Susan McDonald (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I don't know whether to be pleased or vaguely concerned at the opposition's obsession with the National Party—during question time, the calling out and the discussion with the National Party, and the number of questions focused on the National Party. I guess it is a reflection of how the National Party continues to punch well above its weight in terms of its influence and its contribution to the national debate. We will have to continue to listen to the opposition's complete focus on what the National Party does and thinks at every turn. And today we're going to discuss the National Party's position on sensible climate targets and practices.

I'm really proud to be a part of a government that believes in practical environmental programs and outcomes, and the target of 2030, which Australia has engaged with and already done so well on, is a great reflection. I want to talk, too, about the great work that's done around the Great Barrier Reef catchments, where we had a 25 per cent reduction in nitrogen output on the basis of the very practical changes made by Queensland cane farmers. They have done a terrific job of adopting new practices and of innovation in both mechanical and farming practices. Well may those on the other side bury their heads in their hands, because that's how they operate. They don't understand farming. They don't understand the practical realities of balancing the environment with good environmental outcomes.

You cannot do good things for the environment when you trash jobs and you trash industry. That is what Labor would have done if they'd been successful in their desire to form government after the last election. Their high taxes and their crippling policies on farming and on industry would have left tens of thousands of Australians out of work and wondering how they'd transition. We all remember Jackie Trad's policies on 'transitioning coalminers' to—I don't know, maybe coffee jobs, or perhaps tourism?—in their coal areas. These are the sorts of practical environmental and economic balances that we in the National Party consider, because we do understand the regions and we understand the important work that happens in the regions. I can't begin to imagine what would have happened if the opposition, who continue to take this kind of moralising, anti National Party stance, had been in government.

If we're going to talk about emissions targets, I think we have quite practically and reasonably decided to discuss how technology and innovation will be able to achieve the environmental outcomes the world is talking about. Certainly in mining there are a number of programs and projects happening that will allow that industry to have greater control over its emissions through changes to practices around mining, around fuel in trucks and around tailings dams. In the agricultural sector—well, of course we know that agriculture has already borne the great brunt of these changes, with the introduction of the draconian vegetation management laws in Queensland. The loss of property rights for Queensland farmers has been quite traumatic. But that industry has continued to go on and innovate and make practical changes to land management, to genetics in animals, to crops like cotton, which can use less fertiliser, pesticides and water and yet achieve greater yields. These are the kinds of practical outcomes that mean that we still have jobs in the regions, we still have successful industries and we don't smash Australian jobs, as Labor would have us do.