Lyn Allison (Victoria, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance and Administration, Senator Minchin, to a question without notice asked by Senator Allison today relating to climate change.

The minister chose to neither confirm nor deny that he is a climate change sceptic, and that is something that I expected. He remains to be convinced—at least, he says that some scientists remain to be convinced. That is true but it is only a handful of scientists, compared to the 2,500 eminent, world-renowned scientists in the IPCC who tell us that climate change is connected with greenhouse emissions—that there is a clear and unequivocal link—and they can demonstrate the science behind that claim.

Unfortunately, Minister Minchin keeps falling back on the old rhetoric—his government is not going to do anything that would threaten the foundation of the economy. The problem with that assertion is that what threatens our economy most is his plan of doing nothing. Minister Minchin would sooner see us at some time in the future go down the path of nuclear power or of so-called clean coal technology. Interesting this week were the comments made by a former head of BHP, Mr Paul Anderson. He ran BHP Billiton in 2002 and still sits on its board. He says that clean coal technology will pose the same, if not worse, long-term problems as nuclear waste. As we all know, no country in the world has adequately solved the long-term problem of storing nuclear waste. He says that people cannot believe it is safe to put nuclear waste five miles underground, when it is petrified in glass, so how are they going to feel safe putting pressurised gas underground? That is the point of today’s debate about climate change. This government would have us believe that the economy will go to ruin unless we proceed down the path of nuclear power and so-called clean coal technology—that is, sequestering, concentrating and pumping underground vast quantities of CO

We know how to do it; we just do not know how to do it cheaply. It is not looking like we will know any time soon, despite the huge amounts of money that governments have been pouring into this, both here and in other parts of the world, America included. Scientists—if we are going to rely on scientists—tell us that this is expensive, that it is likely to remain expensive and that it is not likely to be the solution right around the country. There are places where it is just completely unsuitable for CO to be pumped underground. If we are talking about transporting CO over long distances then the technology itself will be outdone by the cost of transporting the gas.

Minister Minchin remains a sceptic. He has no doubt been the voice in cabinet which has said: ‘Let’s do nothing for another couple of decades. Let’s use the economy as the excuse for that and talk about coalminers losing their jobs.’ We all know that coalminers will have to go through a transition phase, and they are already used to that.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They’re weasel words.

Lyn Allison (Victoria, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In my home state of Victoria, Senator Abetz, coalminers and those working in the electricity sector have been displaced already by machines, by and large. So they know what it is to lose a huge workforce in the Latrobe Valley. Employment levels in the Latrobe Valley still have not recovered. They might do so if we put in new technology like wind turbine manufacturing or if we set up solar energy applications and industries in that area. These people deserve decent jobs, and they are more likely to get them in the renewable energy sector than they are in the coal industry. We can find work for them, but long term it is not going to be in the coal industry. This government seems to think we can go on polluting the atmosphere endlessly with emissions from coal-fired power stations, but it is not the case. The minister needs to drop his scepticism. He needs to read the Stern report, which says that our economies will be worse off if we take no action, and he needs to engage in this science. In his position, as Minister for Finance and Administration, it is important that he understand this. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.