Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

After listening to Senator Williams' contribution to the second reading debate on this bill, the Steel Transformation Plan Bill 2011, there is no surprise that they will be voting against it because of course again, in their fine tradition, they have outlined how they are the party of 'no', they are the party that say no to everything, that run scare campaigns instead, that stick to a political kind of juggernaut situation of running scare campaigns and opposing everything rather than actually embracing what is good about the bill before them and the good that will come from it for the steel industry and the manufacturing industry.

I am pleased to speak to this bill, which does demonstrate very much the Labor government's commitment to the steel industry, just as Australia is shifting towards a new, innovative industry sector under the new carbon pricing mechanism agreed to by the Senate yesterday. While we are moving to protect steelworkers, and the steel industry, the coalition is mouthing platitudes and turning its back on that very industry. This steel transformation plan, and the carbon price, is giving manufacturing an opportunity to transform and adapt, through innovation, to meet the challenges of the future. It is very much a forward-looking plan: it is looking at the fact that we are transforming into a low-carbon economy future, into a clean energy future and preparing those parts of Australian industry, such as the steel industry and the manufacturing industry, for that transformation. Over something like $20 billion worth of potential support is going to be accessible to manufacturers to seize this very future that those opposition senators are just not willing to embrace and so they continue to live in denial as we move forward.

I think Senator Williams highlights again—similar to Senator Macdonald, whose contributions to both the second reading and the committee stages of the clean energy bills over the last week were absolutely appalling—that he does not accept the science. Similar to Senator Macdonald, Senator Williams spoke just now about his lack of understanding of the issue of climate change. What he raised was the fact that the climate changes. Well, lo and behold, so it does! And that there are floods. Yes, there are floods! And that there are storms and the like—yes, there are!

But why are we acting on climate change per se? Because science has provided us with input to show that some of that climate change is caused by human impact. It is of our own doing.

We have an opportunity to halt that and stop it from getting worse—and time is of the essence in that sense, as scientists have shown us—and actually start to try to save this planet and turn it around. For example, something like one trillion tonnes of carbon dioxide of human origin is in our atmosphere today, and we continue to contribute to it. The senator is right: China does contribute to it to a large extent, as does the United States and other parts of the world. Climate change has no boundaries; it goes beyond countries. But if we all as individual countries take the attitude, 'China is emitting X, Y and Z, so why should we do anything if they're not doing as much as we'd like them to do right here and right now,' then no-one would do anything, would they?

I would like you to go into a classroom and explain that logic to a grade 6 or a grade 9 class, who actually have an understanding about this. They are actually learning it in their school curriculum. They are not learning, 'Climate changes and that's just how it is, so let's do nothing.' They are learning that there is science that provides facts saying that the climate is changing from the human impact of emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and it is causing detrimental effects on our planet. The result is that we need to do something about it. That is what yesterday's vote was all about. That is what it was about yesterday when you put your heads in the sand and voted against the clean energy bills.