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

My question is to the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment, representing the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction, which I think is still Minister Taylor, despite the police investigation. The United Nations Environment Program released a report overnight showing that, for countries to fulfil the Paris Agreement, we need to reduce pollution by 7.6 per cent every year over the next decade. What will the government do to bring down pollution by 7.6 per cent per year, or will Minister Taylor just try to doctor that climate report too?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cormann, on a point of order?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The senator, in breach of standing orders, reflected on a member in the House of Representatives. I would ask you to call her to order and ask her to withdraw.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, I ask you to withdraw that reflection and imputation about a member of the other place.

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

I withdraw and will await what the police investigation finds.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When I ask people to withdraw, I ask them to withdraw unconditionally. I don't want to get into the rabbit hole where people start making qualified withdrawals.

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

I withdraw, Mr President. The question is: what will the government do to bring down pollution by 7.6 per cent per year.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for her question, if not some of the commentary on the way through. Australia has a proud record as being a global leader when it comes to making and meeting commitments in relation to emissions reduction. Australia stands as a very rare country. In terms of the commitments of the first Kyoto period, we met those commitments and exceeded those commitments. We're on track in relation to the commitments of the second Kyoto period—to meet those commitments and to exceed them by more than 300 million tonnes of abatement. And our government has made further commitments in relation to the Paris Agreement out to 2030. Those commitments are for a reduction in Australia's emissions of some 26 per cent. That's Australia's contribution as part of a global effort, and we firmly acknowledge that it takes a global effort. That's why they are part of global agreements. Australia has met and exceeded all of our targets and we intend very much to meet and ideally exceed our 2030 target. That's why our government has outlined, very clearly and in detail, our Climate Solutions Package. The Climate Solutions Package contains the Climate Solutions Fund. That's identified to provide some 103 million tonnes of abatement over the target period.

Overall, it contains projects such as the Battery of the Nation and Marinus Link, contributing some 25 million tonnes of abatement; and energy efficiency projects, contributing some 63 million tonnes of abatement. Ultimately, we outline very precisely the 201 million tonnes of abatement as part of that Climate Solutions Package—all of it contributing towards Australia playing our role, a leading role in the globe, meeting and exceeding the commitments that we make and doing so in a way whereby we encourage others to join us on that journey.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, a supplementary question?

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

Australia's current Paris goals have us on track for three degrees of warming, and the UNEP report says of Australia's climate policies, firstly, that we have 'no major policy tool to encourage emissions reduction'—and that's a quote—and, secondly, that the latest projection published by the government shows that emissions would remain largely unchanged to 2030. Does your government accept your own department's advice that pollution won't go down in this critical decade?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our government has outlined—as I just went through in some precise detail—the mechanisms that are being applied to deliver emissions reduction and abatement right down to the tonnage allocated across the different policy measures.

We have seen in this country enormous change in terms of the energy mix across Australia. Last year, per capita investment in renewable energy in Australia was the highest of any country on the globe—in fact, twice that of the next nearest nation. In terms of Australia's track record in delivering emissions reduction, I've also seen that investment in new technologies and the work of programs such as the Climate Solutions Fund and our abatement purchasing mechanisms have demonstrated that we can meet the targets and that we can continue to make the contribution necessary to make sure that Australia leads the way in terms of change and reform. We absolutely stand by the success of the policies to date and our intent to deliver them over the next 10 years.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, a final supplementary question?

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

We're certainly leading the way in per capita emissions and will continue to do so even under this government's targets, assuming you even get anywhere near meeting them.

A government senator: Question?

Yes, I'm coming to the question. Thanks so much for the reminder. The catastrophic bushfires, half-dead reef and crippling drought are products of just one degree of warming. Your policies have us on track for three degrees of warming or more. Why is your government prepared to accept the catastrophe that will result? Do you accept the science of climate change, which requires a 60 per cent reduction by 2030? (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our government is acting and is absolutely responding to science and evidence in all its forms. What we don't do is what the Australian Greens try to do, which is to take tragic events that Australia has a long history of facing and automatically link them to issues related to climate change. We absolutely recognise that, in terms of Australia's resilience and Australia's strategies, we have to respond to all of the advice that's available to us. But we also have to make sure that we do it as part of a global effort. This is something that the Australian Greens constantly overlook in terms of the role of other countries and their emissions profiles as part of the global impact. Australia is proud to be able to walk into climate change negotiations and highlight the fact that we have met and exceeded all of our commitments to date and that we have detailed plans to continue to do so into the future.