Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water, Senator Wong. Last week the environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, approved yet another coalmine. This year alone, the minister has approved five coalmines that create up to 150 million tonnes of pollution and emissions. Our environment laws are clearly broken. They do not enforce a requirement that the minister consider the climate impacts. Under these laws, how many more coalmines will the environment minister approve?

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

I thank the senator for her question. I am assuming this is an approval under the EPBC Act. That wasn't indicated in the question, but I will make that assumption.

The statistics I have are that the state of play in relation to coal projects is: approved, three; cancelled three. There are obviously a range of renewables, with 11 projects approved and 104 in the EPBC approval system.

An incident having occurred in the chamber—

I reckon that's Senator Sterle. I know that ring. We've been friends a long time.

Hollie Hughes (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Making more sense than anything else we've heard so far!

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

I'll take the interjection, Senator. But I would make the point—and I appreciate you have a view—that the legislation that the parliament has passed provides Minister Plibersek with a discretion within the statutory framework, and any decision the minister makes is a decision that is consistent with the legislation that is before her. I appreciate that the Greens political party have a particular view about resources projects, and that's their view. The government recognises that resources are an important part of the Australian economy, and we also recognise that the transition to renewables is something that has to be given effect and implemented with important and clear policy decisions, domestically as well as internationally. Unlike some, we don't have the ability to simply call for something and assume that energy markets will magically transform overnight. It's the hard work that we are doing, and that's what Minister Bowen is engaged with.

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

Senator Hanson-Young, first supplementary?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Eighteen years ago to the very day, on 5 September 2005, Anthony Albanese MP, before he was Prime Minister, introduced a bill to fix the environment laws, a climate trigger bill, because he knew that our environment laws were broken. The climate crisis has gotten worse. When will this Prime Minister dust off his old bill and introduce a climate trigger?

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

What I would say is—what was the date? 2005? Well, there you go. There are people who would get to vote today who had only just been born at that time, and I would say that what we—

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

Senator Ruston!

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

I don't need to filibuster. You interrupt us enough so you don't get many questions. We don't have to do anything.

Well, hang on. You just had a go at me, and when I respond that's personal?

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

Senator Wong, I'll take you back to the question.

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

Oh, right. Okay. So, when you're saying it, it's fine. When I'm doing it, it's personal. That's an interesting double standard.

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

Senator Wong, please resume your seat. Senator Hanson-Young?

Opposition senators interjecting—

Order on my left!

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order, President: the clock has been running. I understand that Senator Penny Wong is being distracted over here, but I would like the answer to my question: when will this government introduce a climate trigger?

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

Senator Hanson-Young, I did call the minister back to the question.

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

I'm happy for the clock to be reset. Senator Hanson-Young, the point I was making before the interjection is that this was some time ago. The Prime Minister, obviously, in 2005 was responding to the circumstances as he assessed them in his role then. We have made the same assessment now, and that has resulted in the policy that we took to the election of very substantial reductions—very ambitious reductions—in Australia's emissions between now and 2030, as well as a net zero commitment and the policies that will transition the Australian economy. Unlike the Greens, and I appreciate you have a different view, we actually have to do the hard yards of implementing that. We are an emissions intensive economy, and changing our economic base, our economic structure, in the way that this implies is a tough thing to do. It's also the right thing to do for the future, for future jobs and the sorts of jobs that will thrive in a net zero— (Time expired)

The:

Senator Hanson-Young, a second supplementary?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, does the government believe that environmental approval should consider the climate impacts on the environment?

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

The government is of the view that climate change is the challenge of our generation, and the government is of the view that the best way to deal with our response to that is through the policy framework that I have outlined earlier. So that has been the approach that the government has taken. That is the approach that we took to the Australian people, where we laid out a very ambitious plan to reduce emissions, to increase renewables and to transition our economy.

I'd make this point. This is not just for the reasons of the imperative of climate change. It's also for the imperative of future jobs. The vast majority of the global economy has moved to net zero by 2050. What that means is that to thrive in the decades ahead our children and grandchildren will have to work with industries that are of value in that economy. (Time expired)