Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I've never actually heard anyone describe what is being told to Australian people by analysts, by experts, about a gas shortage on the east coast of Australia as gaslighting anywhere. I just cannot believe that anyone would suggest that a problem, a crisis, we are facing is somehow gaslighting the Australian community. It does not matter how much gas is exported because it doesn't matter to the Greens; they will not allow any projects through. This argument that we don't want this project to occur because it's all for export purposes is a folly and a furphy. The Greens just don't want gas—full stop—and that brings us to the problem such an approach in policy would have for our country, would have for energy prices, would have for reliability and would have for things like fertiliser production, which then goes into food production, which is what stocks our shelves and keeps us sustained. This is where these arguments of these approaches go.

If you listen to what was said, you could walk outside this chamber, like you could after any Greens contribution on any matter before the Senate, and look for the smouldering tree stumps and the dried-up creek beds and wonder how we managed to breathe every day. You would think that any project that comes before this government, or any government of any colour, is going to destroy the planet and that therefore we must stop it. There has to be balance in this debate. There has to be an approach where we look to the economic and social impacts and benefits of these projects alongside the environmental impacts.

Nothing in the contribution made by Senator Cox that we've just heard talks about the years and years of environmental assessments and reports—hurdles and hoops to jump through—that the proponents of this project have gone through, all set out in law. Neither the process governed by the laws of this country nor the bureaucrats that actually administer these processes should be besmirched as being beholden to donors. There is this ridiculous argument that just because someone makes a donation to a political party our project gets up. It's easy to say. It's the kind of thing we say when talk about gambling reform. People like Duncan Turpie make donations to the Greens, but it only matters when its fossil fuel donations. It's an appalling approach to public policy. It's one that is shortsighted, and, of course, it results in very negative outcomes for our country, but it doesn't suit the arguments that they make.

Do you know what? I agree with Minister Plibersek rarely, but, on this occasion, she ruled out the need to go and do the reviews that have been called for in relation to the project we're talking about. It was a swift decision, proving this government can make swift decisions. It doesn't always happen—in fact, it rarely happens—but, on this occasion, the minister did it because it was the right decision. As I said before, because of years and years of work, proper assessments and the science based work being done—something that is an inconvenient truth those who are proposing this matter of urgency choose to ignore—the project is safe to proceed. It isn't going to do all of the things that the Greens are telling us it will. Since 2018, these sorts of assessments have been occurring.

I'll tell you what is alarming, though: you've got another example of the Australian Greens wanting to try and dictate how economic policy in this country should go. This is not purely environmental policy; this is economic and energy related policy that we're talking about here. Knocking a project on the head like this, which is exactly what is being asked for, will have implications beyond the environment. The argument is that, just because it's exported, it doesn't matter. Well, then, find us one that they support for domestic purposes. There isn't one. There is not a single gas project in this country, export or domestic use, that the Australian Greens would support, even if the science says, 'It is okay to go.'

Human life has an impact on this planet, and we need to minimise that impact and manage it well. But we have an impact. We don't go and live in caves. We need energy to cook. We need to cool things down. We need energy to create fertiliser and to grow food. The Greens ignore those hard facts in their approach to policy. And the people who miss out are those who are paying more for energy and whose jobs are no longer secure because of policies like the ones we're pursuing here. That is why we totally and utterly oppose what is before us. It's because it is a disastrous policy that is being written by the Greens, which is what will happen under a Labor-Green government if they get into minority government.