Anne McEwen (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Wong. Can the minister outline to the Senate Australia’s most recent greenhouse emissions results and what they mean for Australia’s response to climate change? How does the Rudd government plan to prepare Australia for the future by tackling climate change, and are there any threats to these plans?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator McEwen for her question. Senator McEwen, like all senators on this side, understands the environmental and economic challenge that climate change presents. She understands that Australia is particularly vulnerable to climate change and that, unless we act now, climate change could be catastrophic for Australia and for the world. It will seriously hurt the Australian economy and will cost jobs. Those of us on this side of the chamber understand that the economic costs of inaction are far greater than the costs of responsible action now. Those of us on this side of the chamber understand that this is a challenge for this generation—an economic challenge to which this nation has to rise. We understand that this is all about preparing this nation for future challenges.

Today I released Australia’s National Greenhouse Accounts, which shows that Australia’s emissions for 2006 and preliminary estimates of emissions in 2007 remain on track to meet our Kyoto target.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And, of course, those opposite want to claim credit for that now, but we remember these are the people who said they would not sign Kyoto. The sky was going to fall in if they signed Kyoto, according to Senator Minchin and his colleagues—now they want to take credit for it. Isn’t it amazing how the worm turns?

In 2007, Australia’s greenhouse emissions were estimated to be 585 million tonnes, or 106 per cent of 1990 levels—an increase of 1.6 per cent from 2006. In 2006, the emissions were 104.2 per cent of the 1990 level of 576 million tonnes. But, despite the fact we remain on track, we still have a big job ahead of us to reduce greenhouse emissions. Because this government is serious about tackling climate change, we are committed to reducing emissions by 60 per cent of 2000 levels by 2050.

I note that those opposite have no such plan or target. The fact is that the economically responsible way to move Australia from a high-emissions economy to a low-emissions economy is through an emissions-trading scheme. It is the way this can be done at least cost. When those on the other side were in government they knew that. That is why, after 11 years of neglect, they finally came to the position that they were agreeing to introduce an emissions-trading scheme. However, what do we see now from the opposition? They are backing away from the responsible position they eventually got to, after 11 years of neglect in government. And what are they doing now? They are going back to their tried and true position, playing short-term politics and starting a fear campaign. Those opposite have no credibility on climate change; they simply confirm by their actions that they are a party of the past. They are a party that is focused on economic irresponsibility through their failure to tackle the great challenge of climate change—a challenge that confronts this generation and this nation. By their economic irresponsibility and their short-term politics, they are simply confirming that they are a party of the past.