Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I just want to add a few comments to the end of this debate about this piece of legislation and its effectiveness. Senator Milne made some quite spurious claims about coalition policy and coalition intention in relation to this piece of legislation, even to the extent of making up suggestions about what amend­ments we may or may not have moved, which shows how poorly she has followed the debate in this place. She made allegations about one amendment that we were supposed to have moved, but we did not actually move it. That just gives a demonstration of how poorly the Greens are actually following this debate. They would rather be out spreading their prejudice against some of Australia's wonderful industries.

Right from the outset the opposition has expressed concerns about the design of this legislation and the way that it will effectively work, or more importantly effectively will not work. That is one of the major things I see will be a result of passing this legislation. I am genuinely concerned that the govern­ment and the Greens are raising expectations in the community. We heard Senator Milne talking about the huge opportunities, the bonanza, that might flow from the passing of this legislation. I would caution her against making such broad claims because one thing that we do know is that the regulations that sit around this piece of legislation can be quite restrictive, even to the extent that the National Farmers Federation said as part of their submission that you cannot grow a shelter belt. If you want to put in a windbreak, because it is common practice, it does not fit within the regulations. Some of the things that Senator Milne was talking about, such as savanna burning, may not fit within the process, depending on how it is done, because it is common practice.

The issues around additionality and common practice are very important elements that the coalition were concerned about with this legislation, bearing in mind that we, as Senator Milne correctly said, support the concept of sequestering carbon dioxide in our natural environment. That is an important part of our policy. But we are really concerned about the design of the legislation. We do not believe that it will actually sequester much CO2 at all. In fact it will be very lucky to have sequestered a gram of CO2 by the time we get to the next election because of the processes that still have to be gone through before we get to the stage of accepting a methodology.

Debate interrupted.