Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Hansard source

I have three quick answers. I'm very conscious that Senator Pocock is seeking the call and Senator Roberts was seeking the call at some earlier point. On methane, we have spoken about this publicly but I will reiterate it. The government is in the process of careful consultation with Australian farmers and the resources sector regarding the global methane pledge. We are working with key industry stakeholders and peak bodies, and that process is led by my colleagues Minister Watt and Minister King.

The government is fundamentally committed to working in a collaborative and genuinely consultative way. I reiterate again that there has been an enormous sense of relief in many of the stakeholders that I have spoken to that that is the case with this government because it wasn't their experience with the last.

n relation to Infrastructure Australia, the consequential amendments bill amends the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to allow Infrastructure Australia to take account of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets when conducting audits of nationally significant infrastructure, developing plans and providing advice. This does not preclude other relevant issues being considered, including in relation to climate risk and adaptation. It is merely an additional feature of the things that that body may consider when they are undertaking their work.

Finally, Senator McKenzie asked about lawfare. This was the subject of some discussion in the inquiry process. There was a number of quite interesting submissions. The Wilderness Society gave evidence that the nature of the bills do not give rise to actions that can be taken against the government. The Australian Forest Products Association explained that lawfare is already prevalent in forestry operations; therefore, they do not expect that this legislation will have any additional material effect. BP said, 'Our hope is that by legislating the target and by providing a transparent and accountable framework for its delivery, the legislation might even reduce the uncertainty that can sometimes be a driver for litigation.'

The clear message coming through from business in that process and more broadly is that certainty helps. Comparisons between this bill and legislation in other countries doesn't assist us in this case, because the legislation before us is quite different to the form of the legislation that is in place in other countries. The evidence that was provided to the committee was that this was an unlikely outcome of the legislation that the committee was examining. I hope that that provides assistance to Senator McKenzie.