Nita Green (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on this urgency motion, and, in doing so, I recognise the contributions from Northern Territory senators such as Senator McMahon. This is an issue that relates to the Northern Territory, but, as we know, this is a far-reaching debate about much more than just one area of our country; it's about the government's energy policy, it's about where we're going in the future and it's about the jobs that can be created right now and how those jobs are going to be created.

The problem with what the government put forward in these debates is that they talk about a transition but there's no plan of where they're going to. They talk about a transition, but there is no support for renewable energy; there is a walking away from and a walking backwards of support for renewable energy. There's even, as we've seen from some of the contributions today, a complete denial that this is something the government needs to address, that these jobs can be created and will assist our regional communities, and even that climate change is something that we need to talk about in this place. So it's disappointing. I respect the views of the Territorian senators that have contributed to this debate, but the broader debate around this government's energy policy is incredibly lacking.

On the Beetaloo Basin: can I just say that federal Labor respects and understands the Northern Territory government's support for exploration in the Beetaloo. Labor also understands that there are strong community views and concerns on the issue in the Territory, and that's why Labor will continue to advocate for the government and industry to continue to consult with traditional owners to ensure that cultural heritage and the local environment are protected as a matter of urgency. Under this government, we've had repeated attempts to put in place laws that will not do that—that will not protect the environment and will not protect cultural heritage. So, again, we call on the government to do what is necessary under the Samuel review and bring a bill to this parliament that isn't just a repetition of Tony Abbott's one-stop shop so that we can actually move forward and get good environmental protections and good cultural protections in place to assist state parliaments and state governments to do this work.

More broadly, this motion raises issues around the contribution of gas and the contribution of renewable energy to the energy mix and where we're going from here. Labor has always continued to argue for urgent and meaningful action on climate change, in keeping with our commitment to reach net zero by 2050 and in keeping with our support for the declaration of a climate emergency. Labor's record in government was to ratify Kyoto, to supercharge Australia's renewable sector and to put Australia on a pathway to sharply declining emissions. That's what Labor governments do, but this government has walked backwards from all of those achievements.

Labor's position on matters that involve environmental and heritage protection has always been that we must adhere to, defend and act upon analysis and research. This is science based, and, as much as members opposite want to come in here and give the Senate a science lesson, they are not the scientists. We need to listen to the scientists when it comes to these issues. Of course Labor knows that gas has an ongoing role to play in both firming and peaking electricity, as well as feedstock for manufacturing, but where there is a role for gas to play in firming and peaking electricity, and as a feedstock for manufacturing, it must be subject to rigorous, independent scientific assessment—not scientific assessment from Senator Rennick over there, but scientific assessment that is independent and rigorous.

Labor supports the Australian gas sector. Let's be clear about that. Labor supports Australia's gas sector, the jobs it creates and supports right now and recognises its important role in creating economic growth, export incomes and earnings and both job retention and creation. There's no opportunity here for the Greens to put a wedge motion through or for the government to point the finger at Labor. Labor has a strong position on this, and we want to make sure that is clear. But we also know that we need to invest more money in renewable energy. We want to make sure that we invest money in jobs that not only create economic development but also contribute to our country's need to do something about climate change.

I want to quickly address the comments that were made by the Deputy Prime Minister, the acting Prime Minister, this week about climate change, where he again sought to frame this debate as a city-versus-country divide. Let me tell you this: this isn't about regional versus city. Climate change is not a regional issue. It's not a city issue. It's not about baristas. The jobs that will be lost if we fail to act on climate change are regional jobs.

Climate change is the biggest threat to the Great Barrier Reef, which supports 64,000 jobs. Those aren't my words; they are the words of the member for Leichhardt—the special envoy for the reef. This government isn't listening to their own members or their own scientific panels on this. The jobs that will be created if we do something and support renewable energy are regional jobs. You only have to go to the wind farm that was vetoed by Minister Pitt—250 jobs in North Queensland vetoed by this government—to understand that renewable energy jobs are being created right now in regional Queensland, but they're being held back by this government. We also know that the communities that will be impacted if we don't take any action on climate change are regional communities. They're the islands in the Torres Strait that are facing rising sea levels right now. They know that they may have to leave those islands because this government is failing to take action. Can we just agree that this is a problem— (Time expired)