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

I want to emphasise that this does not seek to change the 100-year provision, but it does seek that there be ongoing monitoring. So if there is further evidence that it needs to be modified in any way for certain types of use, perhaps then it can be looked at. It is just a requirement for there to be monitoring of the scientific research relevant to the issue of permanence. I think the government are saying, 'We'll do that, but not through this committee.' But if this committee is entrusted with dealing with the issue of carbon farming to provide objective evidence, to look at the scientific evidence and to look at the administration of the scheme, I would have thought it appropriate for this committee, the Domestic Offsets Integrity Committee, to look at this issue. It does not actually seek to change the 100 years, but it does seek for the committee to advise itself or to give advice to the government and for that advice to be published. I think that is the right thing to do for such a piece of legislation. Therefore, I will be persisting with these amendments and I am grateful to the opposition for their support.