George Campbell (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Abetz, the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources. As a minister who likes to play the guessing game, guess who said this:

... we have accepted the science of greenhouse ...

We are not trying to buck that science, and we are not trying to talk down the urgency. We do believe this is an urgent matter.

For the minister’s benefit, it was Senator Hill, the then Minister for the Environment, in November 1996. Why was it that in 1996 the environment minister accepted the science of climate change and saw the need for urgent action, yet 10 years on the Prime Minister remained a sceptic, as evidenced by his statement last November that he was not going to be rushed into a panicky response to something that might not be as bad as many are predicting? Isn’t it true that the climate change sceptics won the debate inside the government and that the government is still deeply divided and firmly in denial?

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

I am happy to disappoint Senator George Campbell and advise him that we are not deeply divided. We are, in fact, a very unified government and we are concentrating on delivering for the benefit of our fellow Australians. The proof in all these matters is in examining the issue, but I say to Senator Campbell and others that excessive advocacy on these issues unfortunately tends to trivialise them. I ask Senator George Campbell to listen in silence for once to the actual evidence. The evidence is, according to Senator Campbell—and I am taking a very big risk on this because I have been burnt so often in accepting Labor Party quotes at face value, but I am willing to take this one at face value—that Senator Hill, as Minister for the Environment, made comments about greenhouse issues. What did he do and what did the Howard government do? We established the Australian Greenhouse Office—and somebody might be able to correct me—in 1997 or 1998. Within two years of coming to office, we had the Greenhouse Office up and running. What does that say? That the Prime Minister and the cabinet agreed that this was an issue that needed to be dealt with, but without all the fanfare and without all the hysteria that those opposite seek to create on this important issue. We just went about our business of doing that which is sensible and practical.

The Labor Party have discovered the greenhouse issue just in recent times. We established the Greenhouse Office eight or nine years ago—somebody might be able to do the maths for me—way before the Labor Party ever thought of asking questions about this issue in this place. Since the establishment of the Australian Greenhouse Office, we have engaged in providing funding to renewable energy sources and providing grants to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas—be it in the forestry sector or in all sectors.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brandis interjecting—

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

I thank Senator Brandis for his intervention; he has done the maths. We set up the Australian Greenhouse Office some nine years ago—nearly a decade ago—and we are accused of not taking the issue seriously—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chris Evans interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Evans, shouting across the chamber is disorderly.

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

and that we did not take the issue seriously. Of course we did. Might I add, we set this office up during a time when we were under severe financial pressure in trying to make the budget balance because of the profligacy of the Australian Labor Party. Let us not forget that a $96 billion debt was left to us and a $10.3 billion recurrent deficit was left to us when we came to government. Despite those economic imperatives, we saw the environmental imperative of establishing the Australian Greenhouse Office. Of course, we did that with the support of the Prime Minister, with the support of the cabinet and, I would have hoped, although the Labor Party undoubtedly did not realise it, with the support of this parliament.

To come into this place today, nine years after the event, and claim that you are somehow the champion of dealing with greenhouse issues—

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

New messiahs!

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

that is a very good term, Senator Coonan—pretending that you are somehow the new messiah dealing with these issues, is unfortunately another gross example of the Australian Labor Party seeking to rewrite history. (Time expired)

George Campbell (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Minister, if you set up the Greenhouse Office 10 years ago, why are we still waiting for action on climate change? Wasn’t the Prime Minister’s announcement of a task force in 2006 just another clever political fix? Minister, isn’t the government still dominated by climate change sceptics who are not capable of providing the solutions that Australia needs?

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

Unfortunately there is only a minute, but this is how seriously we as a government are dealing with it. We are a strong and active player in international climate change forums, such as the head of AGO, Howard Bamsey, co-chairing the UN dialogue on long-term cooperative action on climate change. We are a founding member of the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. We play an active role in the G8+ dialogue on climate change, clean energy and sustainable development. The list goes on. We have made money available to our Asia-Pacific partners—I think about $100 million—to assist them in these various areas.

We have a proud record but, unlike others in this place, we got started ages ago and we are still keeping along on the same level. The Labor Party never talked about it. They have discovered it, and like a new toy they want to bring it out on every possible occasion. But we have been dealing with this for— (Time expired)