Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A letter has been received from Senator Milne :

Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:

"The embarrassment caused to Australia on the global stage resulting from the Prime Minister Abbott's climate denial and refusal to commit funds to the UN Green Climate Fund, to assist poor nations combat climate change."

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today’s debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How embarrassed are most Australians when they pick up, after the G20 finishes, the Los Angeles Times, or The New York Times and see the Australian Prime Minister being referred to as 'the great blunder from down under'! That is how he is being referred to throughout the world. And it is not surprising. He was humiliated by his complete ignorance and failure to recognise that all his talk of climate denial is so ideologically driven. His denial of the science and his continual chanting of his three-word slogans is so out of touch with the rest of the world.

Suddenly the Prime Minister got a wake-up check. Basically, the other countries in the G20 said to our Australian Prime Minister, 'We want to discuss climate change at the G20, because climate change is an economic issue.' Climate change will have a major impact on food security and physical security, because there will be food shortages and displacement of people. There are extreme weather events occurring all of the time around the world now. People are recognising we live in a climate emergency, and the major world economies recognise that unless they change and decouple economic growth from the use of fossil fuels and the use of non-renewable resources we will not have a liveable planet. That is the fundamental basis on which the energy and the whole economic system needs to be restructured.

Everyone gets it except Australia. Even Prime Minister Abbott's very best friend in the fossil fuel stakes, Prime Minister Stephen Harper from Canada, has today come out and said that the Canadians will pledge money to the Green Climate Fund—but not so our Prime Minister. What must the small island states and developing countries think about a rich country like Australia refusing to stump up the money to put into a fund to assist them not only to mitigate against things getting worse but to adapt to what they are already suffering—salt-water incursion into their fresh-water systems, loss of land, inability to irrigate their crops.

Whole island states are now in fear that they will have to move. Kiribati has bought land in Fiji to try to prepare to relocate their people. In Tuvalu people are pleading with Australia and other countries to help them, as they live in fear of the next storm surge—but not so our Prime Minister. No, he determined that he was going to somehow stare down other countries and claim that because he was the host of the G20 he could get away with stopping the world talking about what the world wanted to talk about—that is, the overwhelming challenge of our time: global warming. So he was upstaged, blind-sided, rolled straight over the top of, as China and the United States announced, ahead of the G20, their climate deal.

Their climate deal is very significant. It is significant because it is the first time you have had a developing country commit to a binding target. China did that by saying that it would ensure that its emissions peaked by 2030. The United States committed to a 26 to 28 per cent reduction by 2025 on 2005 levels. It is significant because the big thing that had not been able to be gotten through in Copenhagen was the fact that the developing countries were saying that they would not commit to binding targets until developed countries did so. This was a significant breakthrough.

What was the Prime Minister's response? It was pretty typical of a climate denier—of someone who does not realise how out of his depth he is in a global conversation. He said that he was not going to talk about the China deal because it is what might happen in 16 years time. Wrong, Prime Minister

If you had read the small print you would have seen this amazing figure from the Chinese. They intend to double their level of renewable energy between now and 2030—double it so that it is 20 per cent of energy, in China, from renewable sources. They intend to build 1,000 gigawatts of energy by 2030.

That is the equivalent, if you want to compare it with nuclear industries around the world, of a large nuclear power station every week. That is the kind of scale they are talking about, rolling out renewable energy to 2030. They are also saying in their 12th five-year plan, which ends in 2016—so we will be going into their 13th five-year plan—that they have identified seven strategic industries for China: electric vehicles, renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Is it starting to click, in Australia, where this is going? This means that the United States, the European Union and China are going to be signed up for the biggest and best investment around the world in renewable energy, in the best and brightest minds that we have on the planet, to get there and recruit them and build industries and jobs and sustainability into the future. What do we have in Australia? We have a Prime Minister who says, 'I'm not even going to think about that, because it's not for 16 years.'

In order to get where the Chinese need to get, in 16 years, they will roll out a megaplan. More particularly, the Chinese are fairly conservative in what they are saying. They said they want their emissions to peak by 2030. In fact, if they get underway in the manner they are talking about, they are likely to peak a lot sooner than that. They are saying they want their coal emissions to peak by 2020, and that is very bad news.

Here in Australia we have the utter and absolutely blind stupidity of the Premier of Queensland, Campbell Newman, saying today that he is prepared to sell-off assets in Queensland and subsidise the building of coal infrastructure in Queensland, which will be stranded assets. You cannot believe the ideological stupidity we are seeing in this country. The private sector will not fund it. Why won't Campbell Newman answer the question? If the private sector does not think there is a future in coal infrastructure, why would you waste money? Why would you sell public assets to give the private sector a leg-up in an industry that is failing? It is a decaying industry. It is beyond belief that this is happening.

We also have a situation where the Europeans are very strongly committing to the Green Climate Fund. It is Tony Abbott, our Prime Minister, who blocked the Green Climate Fund being in the communique from the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. He is so isolated. Our country is now totally isolated on the global stage when it comes to addressing global warning warming. That means we are isolated on the global stage in terms of where economic business and stimulation and excitement are going to be. We are the rust bucket. We will be the quarry. Only that—the best brains will have gone to recognising that this is the century in which we get the low-carbon economy. This is the century in which we roll out electric vehicles. This is the century in which we have fantastic public-transport systems to give great amenity to our cities. This is the century where we develop new building materials, where we have energy-efficient buildings, where we have renewable energy rolling out jobs and investment throughout Australia, as we are already seeing.

That is why we have to keep not only carbon pricing but also clean energy investment and the Renewable Energy Agency, yet here we have our Prime Minister standing up in front of the world and bragging about getting rid of the carbon price—unbelievable—when everybody else sitting around the table is working out how to introduce one. He is looking at what Australia did with our clean energy package and recognising its template legislation, that the International Energy Agency saw it as template legislation, as what developed countries need to do.

Our Prime Minister is so out of touch that he thought it was a bragging point to go with his 'axe the tax'. He looked around the table and suddenly found no-one thought that was a good idea. Then he reverted to talking about his $7 co-payment that he cannot get through the Senate. As TheNew York Times and TheLos Angeles Times said, he looked like an adolescent. He looked like a pimple faced adolescent on the global stage. How embarrassing for our country. How embarrassing for Australians. We all want to think that when our Prime Minister gets up— (Time expired)

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

After listening to the contribution of Senator Milne you would have thought that the only subject for discussion at the G20 was climate change. Sadly, as important an issue as it may well be, there were a whole heap of other things that happened at the G20, and we should get this into some relative perspective.

There is no doubt that the Australian government welcomed a number of things raised at the G20 in relation to climate. The fact that the USA and China both agreed to make a major contribution to climate change should not come as any surprise to anybody given that both the United States and China are significantly large emitters. A lot of the changes the USA and China are proposing to make, in terms of how they emit, are things the Greens would probably find quite abhorrent. America is proposing that some of the cuts to its emissions will come from fracking.

I have a little trouble with the hypocrisy of those at the other end of the chamber coming in here and singing the praises of the wonderful comments made over the weekend, by both the Chinese and the Americans, on climate change. We obviously all support the world going forward to achieve a better, cleaner and greener outcome for our children. To turn around and make it sound like the Australian government is completely out of step with the rest of the world when the Americans intend to use fracking as one of the methods by which they will achieve their emissions reductions is just the height of hypocrisy. In the case of the Chinese, it is very commendable that they are proposing to look towards a greener future for their country, but they are proposing to use nuclear power as one of the ways that they will reduce their emissions. I am quite sure that those at the other end of the chamber are not going to stand up and say that that is a fabulous way to be deal with this. When we come into this place and try to put an argument forward, we need to make sure that we deal entirely in the facts and not just choose the bits and pieces that suit our argument.

A lot of things happened at the G20 summit that are really good for Australia and Australia's role in the world economy. This was the first time that the G20 leaders had a session entirely dedicated to global energy issues. It is now embedded in the G20's agenda that global energy issues will be a very important part of the discussions for the foreseeable future. Using energy more efficiently is the outcome that I believe every one of the nations that attended the G20 summit would have been seeking to achieve.

The G20 brings together the world's greatest producers and the world's No. 1 consumers of energy. It is all well and good for countries that have had the luxury of readily accessible energy for a very long time to pass judgement, but we have to remember that the one thing that will bring the rest of the world up to the standard of the countries that form the G20 will be a regular supply of affordable energy. We do need to have a balance with affordable energy and make sure we do not stand in judgement of those that are perhaps less fortunate and start making all sorts of wonderful demands like we hear from the other end of the chamber without realising that the global economy exists outside of just Australia, China and the US.

One of the things that I was particularly pleased to see come out of the G20 was the agreement by the leaders to reduce the gender employment gap. I am sure that you, Madam Acting Deputy President Lines, would have been very pleased to see the decision by the G20 to seek to reduce the gender employment gap by 25 per cent by 2025. Whilst it is an admirable goal, the economic and social benefits and outcomes that could come from actually achieving such a goal will be absolutely massive. Delivering on this commitment will bring more than 100 million additional women into the workforce just across the G20 nations. Consider the impact that that could have on global growth, on reducing poverty and on the inequalities that exist within nations—and we are only talking about G20 nations with that statistic.

The OECD have estimated that a boost to women's participation of this scale would actually increase the G20 GDP by between 1.2 per cent and 1.6 per cent by 2025. That will be more than $1 trillion to the global economy which is quite phenomenal when you realise that that sort of growth and that sort of benefit can be achieved by merely empowering a resource that you already have to become more productive. I am sure that for everyone in Australia it was fantastic to see the G20 thought that empowering women and increasing women's participation in the workforce was something that they considered as a priority. I think we should all be absolutely delighted.

Another thing that happened at the G20, outside the climate change hysteria that we hear from those at the other end of the chamber, was the decision to ensure that the world economy will be more resilient going into the future so that we do not see a repeat of the terrible consequences of the global financial crisis of a few years ago. Certainly Australia has been focused and we all commend those opposite when they were in government for putting in place some things that have ensured Australia is better prepared and better placed to deal with the impact should another global crisis occur.

Strengthening our financial institutions and making sure that we have all the things in place in our regulatory environment so our financial institutions can withstand the onslaught from international financial markets and protecting taxpayers from the necessity to bail out these organisations are very important. The adage 'too big to fail' should not be something financial institution should be allowed to hide behind when they run themselves into major difficulties. Addressing shadow banking risks and making derivative markets safer are further important components of the broad suite of activities that the Australian government along with its colleagues at the G20 seek to put in place.

These important reforms mean that the global financial system is now far more resilient than it has ever been, particularly at the time of the last global financial crisis. I think we can be very happy that our banks are now of a much higher quality and that capital and derivative markets are more transparent. We have reduced the risks that the Australian public will face and obviously the other members of the G20 and their respective places.

Another thing that occurred just a few minutes ago that was a very positive outcome of the G20 summit was the off-site engagement and discussions that occurred between the leaders of our countries. This afternoon we have seen the signing of a memorandum of understanding in relation to the free trade agreement that is being pursued between Australia and China. Only those involved in trade in this country will realise the extraordinary significance of having an arrangement where we have better, cheaper, freer and more equitable access to a market the size of China.

The one thing that Australia is never going to be able to do is sell all its product to itself. We are an exporting nation, and so it is very, very important that we put a priority on pursuing trade arrangements with markets that we can export to. Australia is never going to get rich selling to itself, as I have said time and time again. Having a market like China available to us in a much more easy and equitable way will have a major impact on all of our manufacturers but particularly on our farmers. In a state like South Australia, where agriculture is such an incredibly important part of our economy, we do not have the luxury of some of the other states—it would be nice to think that we could get our mining industry up and running, but that is a story for another day—but this is extraordinarily important. I commend the government, and Minister Robb particularly, for having achieved this magnificent free trade arrangement. (Time expired)

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

I am pleased to contribute to the matter of public importance before the Senate chamber today about Prime Minister Abbott’s climate change denial and his behaviour at the G20. I intend to talk to the matter of public importance and not to the free trade agreement that seemed to occupy most of Senator Ruston's speech.

On the weekend just past, Australians were yet again embarrassed by their Prime Minister, this time in front of an international audience at the G20 forum. World leaders had gathered in Brisbane, Australia to talk about a number of issues of world importance—things like international security, epidemics, economic growth and climate change—but our Prime Minister, Mr Abbott, could only bring himself to prattle on about his own domestic troubles. While China and the United States joined together to strike a significant deal to combat climate change into the future, Mr Abbott used the weekend as an opportunity to do nothing but bizarrely push his own parochial politics onto some of the world's most powerful leaders. You have to ask: is the Prime Minister really the person we want representing Australia on the global stage?

As if it were not humiliating enough that Australia is now led by a man who has already repealed domestic climate legislation, on the world stage the Prime Minister tried his best to ignore the topic of climate change completely. While President Obama from the United States and China's President Xi jointly outlined ambitious and dramatic goals for carbon reduction last week, our Prime Minister refused to even acknowledge that climate change was worthy of being an agenda item for the G20. In fact, it seemed the Prime Minister of Australia was the only person at the G20 who did not want to talk about action on climate change.

We have President Obama from America to thank for the fact that climate change was even up for discussion at all, after he all but forced it onto the agenda with his announcement on Saturday, prior to the G20, that the United States would be contributing US$3 billion to help developing countries cope with the effects of climate change. President Obama's announcement was followed closely by Mr Shinzo Abe, the Prime Minister of Japan, who pledged a further US$1.5 billion to the Green Climate Fund. In making these pledges, the United States and Japan have recognised the importance of the Green Climate Fund.

The fund will help developing countries in their bids to tackle climate change. It is a major part of a plan agreed to in 2009 to raise income streams to help developing nations address climate change and reduce carbon emissions. Income for the fund comes from both public and private sources. It is intended to raise US$100 billion by the year 2020. The fund will promote the shift towards low-emissions and climate-resilient development by providing support to developing countries to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the impacts of climate change. It will also take into account the particular needs of the developing countries, especially those that have a high propensity to be adversely affected by climate change.

While the fund has now received pledges from 13 nations totalling US$7.5 billion and looks closer to achieving its target, our Prime Minister wants nothing to do with it. He downplayed the importance of the fund, and he has pledged nothing. He tried to cover up his lack of climate credentials by saying that Australia was contributing to its own Clean Energy Finance Corporation and was contributing to overseas development aid. The trouble with that is that the Clean Energy Finance Corporation is slotted for demolition by this government. Currently, the third iteration of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill is in this parliament. Thankfully, the first and second iterations of the bill were defeated. We know that the current government has already cut the overseas development aid budget by $7.6 billion, from this year's budget. So you have to ask: did Prime Minister Abbott mislead world leaders when he said that Australia was already contributing to climate change funds when in fact we know he has reduced funding to the overseas development aid budget and is hell-bent on destroying the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which is doing such a great amount of work.

Australians expect more from their Prime Minister and they deserve more from him. In this case, developing countries deserve more from Mr Abbott as well. But, at the end of the day, would we really expect anything except dissembling from a man who once described climate change as 'absolute crap'?

Some of the most powerful leaders in the world are shocked at Mr Abbott's actions. President Obama said over the weekend:

No nation is immune and every nation has a responsibility to do its part.

Even Mr Abbott's ally and apparent friend UK Prime Minister David Cameron encouraged our Prime Minister to do more, saying:

Countries that have so far done the least have to think about what more they can do. I've had good and friendly discussions with Prime Minister Abbott about that.

Mr Cameron added:

Even if you don't believe in the nature of this [climate change] threat, isn't it better to insure against it?

That is from another conservative Prime Minister.

Begrudgingly for Tony Abbott, climate change did appear on the agenda for the G20. Of course it became one of the most talked about items from the weekend because it is one of the most significant issues, if not the most significant issue, facing the world today. Australia, as one of the world's largest emitters per capita, should be doing more to tackle the effects of climate change at home as well as helping developing nations.

Senators on the other side of this chamber seem content with patting themselves on their backs for their direct action policy—that is, when they can bring themselves to talk about climate change. They are content to settle for a second-rate policy that is not about behavioural change; it is just a one-off deal which rewards polluters with no incentives for long-term change. Everyone knows direct action is a dud, with major loopholes and the pitiful aim of a measly five per cent reduction of emissions on 2000 levels by 2020. We are yet to see how on earth direct action is even going to achieve that modest target.

Comparatively, the United States-China agreement has seen China pledge to cap its rapidly growing carbon emissions by 2030 or earlier if possible, and increasing its share of non-fossil fuels to 20 per cent of the country's energy mix by 2030. The United States has lifted its target to cut US emissions to between 26 per cent and 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2025. Clearly, the coalition's direct action nonsense cannot and will not compete globally against those significant targets. The Prime Minister has again overlooked the importance and significance of climate change and has made Australia look weak and insignificant on the global stage. The Prime Minister's stubborn isolationism is not only costing Australia our economic competitiveness but also our international reputation.

A brief scan of the international media from the G20 came up a cracker from the Los Angeles Times, where Australia was referred to as 'the adolescent country, the bit player, the shrimp of the schoolyard'. How embarrassing! LA Times reporter Robyn Dixon went on to detail Abbott's embarrassing moments from the G20, including this:

And then he throws in a boast that his government repealed the country's carbon tax, standing out among Western nations as the one willing to reverse progress on global warming—just days after the United States and China reached a landmark climate change deal.

That is embarrassing? To be recognised in international media as a nation led by a Prime Minister who is proud to be repealing progressive policies is humiliating. Even Western Australian Liberal Premier Colin Barnett seemed to distance himself from Prime Minister Abbott, publically announcing over the weekend that Australia 'can be bolder' in our action against climate change. We can indeed be bolder. It is ironic that yesterday, the final day of the G20 summit, also proved to be the second hottest ever November day in Brisbane. World leaders were sweltering, but for Mr Tony Abbott, the international heat on Australia's lack of progressive climate change action is just starting to rise.

Glenn Lazarus (Queensland, Palmer United Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak briefly on this matter of public importance as climate change is an issue of critical importance for Australia and indeed for all countries across the world. The Abbott government must stop jeopardising the health and welfare of this planet by denying that climate change exists. Climate change is real and weather across the planet is changing. While economic growth targets are nice to talk about at international forums, the reality is that economic targets will become useless if there is no planet on which to undertake economic activity. Economic growth targets are useless if there are no humans left on the planet to undertake any activity, let alone economic growth. Economic growth targets will be useless if there are no humans left on the planet to undertake any activity, let alone economic growth.

Palmer United is committed to retaining the RET and let me make it crystal clear: our commitment includes keeping the current 41,000 gigawatt hour target for 2020. Palmer United is committed to continued investment in renewable, clean energy. The renewable energy sector is a thriving, growing industry which provides business opportunities, jobs and clean energy solutions for our great nation. In my home state of Queensland, we are one of the greatest adopters of solar energy in the world. The Abbott government needs to stop embarrassing Australia and to start showing leadership by retaining the RET, adopting the Palmer United emissions trading scheme, incorporating climate change solutions into more government activities and programs, and by committing greater resources to the renewable energy sector.

James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I must confess, I am embarrassed, but I am embarrassed for the Greens, who once again have demonstrated their complete contempt for the will of the Australian people by proposing this matter of public importance today. People at home have listened to the Greens, as have the people in the gallery, be more concerned about readers of newspapers overseas and that says something. We have a Green party here who are more concerned about the Los Angeles Timesthan the South Burnett Times. We have a party who are more concerned about the readers of the Washington Post rather than those who read the Cairns Post. We have a party here who are more concerned about what hipsters living in lofts in Brooklyn think, rather than families living on the breadline in Hervey Bay, Townsville or Nambour. So I am embarrassed for the Greens who continue to espouse their environmental socialism in the face of the clear mandate delivered to this government at last year's election—a mandate to abolish the carbon tax, to lower the cost of living for Australians and to implement practical solutions to deal with climate change.

Let us not talk about what the Los Angeles Times says—I am sure it is an august publication. Let us talk about what the government is doing with climate change. I am embarrassed that the Greens have not heeded the concerns of the Australian people who delivered this government a very big mandate and have not listened to the concerns of the Australian people over the debt and deficit disaster left to us by the former Labor-Greens government.

I am embarrassed that the Greens are advocating that we borrow more money. Our interest bill alone is $1 billion a month at the moment and they want to borrow more money from overseas, to put more money on the government credit card, which will be paid off by our children and our grandchildren, and then send it off to an unelected international body which is unaccountable to the people of Australia.

Despite the opposition of the Greens and the Labor Party, this government has delivered on its promise to abolish the Labor-Greens carbon tax, the world's largest carbon tax, saving the average household around $550 a year, including $200 on the average household electricity bill and $70 on the average gas bill. So for the families living in Nambour, near where I live, Hervey Bay, Townsville or wherever, getting rid of the carbon tax has meant real differences in their wallets and purses.

I was up in Karumba a few weeks ago with Senator Canavan and we heard from some fishermen and fisherwomen about the impact of the carbon tax on refrigeration and how much their costs have gone down since the abolition of the carbon tax. In my home state of Queensland, electricity prices are 9.4 per cent lower than they would have been if Labor and the Greens had had their way.

This government is already delivering on Australia's commitment to reduce emissions by five per cent on 2000 levels by 2020 without a carbon tax. This government's approach is to provide positive local environmental outcomes that reduce emissions in Australia, rather than imposing an economy-wide tax that drives up power prices and sends taxpayer dollars overseas—the position advocated by the Greens.

The government's $2.55 billion Emissions Reduction Fund will help businesses and communities across Australia enjoy the benefits of a cleaner environment and help us to meet our 2020 emissions reduction target. The Emissions Reduction Fund is a buyback model based on activities that actually reduce emissions. This is the basis of the largest and arguably the most effective system in the world, the United Nations Clean Development Mechanism, which to date has generated approximately 1.4 billion tonnes of emissions reductions—something the Greens surely would have no objection to. Competitive auctions will be held, and the government will enter into contracts to buy emissions reductions from successful bidders at the lowest cost, and payment for abatement will only be made when emissions reductions are actually delivered.

Our community-led Green Army projects will also support practical, grassroots environment and heritage conservation activities, which will make a real difference to the environment and local communities, while providing meaningful training and skills to young people. The opposition of Labor and the Greens to these practical solutions only highlights their hypocrisy when it comes to climate change.

The government has always said that it would take into account the action taken by the world's major emitters and our trading partners when considering Australia's post-2020 emissions reductions targets before next year's Paris climate conference, given that we only account for 1.3 per cent of global emissions. As such, it is on the record that the government has welcomed the announcement by the United States and China to reduce or cap emissions, with those countries accounting for 15 and 24 per cent of global emissions, respectively. It is a positive step in the right direction but it must be met with firm action.

I note that, in discussing the US-China agreement, US President Barack Obama expressed concern for the Great Barrier Reef—a natural wonder and a source of tourism jobs in my home state of Queensland. However, instead of high-minded rhetoric—and President Obama is well known for his rhetoric rather than delivering what he talks about—we have got to look at how we get to this, and it has taken Obama over six years to reach this agreement with China on reducing emissions.

In contrast, in addition to our Direct Action Plan, our government has made tangible commitments to securing the future of the Great Barrier Reef rather than just talking about it. The federal coalition government and the Queensland LNP government—led by Campbell Newman and Andrew Powell, my local state member—are developing the Reef 2050 Plan to guide sustainability and management of the Great Barrier Reef over the next 36 years.

It is the federal coalition government and the Queensland LNP government that is investing in the Reef Trust with a $40 million initial investment from this government to help improve water quality and coastal habitat along the Great Barrier Reef; control crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks—and they have been responsible for 42 per cent of coral loss since 1985; and protect threatened and migratory species, particularly dugong and turtles. These are practical steps to ensure the reef's future for years to come, not words and platitudes from a visiting head of state.

It is important to remember that we cannot deal with the challenges posed by climate change or any other problem unless we have a strong economy and a healthy budget position—and this is what the G20 was all about. Instead of the Greens or Labor being all embarrassed like spotty teenagers going out with their parents, we should very proud of what the G20 did on the weekend.

It highlighted Brisbane—I am very proud to say this as a Queenslander—as being one of the world's great cities. It also shone the light on Queensland—and Australia—and our beautiful climate, and that we are open for business. That is the real story that has come out of the G20, not climate change—it is what the world's economies are doing to push economic growth and create jobs, and what the Prime Minister of India, the President of China and the Prime Minister of the UK have been talking about. It is about jobs for people. It is about creating economic growth. The work that the Queensland government, the Brisbane City Council and the Australian government did on the G20, I think, is fantastic.

As G20 President, Australia has led with the development of an agreed Brisbane Action Plan of over 1,000 measures to boost the world economy by an additional 2.1 per cent over the coming five years—that is an extra $2 trillion into the world economy and millions of new jobs. By strengthening the world economy, we support job creation at home and drive the economic gains that will help to repair the budget.

Graham Quirk, the Lord Mayor of Brisbane, has estimated that the G20 pumped $100 million into the local economy of Brisbane—and that is not counting all the people watching CNN or listening to the BBC World Service thinking: 'I might go to Australia for a holiday' or 'I might move to Australia and start a business there.'

For the time being, with Labor's red ink still running through the books, Australia will not make a contribution to the Green Climate Fund at this time but will instead continue to prioritise climate mitigation assistance through our aid development program. Through direct action locally, international engagement and our aid program, Australia is playing its part in an effective international response to climate change.

The Greens are embarrassed about what happened on the weekend; I am not. I am very proud about what happened. I think our Prime Minister did a fantastic job. I think all the people involved with the G20 did a fantastic job. Instead of talking and moving pointless motions like this, perhaps the Greens could work with the government and act like adults to make sure we have practical environmental protection in this country but not at the expense of growing our economy.

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last week, the United States and China joined to announce a landmark commitment to curbing carbon emissions. Side by side, these two world superpowers declared that climate change is 'one of the greatest threats facing humanity'. The recognised unequivocally that 'human activity is already changing the world's climate system'. They also acknowledged the serious effects of climate change, including increased temperatures, rising sea levels and more droughts, bushfires and severe storms.

These two countries, which represent more than a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, put forward an ambitious set of commitments. China agreed that it would set a new target to move towards 20 per cent non-fossil fuels by 2030, while the United States pledged to cut emissions by 26 per cent to 28 per cent below the 2005 levels by 2025. Together, the put the world—especially Australia—on notice that countries would be expected to follow suit and put forward ambitious targets at next year's Paris climate summit.

The President of the United States of America, Barrack Obama, reiterated the importance of this joint US-China climate change and clean energy agreement in his address at the University of Queensland in Brisbane on Saturday.    Here, he said, and I quote:

In a historic step China made its own commitment for the first time, agreeing to slow, peak and then reverse the course of China's emissions...

He went on to say:

And if China and the US can agree on this, then the world can agree on this, we can get this done and it is necessary for us to get it done.

In the same address, Mr Obama also pointed out that no country is more at risk to the impacts of climate change than Australia when he said:

Nobody has more at stake when it comes to thinking about and then acting on climate change.

Here a climate that increases in temperature will mean more extreme and frequent storms, more flooding, rising seas that submerge Pacific Islands.

Here in Australia it means longer droughts, more wildfires.

The incredible natural glory of the Great Barrier Reef is threatened.

Against this backdrop of the world leaders facing up to one of the world's greatest economic challenges, what did our Prime Minister do? That's right; he took this big opportunity to tell the most powerful people in the world about how hard it is for him to get legislation through to make Australians pay an extra $7 to go to the doctor.

Don't get me wrong: I think this is a very serious issue, and the $7 co-payment would have terrible impacts on Australian health outcomes and place a greater burden on the health budget for decades to come. But I believe this choice of subject matter is a clear indication of the petulance of our Prime Minister and of how incapable he is of putting domestic politics aside to act in the national and global interest. This was reinforced when Prime Minister Abbott used the same speech to brag to the G20 about how he is taking Australia backwards in our climate change response by repealing the carbon tax.

The Prime Minister might not want to admit it, but the reality is that, if we fail to act now, it will not be long before the impacts of climate change will send shockwaves through all vital sectors of our economy. While no sector will be unscathed, there will be particularly serious impacts for agriculture, tourism and health. World leaders understand this, economists understand this and scientists have been telling us this for decades. So why doesn't our Prime Minister understand? How can Prime Minister Abbott remain so determinedly out of step with the rest of the world? How can he so belligerently refuse to step up and ensure that Australia does our share as a responsible global citizen to reduce carbon emissions? How can he so blithely betray the future of our economy and our environment?

Across the world, experts have agreed that the most cost-effective means of reducing carbon is through an economy-wide pricing mechanism. Yet the government persist with Direct Action, their multibillion dollar slush fund for polluters that experts say has no hope of meeting emission reduction targets. If there was ever proof that this government are intent on propping up the fossil fuel industry at the expense of billions of dollars of investment and our international reputation, the shameful events of the G20 on the weekend tell the sorry tale. While key world leaders were uniting on the importance of developing ambitious measures to address climate change, this government were busy using every sneaky means they had at their disposal to shut down climate talks wherever possible.

But we should not be surprised. It has been an all-out war on the environment since those opposite secured the keys to the ministerial wing. They abolished the carbon tax, making Australia the only country to be moving backwards on our responsibility as a global citizen to address climate change. They have shut down the Climate Commission. They attempted to abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation—a particularly senseless act when you consider that the CEFC actually returns a healthy profit to government coffers. They hope to close the doors at the Renewable Energy Agency and they tried to axe the Climate Change Authority. They called on a climate sceptic to undertake an inquiry to discredit the renewable energy target, but he failed to do that. Despite this, they are now trying to reduce the RET by 40 per cent. They tried to delist 74,000 hectares of World Heritage forest in Tasmania, despite offering no evidence to support their outrageous request. They commissioned an inquiry into emissions trading schemes—which they have already promised they will do nothing about, regardless of the findings.

The Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, has been telling the world that `coal is good for humanity', while accusing a senior UN official of, and I quote, 'talking through her hat' on climate change. Prime Minister Abbott also refused to attend the international climate change negotiations in Warsaw. He was also a no-show at the International Climate Summit in New York, despite the fact that he was due to attend a UN Security Council meeting in New York the very next day. And the Prime Minister's sidekick, Treasurer Joe Hockey, has been doing his bit for the anti-environment cause by bemoaning that he thinks wind farms are 'utterly offensive'.

Behind the scenes at the G20, the Abbott government were doing everything they could to keep climate change off the agenda. When this failed, they desperately tried—and failed again—to scuttle the push from world leaders to include climate change statements in the final G20 communique. And, now, Mr Abbott is refusing to contribute towards the UN's Green Climate Fund. Yesterday Mr Hockey was out and about again peddling disinformation by saying that climate change is not a major impediment to global growth, in direct contradiction to the views of G20 participants.

So it is clear that this government is a repeat offender in this area. They are steadfastly opposed to renewables and intent on shackling Australia to the industries of decades gone by. Meanwhile, the rest of the world is embracing the transition a low-carbon future and the economic opportunities it will offer.

What is truly galling about the Abbott government's stance on climate policy is that it is not only environmentally and diplomatically reckless, but it is economically irresponsible, too. By actively pulling apart the mechanisms Australia has in place to address climate change, this government is actively destroying investment opportunities and jobs. By shutting down initiatives that encourage a greater use of renewables, this government is sentencing households and industry to more expensive bills for decades to come. And soon, Australian companies that are paying sky-high prices for fossil-fuel based energy will have to compete with international companies that have turned to renewables.

The American president and the Chinese understood this when they outlined in last week's historic declaration of the landmark deal that:

… smart action on climate change now can drive innovation, strengthen economic growth and bring broad benefits—from sustainable development to increased energy security, improved public health and a better quality of life. Tackling climate change will also strengthen national and international security.

Today, we have heard nothing but whining from those opposite that we cannot possibly afford to do our share in addressing climate change. Of course, we know that stoking up fear and hysteria over debt is one of the government's tried and true strategies, but that does not make what they are saying true. The fact is that Australia is one of only ten nations on the planet with a AAA credit rating from all three ratings agencies. And the truth is that our debt is about one-fifth of the average debt of other industrial economies. I would put it to those on the other side that the exact opposite is the case—we simply cannot afford not to act on climate change.

On the weekend, what an embarrassing way we saw to perform on the world stage. What an appallingly regressive, selfish and ill-considered response to one of the greatest challenges facing our planet.

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this matter of public importance about our Prime Minister's continued denial of the reality of climate change and his continued mealy-mouthed approach to meeting our global responsibilities to assist countries that will suffer from our profligate use of fossil fuels. I am from Queensland, where it has been obvious to all both observing and protesting against the Prime Minister's refusal to put climate change on the G20 agenda that he was totally out of step with the world and out of step with community expectations. Of course, when China and the US reached agreement on emissions targets the Prime Minister was totally gazumped and shown for the laggard and the spoiler that he is.

The Greens welcome this acknowledgement and this step forward, although this important commitment does not absolve President Obama from needing to refuse approval for the Keystone tar sands oil pipeline from Canada, and for deeper and binding cuts to emissions. That said, the Greens warmly welcome the announcement of a fund to assist with climate adaptation for less wealthy nations, which stand to suffer unfairly from the impacts of climate change.

But Australia, the highest per capita emitter in the world, is too greedy and self-interested to stump up and contribute to this fund. Mr Tony Abbott's excuse? Apparently we are already doing enough. This is, of course, after this government has axed more than $7 billion from foreign aid, which includes some climate programs. To add insult to injury, Tony Abbott is trying to count the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation funding, which his government has a bill in the parliament to abolish. Also, Mr Tony Abbott wants to count his big polluters' slush fund as a meaningful contribution. This slush fund for big polluters, with its pathetic five per cent target, is just more subsidies for fossil fuels.

Today we see that in Queensland our premier will bankroll the building of a 500-kilometre railway for Indian coal company Adani, to open up the Galilee Basin—the mega-coal basin that would see coal exports through the Great Barrier Reef world heritage area more than double. Why is it that the Queensland government has to kick in the dough? It is because nobody else will. No investment bank will touch this poor investment. This is a bad investment for Queensland, and Premier Newman is simply propping up a dying industry that the world increasingly does not want a part of. Perhaps the worst part of this is the audacity of Premier Newman's decision to fund this propping up of fossil fuels from selling Queensland's public assets. Flogging off Queensland's public assets to give more free money to coal industry is not going to go down well with Queenslanders. Queenslanders do not want privatisation in any event, and we certainly do not want free money going to coal barons to trash the reef and the climate. Of course, we are told that the coal is to help bring Indians out of poverty—it is a public service—except for the fact the coal will be too expensive for them to afford, the fact that they do not have an electricity grid in many of those areas and the fact that air quality from coal pollution is killing more than 85,000 Indians per year. Fossil fuel subsidies are not new. Recently, a report found that federally Australia gives more than $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies. In fact, we are the second highest in the G20 when it comes to propping up the fossil fuel sector.

We know that climate change is real. It is affecting us already with extreme weather events. The irony of a November heat wave on the G20 weekend just gone was not lost on anyone, except perhaps our Prime Minister. Climate change is affecting our industries that rely on a healthy climate, like agriculture, and of course tourism. I hope people are familiar with the fact that the Great Barrier Reef has already lost 50 per cent of its coral cover in the last 27 years. That is due to extreme weather events, to coral bleaching and also to the crown of thorns starfish. All of those threats, plus the new one of the dredging and dumping bonanza for more coal ports in the reef, are either being driven or worsened by climate change. Our reef is the largest living organism that can be seen from space and in climate change it faces the biggest threat it has even seen. We must safeguard this natural wonder—this economic generator of $6 billion and employer of 63,000 people. Even President Obama, in his very well received talk at the University of Queensland at the weekend, lauded the beauty of the Great Barrier Reef. He said he wants his daughters and grandchildren to come to see it, and I share those sentiments. Instead, Premier Newman wants to put new and expanded coal ports in the reef, with all the associated dredging and dumping and climate impacts.

Unfortunately, they are still treating the reef like rubbish tip. Minister Hunt's commitment to stop offshore dumping comes with so many holes it is meaningless. The dumping cannot happen in a marine park, but never mind about the rest of the world heritage area. It is only a ban on capital dredging. Never mind about maintenance dredging. Also, it is only future projects. Never mind all of the projects that are currently on foot.

The solution is clear, and it is shining down on us every day. Concentrated solar thermal power, solar photovoltaics, wind, wave, tidal and geothermal energy. Renewable energy is job rich and can fill our energy needs cleanly. Globally, there is an unstoppable momentum towards clean renewable energy, and not even Mr Abbott can stop that. Australians love clean energy. Indeed, in Queensland we have the highest proportion of solar PV on our roofs, with more than one in five households being part of the solution.

Our government is wrecking that attempt to a sustainable future by axing the carbon price, the mining tax, attacking the renewable energy target, defunding ARENA, saying it will abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, and by driving the expansion of dangerous unconventional gas-fracking, which is ruining our land and water, for export corporate greed. This government has a tin ear to science and to the community and that is why the Australian people will confine them to the dust bin of history at the next election.

Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time for consideration of the matter of public importance has expired.

Sitting suspended from 18 : 31 to 19 : 30