Senate debates
Tuesday, 16 August 2011
Questions without Notice: Take Note of Answers
Answers to Questions
3:31 pm
David Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Hansard source
Senator Ronaldson, having just endured your hyperbole for the last few minutes, I am sure you will pay me the courtesy of listening. The Labor Party's policy is to achieve a five per cent cut in 2000 emission levels by 2020. This represents a goal of abating some 160 million tonnes of carbon by 2020. I think that policy is generally well known. What I think is perhaps less well known is that the Liberal and National parties have the same policy. It is also their policy to cut 2000 carbon emission levels in this country by five per cent by 2020. One might think that the fact that we have the same target and the same policy might mean that we are in an environment where there could be accord. One might think that it might be the basis for agreement. Of course once upon a time it would have been. The reason it is not the case now, the reason it is not the basis for an accord, is that the Liberal and National parties live in shame of their own policy. Theirs is a policy that was cobbled together in the aftermath of dealing with the clash between those opposite who are sceptics and those who believe in climate change. They now have a policy which they seek to hide. This is why those opposite wander around Australia and say different things to different audiences. This is why those opposite attend rallies of climate change sceptics and shamelessly agree with those audiences.
The fact that their policy is the same policy as the government's is hidden. When one looks in detail through their policy, their so-called direct action policy, one finds it is neither direct nor about action. It is a policy that aims to achieve the very same targets as our policy, but they have found a more expensive route to do it. The direct action policy is a policy which ultimately boils down to paying polluters and sending the bill to Australian households. Theirs is a command economy model and it goes to one of the more extraordinary features of this debate. The government are promoting a policy which ultimately will result in an emissions trading scheme—a floating price. The fixed permit will ultimately transition into a carbon market and that market will mean—
No comments