Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this matter for a few minutes, and I would firstly like to take note of the hysteria that is rising from the crossbenches and the comments that have been made by those on the opposite side of this chamber in relation to the evidence presented in this report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Climate Change, Water, Environment and the Arts. I would suggest that the hysteria that we have witnessed today is far more erosive for all Australians than the potential effect of rising sea levels on our coastal areas.

What we are hearing is a most excitable and emotional response to a report on rising sea levels given that sea levels, as we have already heard, have risen 20 centimetres over the last century. To put this into context, if I may, there has been a 130-metre change in sea level over the last 20,000 years. What we have heard is nothing but scaremongering, and it is not what we should expect from this chamber. A responsible government would take a reasoned and cautious approach to the findings of this report and consider the recommendations provided with a cool head. There is no place for a hysterical overreaction to the latest report. But, as we know, it is not a responsible government that has been determining the future of Australia and the generations to come. It is not a responsible government that has plundered our financial reserves and committed future generations to paying off a $315 billion debt.

What we have been saddled with instead is a Big Brother government determined to cast its authoritative hand over the lives of all rather than allowing individuals to have a greater say over their own lives. It is this Big Brother government that demands compliance from principals and parents to build a ‘Julia Gillard memorial hall’ rather than allowing them to determine where the stimulus money could be best spent—whether on shadecloth, whether on classrooms or whether on, dare I say, more books for the kids to learn from. It is this Big Brother government that believes that parents are incapable of supervising their children and wishes to introduce a mandatory internet filtering system. Filters are available now to parents for them to determine how they wish to protect their children from unwarranted and inappropriate sites. This is a government that believes it knows best and wishes to enforce this upon all parents.

Such is the arrogance of this government that they are even now seeking to censor the very people elected to this place so that they may not have the opportunity to question or criticise the actions of the government on behalf of those very constituents who elected them. So it is no surprise that those on the crossbenches and those on the other side of this chamber have sought to tie-in rising sea levels to the CPRS legislation. But I ask: how will a reduction in CO2 emissions by five per cent make any difference to a natural occurrence that has taken place for centuries? Minister Wong said in question time today that this was further proof of why we have to act now. Well, I ask Minister Wong: why do we have to act before Copenhagen? This report should not be used to justify the Rudd government’s political agenda to pass the CPRS before Copenhagen. It is deeply flawed and in its current form will cost jobs. It is going to cost industries. It will impact on our international competitiveness and it will affect us all for many generations to come. In its current form, it will hurt each and every household in terms of the significant rise in energy costs. It is for that very reason that the coalition have sought to amend the CPRS to protect those who are going to be most impacted by it and ensure that the jobs and safeguarding of all Australians is paramount.

Can I suggest that a government’s No. 1 priority is to protect and safeguard all Australians. Bringing the CPRS legislation into this chamber and ramming it through without consideration of amendments before Copenhagen does not do that, and that is why we do not resile from the fact that we want to address climate change. There has been no suggestion that we do not support what the Senate are trying to do here. What we wish to do is make sure that the final CPRS is not as flawed as it is in its current form. This report must be considered with reason and with a cool head. It is an interesting report. It is interesting that Mark Dreyfus commented on it this morning. We have heard already that he made the comment that it will reduce sea levels and suggested that the extent of that will be more than a couple of millimetres. I find it very interesting that Mark Dreyfus has such a concern as the member for Isaacs—so concerned that he does not even live in his own electorate; he lives in Toorak, and his neighbours are not affected by this.