Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Fielding talks about viability, and that is fair enough, in terms of renewable energy and emerging technologies. Can I just say that what will not be viable is if we do not have comprehensive policies in place to deal with climate change. There are doubters—and I do not criticise Senator Fielding for this; he has these views—but it seems to me that the preponderance of scientific evidence is that unless we take action to deal with greenhouse gases there could be irreversible climate change. So all I ask the sceptics out there to do is to consider, from a risk management point of view, that if there is a risk of catastrophic climate change we ought to do everything possible to deal with it, because the consequences of not dealing with it will simply be too great and they will be irreversible. We are already seeing issues in relation to climate change—there is the debate about the Murray-Darling Basin. Whether you think it is anthropogenic or not, there will have to be considerable adaptation to deal with that.

I cannot support this particular amendment for several reasons. It is not because I do not support Australian made goods—and I am very grateful to Senator Joyce for co-sponsoring a bill along with Senator Brown earlier today on food labelling and truth in labelling, so that when consumers go to their supermarket shelves they can have a genuine choice as to whether they are buying Australian goods and not have to deal with the misleading labels we have now. In relation to this issue in the context of the renewable energy target, the modelling indicates in the order of four per cent over 10 years. That is nothing to be sneezed at, but it is still a relatively minor, absorbable cost of business in the context of this particular bill. The real challenge will be in the context of the government’s CPRS legislation and that is why it is important we get that right, because it is predicted that there will be electricity price increases in the order of 40 to 50 per cent.

I know the Liberal Party is considering the Frontier Economics modelling; it is not their policy. Well, I can say that in my party room it is my policy in the sense that it is important that we go down a path where you can mute electricity price rises and you do not have revenue churn, because that is where the real challenge will be. So I indicate to Senator Boswell and Senator Joyce, who are passionate advocates for their communities, for food processing and for regional industry, that the real challenge will be to get the CPRS right to ensure that we do not have massive spikes in electricity prices. This is not the bill to deal with this. It is important that we get the modelling right in the CPRS legislation. I think hiving off food processing in relation to this particular bill is bad policy. It is important that we get the big policy issue right, and that is the design of the CPRS.