Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

There are three matters that I want to go to. One is in relation to the statement that accompanies a motion. I remind the Senate that we recently provided a Procedure Committee report which effect­ively went to this issue to limit the amount of time people take in making short statements during this time. This is a time when people can put motions and if they want to contain the issue within the motion they should write the motion accordingly. They should then put the motion without debate. What we have now heard is debate in relation to the motion, which then provokes others around the chamber to debate the motion. It is this issue that we are trying to avoid. I under­stand Senator Rhiannon is new to this chamber so I simply rise as a courtesy to explain how motions work in this instance.

The government does not support the motion. The government notes the use of biomass as an energy source is carbon neutral as it does not add to the stock of carbon in the atmosphere, as does the com­bustion of fossil fuels. Accordingly, there is no liability under the proposed carbon price for carbon dioxide emitted from the combus­tion of biomass. This will mean that biomass combustion will benefit from a carbon price through greater cost competitiveness. How­ever, to protect native forests from the risk of perverse outcomes, the government has com­mitted to amend the renewable energy target regulations to ensure that renewable energy certificates are not issued for wood waste that comes from native forests. Both I and the Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry clearly support the government's position in relation to this. And I do understand that I have now probably provoked a further response—and this is the exact issue that I am trying to avoid in respect of these notices of motion as they proceed, but be that as it may. (Time expired)