Matt Thistlethwaite (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

One industry in Australia which does stand to lose from inaction on climate change is our tourism industry. It is an industry which stands to lose income, investment and jobs from inaction on climate change. That is why the Labor Party is seeking to price carbon and reduce emissions—to protect industries which provide vital employment in regional and rural areas in a number of important pockets of our democracy. That is the basis on which we are acting on climate change.

The best way to highlight our action on climate change is to run through a number of facts and how they affect tourism in this country. It is a fact that each decade since the 1940s in Australia has been warmer than the last. The decade 2001 to 2010 was the warmest on record, both here and worldwide. It is a fact that sea surface temperatures across the Great Barrier Reef have increased by 0.4 of a per cent in the past 30 years, increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide and increasing ocean acidity. It is a fact that increasing sea temperatures have led to coral bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef, and the most severe cases of coral bleaching have occurred recently, in 1997 to 1998 and 2001 to 2002. It is a fact that sea surface temperatures are projected to increase further in Australia, by a magnitude of two degrees by 2050, which will lead to further coral bleaching. It is a fact that extreme weather events are beginning to have an effect on beach erosion, with potential damage to property, in a number of coastal areas throughout Australia, most notably to the north of the state that I represent, New South Wales. It is a fact that an overwhelming majority of scientists and economists state that we need to take urgent action on climate change and that, the longer we wait, the greater the cost will be and the more drastic the action we will need to take will be.

It is a fact that Labor's plan to price carbon through a market based mechanism will reduce emissions over time and will be the cheapest policy option available to us as a nation to deal with this pressing environmental and economic issue. That is a fact that all economists agree with—except those opposite. It is also a fact that the Liberal Party's policy of direct action will not reduce emissions. There is no guarantee it will reduce emissions. It will be more costly to Australian taxpayers and it is based on very dubious assumptions, which, I am pleased to say, a number of business groups are beginning to understand and are beginning to highlight. Most notably, a number of business associations are saying that, without access to international permits, the costs on business in Australia of taking action on climate change would be unbearable. Even last week we saw the Farmers Federation come out and say that they do not believe the opposition when they say that they will achieve 85 million tonnes of abatement through soil carbon because their policy and their assumptions are dubious.

These simple facts that I have gone through highlight the hollowness of the opposition's arguments against the government's plan. The opposition ignore the facts. They ignore the advice of experts. They ignore the urgency of the situation and they have developed an irresponsible and belligerent approach to this issue. It is not characteristic of all of those opposite, I must say. They have had leaders in the past who have seen the light on this issue and who have understood the facts and the urgency of acting on this issue. Malcolm Turnbull certainly did not ignore the facts. Eventually, even John Howard came to the realisation that we needed to take action on climate change and that a market based mechanism was the best manner in which to do it.

Indeed, many of those opposite have stated in the past that they believe a market based mechanism is the best way to approach the issue of climate change. But now they choose to ignore the facts. Why is that? One simple reason: their leader has changed his mind. Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition, has changed his mind on this issue. Why? Because he sees an opportunity to buy votes at the next election. He sees an opportunity to run an irresponsible and cynical scare campaign that he sees will buy them votes at the next election.

The opposition is running a scare campaign, but the facts about climate change are scary. They are particularly scary for the tourism industry. Last year it contributed $34 billion to Australia's national income. Nine per cent of Australia's total exports were from the tourism industry. It employs half a million Australians and it is Australia's largest service export provider, with $23 billion worth of service exports in the last financial year. If there is one industry which stands to lose from inaction on climate change it is Australia's tourism industry. That is why we are taking action to protect vulnerable industries such as this. We are taking action because we understand that the health of the tourism industry relies on the health of our natural resources. It relies on the health of fantastic natural resources in Australia, such as the Great Barrier Reef, Ningaloo Reef, Kakadu, the Whitsundays and our magnificent coastline around the Gold Coast. This point is well understood by the Australian tourism industry.

I would like to draw the attention of the Senate to the transcript of the hearing of the Senate Select Committee on the Scrutiny of New Taxes, held in Mackay on 5 August 2011, when Mr O'Reilly, the Chief Executive Officer of Tourism Whitsundays appeared before the committee. He was asked a number of questions about the urgency of the government acting on climate change. When he was asked whether he accepted the scientific evidence that global warming is damaging the Great Barrier Reef and that the government needed to do something about that and take urgent action on climate change, Mr O'Reilly's response was:

Yes, I think the modelling shows that the reef will undoubtedly be impacted by global warming.

He went on to say:

… I have also said previously that our communities up and down the reef are very concerned about protection of the reef. When we have run climate change adaptation workshops in the region, we have had very strong participation from industry and good engagement with the CSIRO and Tourism Queensland in doing that.

The tourism industry in the Whitsundays understands the urgency of taking action on climate change but, again, those opposite seek to ignore the facts.

I draw the Senate's attention to a quote from John Lee, Chief Executive of the Tourism and Transport Forum Australia. In a media release, dated 26 July 2011, he said:

It is vital that Australia’s natural assets are conserved to maintain our unique selling proposition and enhance our reputation as an environmentally aware destination.

He went on to talk about the Henbury Conservation Project. He said:

This is a great example of its commitment to Australia and to combatting climate change in cooperation with the federal government.

We hope that this is the first of many similar projects and that other tourism operators see the potential environmental and economic opportunities in this initiative.

I also draw the Senate's attention to the view of Alan Joyce, Chief Executive of Qantas—one of the biggest tourist operators in this country—who, on 14 March 2011, said:

We can understand the logic on the carbon tax and why the government regards it as a necessity we’re convinced that all organisations should do whatever they can to reduce emissions.

It is obvious that the tourism industry understands the urgency of acting quickly. As a father of two young children, I have enjoyed the beauty of our magnificent coastlines. I have dived on the Great Barrier Reef and I have seen the destruction that has occurred because of coral bleaching. I do not want to be seen as not having acted on climate change. (Time expired)