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

Of course, these are questions we have canvassed through the course of this debate and questions we regularly canvas in other forms including here in the chamber and at estimates. As I have indicated many times, science is unequivocal. This is the critical decade, and the world needs to take important steps to reduce emissions so as to keep 1.5 degrees within reach in order to preserve a safe climate for ourselves and for future generations. This is a government that acknowledges the science. We came to government determined to rectify a long period where climate had been dismissed, ignored, downgraded by the previous government. We have legislated our climate targets and increased their ambition, notifying the UN that that is our intention. We are making substantial investments in our industrial capability so we can seize the opportunities that will arise in Australia as a consequence of a decarbonising global economy, combined with our very significant renewable resources. We have recommitted to playing a constructive role in multilateral forums, to working constructively with partners in our region and globally, and we look forward to contributing in substantive and constructive ways at the COP in Dubai.

All of these things are entirely consistent with the bill before us, which seeks to put in place the legislative arrangements that would allow us to ratify amendments that have been made to the London protocol. The government simply seeks to ensure that, should a project that involves the transport and movement of carbon dioxide be put before us, we would be in a position to properly regulate it. It is the first of the steps necessary to create that set of regulatory arrangements. There are many further steps to take, as we've indicated previously, including bilateral arrangements with any other country that sought to engage us in this way; a set of permitting arrangements; and, finally, an assessment of any project should one be brought forward. This is not the only technology that the government imagines will be part of our transition towards 2050. I have made it clear repeatedly in the debate that, nonetheless, we consider that we need to create the pathways for all of the options to make it to 2050—understanding the commercial and technical uncertainties around some of these technologies, including the one that we're discussing today.

I appreciate the willingness of senators to contribute to this debate. I appreciate the Australian Greens' decision to formally move their amendments today. I do consider that I have answered the broad questions about the bill in general and the specific reasons why we don't support the amendments that are before us. With that, I move:

That the question be now put.