Kate Lundy (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Mr President, congratulations on your appointment. As a senator for the Australian Capital Territory, I have spoken many times in this chamber about the importance of Australia taking meaningful action to combat climate change. I am in the strange position this morning of being grateful that I have been able to speak because of the failed motion on behalf of the government to gag the debate—a pathetic attempt to try to manipulate the operation and function of this chamber to suit the Prime Minister's agenda. I am glad it was defeated, because now we have an opportunity to say a few words about this extremely important matter.

I believe Australia and the world have come to terms with the issue of climate change and the vast majority of Australians understand that action needs to be taken. The debate over whether climate change is a natural or man-made phenomenon has been unequivocally resolved by the scientific community and, as I said, the vast majority of Australians have come to accept the verdict that it is real, it is anthropogenic, or man-made, and we need to do something about it. Policymakers, scientists, economists and community leaders around the world have taken up this challenge by finding ways to reduce global carbon emissions while making our way of living more sustainable. In recent years we have seen the global community rallying to take meaningful action on climate change, with 99 countries, including Australia, having made formal pledges to the United Nations to reduce carbon pollution. Thirty-five countries, including Australia, have a national emissions trading scheme and, collectively, they have a population of some 560 million people. By 2015 that number is expected to grow to two billion people. Just in the last few weeks we have seen the President of the United States, Mr Barack Obama, make a series of announcements demonstrating his administration's commitment to tackling climate change, including his desire for a price on carbon in the United States.

Under the previous Labor government, Australia took some significant steps forward. We implemented an integrated set of policies to drive down Australia's carbon pollution while enabling us to achieve more ambitious targets in the long term. We introduced an emissions trading scheme which put a legal limit on pollution for Australia's 370 largest polluters. This ETS was specifically formulated to cut pollution in the cheapest and most effective way. It was a market solution. It was a solution designed to have the least impact on our economy. In line with this policy, we also gave unprecedented support to the renewable energy sector. Our renewable energy target guaranteed that at least 20 per cent of Australia's electricity would come from renewable sources by the year 2020. We established the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which this government has repeatedly tried to destroy. We implemented these policies on the advice of Australia's leading economists who still say that a market based mechanism would be the most effective means of reducing emissions without damaging the national economy. We implemented these policies because Labor respects the scientific consensus that climate change is real, that it is anthropogenic and that its poses a serious threat to our way of life, and these policies have been working.

During our time in office, Australia's capacity to derive energy from wind trebled. More than one million solar panels were installed, compared to only 7,500 under the previous government, and employment doubled in the renewable energy sector. This is an important point: 150,000 jobs were created with the carbon price in place and our economy grew by 2½ per cent, while inflation remained at record lows. Crucially, Australia's pollution in the national electricity market decreased by seven per cent while our renewable energy generation grew by 25 per cent. By any measure, the carbon pricing mechanism was a success. An economic measure, a jobs measure, a reduction-in-pollution measure—a success. Emissions declined in industries targeted by the price, the renewable energy sector grew and the economy remains strong—irrefutable evidence of success of our policies.

When I consider where this debate was in the late 1990s, it is impressive how far forward Australia and the rest of the world have come, with a decade and a half gone from debating the existence of climate change to setting a great example of a Western developed country in our attempt under the previous Labor government to combat the phenomenon. And yet today we have in front of us a package of legislation that, instead of furthering Australia's fight against climate change, intends to take us all and Australia backwards. It not only repeals a piece of legislation that, as I have explained, is working but replaces it with something that even proponents of the coalition's package know will not work. This raises serious doubts over the government's commitment to address the problem of climate change through their flawed package and leaves Australian people questioning whether the coalition even take this issue seriously. We know that some members of the coalition clearly do not and we know some members of the coalition do, but in the wash-up through their party room we have flawed policies that will not be able to address this issue seriously. As we have heard from the proponents, they will not work.

As we move forward through this period of political debate with the changed Senate, we have a situation where the crossbench have determined, at least in part, as far as we can tell, to support the repeal bill. They do so on the basis that we have unfinished business. We have a population—I believe, a community—that is committed to tackling climate change. We have a market mechanism available and functioning well that is about to be repealed. I certainly represent a community that is both passionate and committed to tackling climate change in the most effective way. It would be a great shame for these bills to pass and I implore my Senate colleagues to reconsider their vote and oppose this package.