts are there; we are not in recovery. Whatever shaft of light the government is pointing us to, there is a long way to go. Putting this extra burden of some $13 billion a year on the economy, for companies to have to find that money to borrow on top of what they are already struggling with in the credit squeeze, will do great damage to our economy.

I suspect, in fact in my heart of hearts I believe, that this legislation is purely political. Senator Mason gave a brilliant analysis of just how political this bill is, particularly for the Prime Minister, Mr Rudd. When he jets off to Copenhagen, he wants it in his pocket so he can prance around showing off, as he does. He thinks he is important—yes, that is a cheap shot, Senator Conroy, but I noticed you enjoyed it.