David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is directed to the Hon. Penny Wong, representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Minister, communities across the west of New South Wales are experiencing record floods, with lives lost, property destroyed and towns in shock, after an already devastating 12 months, with major flooding affecting the Lachlan, Murray and Murrumbidgee rivers, amongst others. Residents in Forbes, Condobolin, Deniliquin, Eugowra, Walgett, Collarenebri—town after town—have been subject to major floods. Minister, do you accept that these major flooding events are being driven by and exacerbated by climate change?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, I think I'm on the record, for many years, in accepting that there—

Honourable Senator:

An honourable senator interjecting—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Actually, since I was climate minister in 2007 and in the 2007 campaign, where we campaigned for an emissions trading scheme, which you also supported at the time. I've been on the record for many years—well over a decade, which shows you I've been here a fair while—in accepting the scientific advice about the consequences of climate change. I recall reading a CSIRO report, many years ago, in the last decade, which forecast that unmitigated climate change would see the Goyder Line move south of Clare. For those of us who come from South Australia and understand what that means, that was horrifying. That is what has informed in part my commitment and our government's commitment—certainly in government last time—to implement an ambitious emissions trading scheme. I realise you weren't there, but your party voted with the coalition against it. That's why in government we delivered a climate scheme when the Greens did decide to vote for it. It was perhaps not quite as important, but it was ambitious nevertheless. And that is why for nine years we in opposition have argued each election, notwithstanding the challenge of that, for a clear, credible, ambitious position on climate. I am very pleased that after years of irrationality the Australian community has returned not only a government—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, I have already drawn to your attention you do not start saying 'point of order' the minute you stand. You wait, I give you the call and then you tell me what the issue is.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's relevance. We're a minute and a half into the answer on floods and the terrible floods that are happening now, and the minister has not once addressed them.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Minister, I remind you the question was about the floods.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, and as I said at the outset—I'm sorry if the senator needs me to repeat it—I'm on the record for over a decade—

Would you like to speak, Senator Whish-Wilson? I notice you always want to interject. You go right ahead, mate.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I did get an invitation.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, do you have a point of order?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He's always so keen to interject, particularly on some things. We'll give you leave, mate, if that's what you want. Senator Shoebridge, I was genuinely trying to answer your question. I have always accepted the scientific advice about the consequences of climate change. I also recognise—and this is where our parties do differ—that you need to have policies to meet a target and recognise that ensuring that you meet a target of reductions in emissions is a tough policy. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, first supplementary.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, when Brisbane was devastated by flooding in 2011, we all had to pay to clean it up through a flood recovery levy. Now we're making our children pay through increased government debt, and all the while coal and gas companies are still making billions and fossil fuel subsidies are a staggering $11.6 billion a year. Why won't your government make coal and gas companies pay for disaster preparedness and to rebuild and support these devastated communities, since they created the problem in the first place?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I appreciate that the political object of that question is to try to suggest that only one part of the economy has responsibility, only one sector in society has responsibility. The reality is this is a whole-of-economy, a whole-of-society response. We'll be able to deal with it if we deal with it together. But if all we do is point the finger at different parts of our society, different parts of our economy, we will never get there. The hard reality is this country has prospered greatly. We have all prospered greatly, including through the education system that has been funded by government revenue from the exports we have made over decades. Now, what we have to do is transition our economy over time to a world that will be a net zero emissions world. That is a big challenge and is not one that's achieved by pointing the finger. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, second supplementary.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, many Australians are pleased to hear the changing rhetoric on climate, and I'm pleased to hear the changing rhetoric on climate, some of which you've repeated here. But how is that rhetoric going to protect us from the carbon emissions of the coal and gas projects that your government keeps continuing to support? How are you going to answer that question for the people in western New South Wales who have climate induced flooding right now?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will do what we said we would do before the election—that is, to put this economy, which is a highly carbon intensive economy, on to an ambitious 2030 target, a 43 per cent reduction, and a 2050 target of net zero. What we will do in government is not simply rhetoric but policy that delivers it, because that is the key. We actually have to change the direction in which our economy, along with the global economy, is heading. As I said, no amount of blaming others, looking to the past and pointing the finger is going to actually achieve what is an ambitious transformation of our domestic economy and the global economy.

I wish that the world at Copenhagen had done more—I really do. It was one of the saddest moments I've ever been involved in in politics, for the reason to which you avert. But we are— (Time expired)