Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

This has been an awful summer. It's been an awful summer particularly in my home state of New South Wales, which has suffered awfully under an unprecedented bushfire crisis and then in parts of the state with extreme weather events, particularly in relation to rainfall that has then gone on to produce flooding. It's a state that's been suffering and continues to suffer from drought, and all of these things are directly related to climate change. All of these things are consistent with the predictions made for many decades by climate scientists about the consequences of a warming planet. All of these things should propel people in this place—in this chamber and in the other place—to action on climate.

The great shame—the great waste—of the last seven years of coalition government is their complete and total inability to get a grip on this problem. The internal dynamics within the coalition party room are simply so bad, so divisive and so difficult, that no leader—not Mr Abbott, not Mr Turnbull and not Mr Morrison—has been able to present a coherent energy policy, or a coherent climate policy, to their own party room and have it accepted.

On this side of the chamber, we are keenly aware of the urgent need for action and we have offered support to the many variants of climate policy and energy policy that have been put forward by the government. We're interested in the clean energy target. We were interested when they were talking about an emissions intensity scheme. We were interested, certainly, when they were talking about the National Energy Guarantee, and I guess we'll be interested in whatever it is that they bowl up next.

We understand that it is absolutely critical that we move to an evidence based policy that accepts what the economists tell us about the cost of future energy, accepts what the science tells us about the cost of inaction on climate change and accepts what the market tells us about the enormous instability and uncertainty that this continuing failure to have an energy policy is placing on it. The truth is the market is on strike and, if there is a problem in our electricity system, it arises directly from the failure of the government benches over seven years to develop an energy policy that anyone can understand. The problems arise directly from the National Party, who simply don't accept the science of climate change—and you heard the ignorant responses presented by National Party members and senators last night when they were asked about this same question. But the problems also arise inside the Liberal Party from a group of people who prefer the culture wars on climate to actual solutions.

I want to be clear that the bill before the chamber today seems unlikely to do very much about any of these problems. My concern is that this is part of what has been a very effective branding strategy on part of the Greens political party to let everyone know they're opposed to climate change, but I don't think it's part of a coherent strategy to lay out a policy agenda that Australians can get behind. I don't think it's part of a political strategy that will built a broad constituency across the community in support of climate action. On the bill in particular, let's be honest about it. We all understand how this works. This bill will not succeed. If it manages to pass the Senate, it will go on to languish on the Notice Paper in the House of Representatives, and the government controls the legislative agenda in the House of Representatives. They're not prepared to consider their own climate change legislation, let alone legislation prepared by another party. Even if the legislation did by some miracle get up, it wouldn't make that much difference at all to the task, because the task is transforming the Australian economy to net zero by 2050 and starting now to do it.

Let's be clear about what this bill will and won't do. Nothing in this bill relates to the potential emissions of the product of a mine—just the emissions from the construction itself. This legislation treats a mine producing dirty brown thermal coal exactly the same way as it treats a mine producing zinc for solar panels. The only factor that matters is the emission from constructing it. In any event, the act that it seeks to amend, the EPBC Act, contains substantial discretions for the minister. The nature of judicial review means that the merits of this discretion will never be tested by a court, and this bill would not stop the Minister for the Environment approving 15 new Adani-size mines side by side in the middle of a rainforest if she set her mind to it. That's not to say there aren't interesting proposals in the bill. We look forward to having an opportunity to consider through the committee process whether it's fit for purpose. But this is not part of a realistic strategy for combating climate change. More importantly, it is not part of a strategy for building a coalition to combat climate change.

The Greens political party have their origin in an environmental movement that was practical and grounded. It's an ethos that has been enormously influential in Australian politics. Indeed, part of my political awakening, and part of the reason I was interested in politics as a kid, was that overdevelopment threatened the beautiful place in which I grew up in northern New South Wales. People in my community didn't like it and they responded politically. People from all walks of life got together. They were united by the realisation that the environment that surrounded us was more valuable to us than what had been promised by developers. And it didn't just happen. Small-business owners, farmers, teachers, tradies—they were all in it. You might have thought that there was more to drive those people apart than to bring them together, but local campaigners, people who showed real leadership and whom I truly admire, created a movement that was open enough for very different people to find a place in it. It was open enough and big enough that all sorts of people could come together, feel welcome and fight for common values together. Those environmentalists, those people in my community, created change by building a coalition of interests.

My concern is that the approach from the Greens political party has left this tradition behind. The Greens political party did have their origin in that kind of movement. They had their origin in sit-ins and local protests. But the new party, the new Greens, have their roots in the moral absolutism of culture wars. The problem is that that's not taking us anywhere, because they've been going on for a long time. To create deep, lasting change we need deep and broad support, and the task is to build that support in the community. The Greens are not prepared to do that work, or at least they haven't been to date. They are usually committed to demonstrating their bona fides to a constituency that is already committed to effective action on climate change. That's a really important group of people—we need people who are passionate and committed to action—but what is missing is any sense from the Greens that they are committed to engaging with anyone else.

Just last week, former senator Bob Brown was quoted as describing the people in regional Queensland who opposed his pre-election climate convoy as an unruly mob—that's a quote—that was 'cranky, nasty, inhospitable'. Former senator Bob Brown said he was tired of being polite to planet killers. That's also a quote. Now, it might come as news to many involved in the climate change debate that the Greens were being 'polite' beforehand—that this is a new position—but the bigger problem is the attitude that was displayed. The alternative is to consider the possibility that, maybe, working people with legitimate concerns about their livelihood, the livelihood of their families and the future of their children may not be the real enemy here. That would be an alternative approach—to consider that one of the challenges for us is to create a movement in which people from all walks of life can see a place for themselves; to recognise that people have a right to be worried about their jobs and the future of their families, communities and way of life, and that it's our role to answer those fears. That is the approach that Labor brings to climate change policy.

I'm proud that on Friday the Leader of the Opposition announced that an Albanese Labor government will promise to make Australia carbon neutral by 2050. Labor is the only party capable of forming a government that is committed to real action on climate change. We know this, and anyone watching the shambles on the other side knows this. It is only a Labor government that will build an economy where, by 2050, the amount of pollution we release into the atmosphere will be no greater than the amount we absorb. This is the right thing to do. Strong climate action is needed not only to protect the prosperity of future generations of Australians but also to meet our international obligations. It's also an enormous opportunity. We have the opportunity to deliver prosperity by modernising our economy and adapting to inevitable climate impacts. All states and territories have already promised to be carbon neutral by 2050. Australian businesses are calling for this, including AGL, Amcor Wesfarmers, Telstra, Qantas and others. Seventy-three countries around the world, including the UK, Canada, France and Germany—many with conservative governments—have already adopted this as their goal. So it's time to move on. Real action, science based goals, bringing the country together—that is what we need. We do not need the same old Liberal and Greens playbook of dividing the nation for political gain.

This goal is a goal that the CSIRO says will deliver higher wages and incomes and lower power costs. It is a goal that the University of Melbourne says will deliver 20 times greater benefit to the economy than any costs. The Business Council of Australia says getting to net zero emissions by 2050 will mean $22 billion of new investment per year; that is $22 billion of new jobs, new infrastructure and new industries. That is an investment boom. It's an investment boom which, like all past investment booms, will grow incomes, will grow jobs and will grow Australia. More than that, it will put Australia in a strong position to argue for greater action internationally, because, in the end, only international action will deliver a safe climate. Crucially, our policies will be underpinned by commitments to ensure no workers or communities are left behind as well as to protect future generations from dangerous climate change that would see even worse emergencies than the ones we have seen over this last summer.

Action on climate is as important for regional Queensland as it is for Sydney and Melbourne. This is a shared challenge. We are in this together. We need a movement for change that has different voices—from the bush, from our cities, from our suburbs and from our towns. Labor is committed to building this coalition and committed to taking action.