Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

This is a great opportunity to talk about the US-Australia relationship. Regardless of who had won the presidential election, the relationship that our country has with the United States is so complex and deep, across military, economic and cultural factors, that it was always going to withstand any particular judgement made by the American people. Just as governments of the day in Australia are here for a temporary period but ultimately it's about the relationship over the longer term. The relationship is always going to be very strong regardless of the outcome.

This is not an opportunity for Labor, the Greens and others to try to resume the energy wars. It was always very strange that people tried to push energy into a culture war, because, at the end of the day, any sort of obsession with a form of energy generation is frankly weird. The only group that is having a culture war or an energy war internally at the moment is the Labor Party, which really can't decide what it wants to do in relation to energy generation.

People want to talk about net zero targets and the like. Australia has an unparalleled record in getting our emissions down. We've beaten our Kyoto targets. We're on track to beat Paris and in fact, on a comparative basis, we're doing better than most of the other OECD jurisdictions when it comes to actually reducing our emissions over the course of the Paris accord. Yes, there will be another climate conference in Glasgow when people are able to get on to aeroplanes and meet—I assume that will be done in person. As people who follow this closely will know, as part of our Paris obligations we've already committed to get to net zero. The question is: when does that happen? Rather than trying to put in place a commitment which we don't know can be kept at a particular point in time, we have committed to our Paris obligations. We're on track to meet and beat them. In due course there'll be further statements made in relation to the Glasgow commitments that our country will make. With our track record already so strong, it is ridiculous for people to try and drag our progress on emissions reduction into an international relations discussion. Frankly, it is desperate.

Our agenda is to develop a plan to get to the target before announcing the actual target, because that is what you do in the real world. I have to say that people tire of politicians promising things and then not delivering them. Surely the people of Australia, and I think this has been supported at the ballot box, want to see politicians and governments promising things that are deliverable and delivering a framework alongside a commitment, which is effectively what we've had in the past with the Kyoto and the Paris accords.

At the moment the national government have a plan on the table which is technology neutral, which is going to get us to the place where we need to be. Today we've seen my home state New South Wales deliver another plan, which is a significant investment into clean energy. Driven by the market and supported by the government, it is going to see significant new investment into wind, solar and of course pumped hydro. So you've got the national government with a technology-neutral plan, which is going to support clean energy and the transition, and then you've got the states coming in behind that and supporting that. I am optimistic that we are going to get to this net zero target in a reasonable timetable. Of course, you need to see the plan, you need to see the formula, you need to see the framework, because otherwise it's just an empty promise without any backing.

The reality is that the relationship that we have with the US is very strong. It would have withstood any particular judgement made by the American people. These two democracies go back in conflict to the First World War. We've always been there, with a very strong relationship, with the United States. So any suggestion that there is an opportunity for us to have a barney with the US now over climate policy is simply very misguided.

We always have been in these climate discussions. We have not left any of the multilateral institutions or any of the groupings. We're in Paris. We're in the TPP. The US left both, under the Trump administration, and I'm sure they will come back. We've been there as a responsible global citizen with targets that are appropriate for our economy. Over the next few months and years we will continue to make our contribution as a significant economy that is doing a lot on emissions reduction. At the end of the day, Australia has the 12th- or 13th-biggest economy on earth. It's a serious economy. It's an outward facing economy.

All these judgements we make about our economy are very important to people's lives. They're not just boxes or bits of paper that we don't think about and that have no real impact on the world. The methodical approach that the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction, Angus Taylor, and the government will go through in determining these future targets will factor in all of the economic and climate factors. I would say that we are beyond the culture war and the energy wars. I think we're in a good place as a country. We've got a technology-driven focus that doesn't feature punitive taxation or a preference for any particular form of energy generation. Clean energy is up to 18 per cent, I think, of generation in Australia today, which is a great thing, and a lot of that was achieved with significant market intervention. That is not necessary now, because clean energy is very economical in its own right. It's now appropriate for the government to step back and allow that market to work with the price signals that are already in place.

Our bilateral relationship with the US is as close as any two countries can be. I'm sure our government will work closely with the incoming administration on this, on trade and on all the other important economic and environmental matters over the next few years. We will take our plan to Glasgow, which is appropriate for Australia and which is in keeping with the tenor of the commitments we have made over the last two climate conferences, certainly to Paris and Copenhagen. It will be a serious, credible bid and we will meet and beat that, unlike many countries we often hear lecturing us from abroad.