Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Leader of the Government in the Senate, representing the Prime Minister. Minister, I refer you to a series of devastating natural disasters that have occurred in recent weeks, including flooding from monsoonal rains in South Asia and hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Katia and Jose that have caused untold damage, including the tragic loss of life in the Caribbean and North America. Minister, isn't your government's continued denial that there is a link between climate change and an increase in the frequency and severity of extreme weather events putting people's lives in danger?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't accept the premise of your question. The government does accept the science of climate change. Of course we accept the science of climate change. We also, by the way, accept that within that broad descriptor there is vigorous debate, particularly, of course, among scientists themselves, as to certain premises and certain conclusions. Nevertheless, the broad proposition that there is an empirically established link between human behaviour and climate change, we do support and accept. For that reason—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order, Senate Di Natale?

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order on relevance. My question went specifically to the link between climate change and extreme weather. I didn't question the government's view on whether climate change was caused by humans. We know the debate within the coalition around that. I said specifically that the government denied that there was a link between climate change and the frequency and severity of extreme weather. The minister has not addressed that part of the question.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Di Natale. The minister did reject the premise of your question outright at the beginning. But, also, the minister has been relevant to your preamble and to parts of the question. I will call the minister.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, we have been debating this issue, as you and I both know, in this chamber for many years. What has been a subject of frustration to me, I must say, and to many on my side of the chamber, is the refusal of those who have your concerns to even pay the courtesy of a hearing to those who might challenge your assertions. We believe, on our side of the chamber, that the discussion of any question of public importance is improved by a debate, is improved by having the premises tested and is improved by having the conclusions questioned, rather than the assertion that we so often hear from the Greens that there is only one point of view available here, and that's the end of the matter.

Having said that, I accept, and the government accepts, the proposition that there is an empirically established link between human behaviour and climate change, and that includes, on occasions, extreme weather events. Although, among scientists, as you know, Senator Di Natale, there is also a vigorous debate about which extreme weather events may be attributable to which particular causes of agents.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, a supplementary question.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government continues to throw public money at fossil fuel projects, despite the link that you have just accepted, through finance bodies by propping up ageing rust buckets like the Liddell coal plant. Why is the business community fleeing these bad investments, yet the government, the so-called champion of free-market economics, is flocking to them? Does it have something to do with the millions of dollars in donations from the coal lobby?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, Senator Di Natale. It has everything to do with keeping the lights on. That's what it has to do with: keeping the lights on. In order to keep the lights on, in order to ensure that the Australian people have affordable and secure and reliable power supply, we adopt a pragmatic, engineering based and economically informed agnostic approach to energy sources. We are not ideological about this, Senator Di Natale, as you are. We are not theological about this, Senator Di Natale, as you are. We believe that renewables have a very important role in the energy mix. But we also think that fossil fuels will continue, for a very long time to come, to have an important role in the energy mix.

If you go to the streets of your home city, Senator Di Natale, I'm sure you will find that people are more interested in ensuring that power remains affordable and reliable than where it comes from.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, a final supplementary question.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, isn't the fact that the government continues to desperately spruik coal-fired power, rather than the much more sensible options of solar, wind, battery technology and energy efficiency, just the clearest sign yet that the coal lobby is running the Liberal-National Party's energy policy?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The difference between your approach to climate change and the government's is the difference between ideology and rationality. On our side of the chamber, Senator Di Natale, we take a technology-agnostic approach. Let me put it to you really simply, Senator Di Natale: whatever works. Therefore, we accept that there is an important and growing role for renewables—of course, we do—but we also accept, as you should accept, Senator Di Natale, because I know that this is an area of policy that is of great interest to you, that we are not going to convert from a fossil fuel based energy system to a renewables-only energy system overnight, which is what the Greens would have us do. Of course, there has to be sequencing. Of course, there has to be intelligent integration. Of course, there has to be evolutionary change. While that change is occurring, fossil fuels will continue to be a very important part of the mix. (Time expired)