Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The I rise to speak on the urgency motion: The need for the Prime Minister to attend the United Nations Climate Summit 2014, and to recognise that Australia’s emissions reduction target is inadequate. We woke up this morning to the news that over 300,000 people marched through the streets of Manhattan Island, New York to peacefully protest for global action on climate change. The New York march was the culmination of a series of events right across the globe. Organisers said 550 busloads of people had arrived for the rally, which followed marches in 166 countries including Britain, France, Afghanistan, Mexico and Bulgaria. Back home in Australia, more than 10,000 people took to the streets in Melbourne, 1,500 in Brisbane and many more in other capital cities. The message from these events to politicians and powerbrokers alike was very clear: people want action on climate change and they want it now. The global events were held to herald the start of the Climate Change Summit 2014, which has been organised by the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon. The Secretary-General was clear about the urgency of action when he said, 'The longer we delay our action, the more we will have to pay.'

The climate summit will be about action and solutions to separate progress in areas that can contribute to cutting emissions and building resilience. Areas such as agriculture, cities energy, financing, forests, pollutants, resilience and transportation will all be in the policy spotlight. It will also mobilise the will for a global agreement on climate change ahead of the ahead of the 2015 conference in Paris, where participants will try to agree on legally-binding climate change regulations.

If we are to keep the world within the brink of a dangerous two degrees Celsius rise in global temperatures, world leaders need to work together. Present at the 2014 summit will be the US President, Barack Obama. Joining him will be the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, along with more than 120 other world leaders. These leaders understand that action on climate change must happen. But the Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, will not be joining them. He will not be making time in his diary to address the pressing global issue of climate change despite the fact that he already had a trip to New York in his diary for later in the week. Instead, he is sending Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop, who has already knocked back a United Nations request for Australia to strengthen our climate targets. This is disgraceful and it is further proof that the government is actively hindering global action on climate change. This is the government that has systematically set about dismantling each and every tool that Australia has had in its kit to address climate change and to harness the opportunities presented by a low-carbon economy.

To say Australian government action on climate change has been one of the most vexed in recent times would be an understatement. Of course, both major parties took to the 2007 federal election a policy to implement an emissions trading scheme. But the now Prime Minister, Mr Abbott, put political expediency ahead of the planet's future in 2009 when he led the Liberal and National parties to a 'no' vote on the carbon pollution reduction scheme.

In 2011, the clean energy future package was legislated. Of course, it was for a fixed price for three years then a floating price in 2015. The fixed price component caused the issue with the electorate. For the better part of four years, we have witnessed continued deceit from the now Prime Minister about the impact of the carbon price. Whyalla was not wiped out, lamb roasts did not reach $100 and the Australian economy continued to grow. While the now Prime Minister and a large number of his front bench were telling tall tales, there was absolute silence from those in the coalition who supported a market based mechanism purely for political expediency.

I now turn to Australia's emissions reduction target and the importance of flexibility in this target for international negotiations. Labor's position is that the Australian government should commit to emissions reductions of between five and 15 per cent unilaterally and that there be an international agreement up to 25 per cent. The strategy behind the two targets is to provide a bargaining position at international forums like the UN's Climate Summit 2014. These are the same targets that Labor sought to enshrine in 2009. These are the same targets that Labor legislated for in 2011. As a party of government and not a party of protest, it is vital that the Australian government not only attends important summits like the UN's Climate Summit 2014 but also considers an appropriate bargaining position. It would be a poor strategy for Australia to act unilaterally with large legislated targets before the rest of the world cements its carbon pricing frameworks.

The clean energy future package provided a clear path for Australia to meet a five, 15 or indeed 25 per cent reduction in our emissions. Labor's focus in both 2009 and 2011—and it remains today—is that Australia should have strong emissions reduction targets unilaterally and we should take a strong bargaining position to international forums. Of course, the now Abbott government has trashed Australia's emissions reduction framework, trashed Australia's emissions reduction targets and trashed Australia's bargaining position at international forums like the UN Climate Summit 2014. But this is Mr Abbott's intention. Under his leadership, Australia is the first country in the world to go backwards on action on climate change, with the repeal of the carbon price. The Abbott government has left Australia without a framework to tackle climate change.

And, now, the next frontier is the renewable energy target. The Abbott government appointed a climate change sceptic to head its review into the renewable energy target. This review is reported to have recommended scrapping the RET altogether. And the government's response to that? Silence. The Abbott government is threatening an emissions-reducing, jobs-creating initiative. Labor supports maintaining the renewable energy target. We understand that the RET is a major economic driver as well as a major employer. Renewables support 24,000 jobs and the RET has attracted $18 billion in investment across Australia to date. The Abbott government's own review found that we will pay more for electricity after 2020 if the RET is dumped or reduced.

Labor supports the RET, while at the same time supporting assistance for energy-intensive trade-exposed industry. The clean energy future package saw relevant heavy industry receive a rebate on 97 per cent of their carbon price liabilities. Also at risk are hundreds of millions of dollars that Hydro Tasmania returns to the state government and the $200 million Granville Harbour wind farm, which is set to deliver 200 much-needed construction jobs.

Last week, I hosted Bill Shorten in Burnie and Queenstown in north-west Tasmania. In Burnie we met with the proponents of the Granville Harbour wind farm. They have finance. They have the plans. They have the approvals process underway. The only thing holding them back is the Abbott government's ideologically driven attack on the renewable energy target. This is holding back 200 jobs in Tasmania's north-west—a place where unemployment is a number of points higher than the national average; a place where people are screaming out for opportunities; a place where people see the long-term benefits of renewables and want a federal government that will help with this major project, not hinder it. The Abbott government must keep its election promise to retain the renewable energy target in full.

The Abbott government's Direct Action Plan is a sham, and I would urge all in this place to not support it. There is clear evidence that it is a waste of taxpayer resources. There is clear evidence that it will struggle to assist Australia meet even the five per cent reduction target. To meet our commitment of reducing Australia's carbon output by five per cent by 2020, the government initially allocated $2.55 billion over three years. But modelling by SKM-MMA and Monash University showed this to be $4 billion short of what will be needed.

A recent inquiry for the Senate Environment and Communications Committee failed to find one witness who supported Direct Action as a credible standalone solution to address climate change. Direct Action will hand out grants to big polluters but levy no fine on those who fail to reduce their emissions. Shockingly, Climate Institute modelling found that, if other countries followed the Abbott government's policy lead of Direct Action, the world would be on track for a catastrophic rise of up to 6.5 per cent by the end of the century. Tony Abbott, the Prime Minister, needs to recognise that the world is moving toward a low-carbon future, whether he likes it or not. He can either embrace this future and the opportunities it offers Australia, or he can continue to block action on climate change.