Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Wong. Has this government expressed a position on whether or not nuclear power should be incorporated into the Clean Development Mechanism, or other instrument, as part of the post-Kyoto arrangements, either verbally or in writing, in any of the UNFCCC negotiations that it has participated in to date?

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

Certainly domestically the government have expressed a view about nuclear power—that we are opposed to the utilisation of nuclear power in Australia. I am not sure what the position of those opposite is—they have expressed a range of views—but that is the policy position of this government. There have been quite a lot of discussions about the Clean Development Mechanism and whether or not other forms of technology should be included. Certainly we are on the record on carbon capture and storage—and I appreciate that your party has, I think, a view about that. But we were of the view that that would be an appropriate thing to include in the Clean Development Mechanism as a way of trying to maximise the incentives for technology that we believe the world needs if it is to tackle climate change. I am not aware personally of any detail of what has been expressed in those negotiations by negotiators. I can tell you what the government’s policy position, certainly domestically, is: that we do not agree with a position that says nuclear power is the answer for Australia. We think we should invest in carbon capture and storage and also in renewables.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It should be explored. You should have an open mind.

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

You can advocate in your party room, Senator Cormann, that you want nuclear power; that is fine. I am answering a question from Senator Ludlum. In terms of what discussions have occurred on the CDM, as I said, the one I can recall that occurred at ministerial level was certainly the CCS discussion. That occurred at the COP—the conference of the parties—in Poznan. As I said, the government has made clear its views about nuclear power domestically—(Time expired)

Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I can presume then, Minister, that you would take it on notice if it later turns out that discussions have occurred—that the Australian government has put a position. Can you tell us what position the government negotiators are being directed to take in Copenhagen on the inclusion of nuclear power—which was rejected in 2001—into the post-2012 Clean Development Mechanism, and with whom the government is consulting on this matter?

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

As you are probably aware, negotiating mandates are first signed off at the highest level of government, whether it is a coalition or a Labor government, for these sorts of major international negotiations. Our submissions to the negotiations are public. They are on the web and I think, in fact, I have had questions from your colleague Senator Milne about the detail of some of our submissions. Those submissions go in reasonably regularly. I cannot recall our most recent submission on the CDM. I do recall a range of submissions—particularly on legal structure—and a range of other matters, and the process is that those submissions are developed by government. There is the possibility of dialogue with other organisations. In fact, I have taken the opportunity to brief a range of NGOs with an interest in international matters about the most recent international negotiations. (Time expired)

Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Does the government have a position on the use of uranium exports from Australian uranium mines being used to offset domestic emission reductions here in Australia? Depending on your answer, Minister, would you rule out any possibility of this?

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

I am not sure that is a question that should come to me. Uranium exports are in Minister—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

Uranium exports—

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let’s increase it!

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

You really cannot help yourself in your advocacy of nuclear power, can you, Senator Cormann. I hope you tell the people who vote for you in Western Australia that that is your solution to everything. What I was trying to express, Senator Ludlam, is that my recollection is that exports—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I cannot hear the answer for the interjections on both the left and the right. Senator Wong is entitled to be heard when answering the question.

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

As I was trying to express over the din opposite, Senator Ludlam, export licences, from recollection, are in Minister Ferguson’s portfolio. What I have continued to express is that our very clear view, as the Australian government, is towards investment in Australia in renewables and in carbon capture and storage. We are not going down the nuclear path. (Time expired)