Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition does not support this bill. The primary objection of the coalition is on the process that is attached to the allocation of the Pacific engagement visa, or PEV as it is now known. As coalition speakers have stated in the debate thus far on the Migration Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific and Other Measures) Bill 2023, which provides for a ballot mechanism or a lottery to be conducted in order to grant the pacific engagement visa, we don't believe permanent residency to Australia and, ultimately, citizenship that would follow should be decided by a lottery. Nevertheless, the Senate and the other place have now passed that bill, and the ballot mechanism will be attached to the Pacific engagement visa.

However, as an extension of our opposition to that bill, we'll oppose this bill, reflecting our strongly held view that permanent residency to Australia, which provides a pathway to citizenship, should not be determined by ballot or a lottery. Whilst PALM is an important program and has the strong support of the coalition—which in fact established PALM—the PEV is untested. There have been concerns expressed by some Pacific leaders about the impact of the PEV, particularly given it's a permanent visa. There are genuine concerns that it may ultimately lead to the permanent loss of population or brain drain. Importantly, there are also concerns that, as a consequence of that permanency, it may reduce remittances back to Pacific island nations. Remittances from PALM workers, of whom there are about 40,000 currently in Australia, have been important to sustaining whole communities across the Pacific. Remittances now form a big part of GDP and economic activity in PALM source countries.

We already know that this government has no inflation strategy. Indeed, under this government, Australia's inflation is now higher than in most advanced economies. Australians know this all too well. They know that, over the past more than 15 months under this government, the cost of food has gone up by 8.2 per cent, the cost of housing is up by 10.4 per cent, the cost of insurance is up by 17.4 per cent, the cost of electricity is up by 18.2 per cent and the cost of gas has gone up by 28 per cent. We know that the government has no budget strategy. The Albanese Labor government has delivered two budgets which could have included decisions to ease pressure on inflation, help take pressure off interest rates and help Australians. But Labor hasn't done that. Labor has in fact only added to inflationary pressure. We don't believe that Australian taxpayers should be facing the additional financial costs associated with this bill at a time when there are absolutely no signs of the government getting on top of the issue of most concern to Australians, which is the cost of living.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023, and I do so in the knowledge that the Pacific Islands Forum is underway this week and that our Prime Minister, Mr Albanese, is expected shortly to fly in. I also do so in the knowledge that the call from Pacific island nations and their leaders is very clear and stark. That call is for Australia to actually take the climate crisis seriously, to stop publicly subsidising the burning of fossil fuels and to stop approving new fossil fuel projects.

Of course, the reality in this place is that, right here, right now, today in the Senate, the major parties have colluded to stitch up a dirty legislative deal on behalf of Santos, one of the major members of the gas cartel in this country. The stark, harsh reality in Australia is that the fossil fuel lobby have got their hooks into the Labor, Liberal and National parties, and they've got them in deep. They've got them in through the mechanisms of political donations and the revolving door—which has existed for a long time, exists today and will, unless we do something, exist into the future—whereby politicians and their senior staff roll out of this joint, after years in here doing the bidding of the fossil fuel companies, and into cushy, plum jobs in the board rooms or in senior executive levels at those very same fossil fuel companies, or into public relations or other consultancy firms advising those fossil fuel companies. We all know it, colleagues. Let's call it out for what it is: corruption. That's what it is. That's why, when our prime Minister, Mr Albanese, arrives at the Pacific Islands Forum this week, he's going to ensure that the communique that comes out at the end of that forum is watered down. You can bet London to a brick on that outcome. Australia is most emphatically not going to allow a communique to come out of the Pacific Islands Forum with Australia's name on it that talks about not subsidising fossil fuel companies or not approving new coal and gas projects. We know that, where new coal and gas projects are concerned, this Labor government in Australia falls over itself to approve them.

Australia is one of the biggest net carbon emitters in the world. When you factor in our exports, we are in the top handful of net carbon emitters in the world. It's all very well for this government to come into this parliament and legislate a 43 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030, consistent, I might add, with more than two degrees of global warming. The stark reality is that this government is continuing on the calamitous trajectory that the former government had us on, and that calamitous trajectory is to a future where we are at risk of having an unliveable planet, where we are at risk of billions of people being displaced from their homes, where we are at risk of the ecological systems that ultimately provide the relatively stable climate that we've all enjoyed here in our lifetimes and that people have enjoyed around the world coming to an end. If you don't think it's coming to an end, look at some of the temperature records that are being set month after month, year after year. Look at the reduction in the glaciers. Look at the reduction in the ice sheets. Look at the melting of the tundras. Look at the bushfires. Look at the floods. If you can't see it happening, folks, you're just not paying attention.

I think you can see it happening, but you don't want to acknowledge it. That's what I think. That's what I think the cognitive dissonance is in this place. That's why the Australian Greens will be moving an amendment to the second reading on this legislation, which would, at the end of the motion, add the words:

… but the Senate:

(a) notes the advocacy of Pacific leaders that the greatest threat to the wellbeing of the region is the threat of runaway global heating caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas—

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

Senator McKim, please resume your seat. Senator Scarr, on point of order?

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On relevance, Madam Acting Deputy President—I've seen the amendment which has been circulated by Senator McKim, which he's speaking to. I'm not expecting you to make a decision now—I'm happy for you to take it on notice—but under standing order 118:

An amendment may be made to any part of a bill, provided that it is relevant to the subject matter of the bill …

Whilst I'm aware that these things can be interpreted liberally, in this case, Senator McKim's amendment does not relate to social security at all. It doesn't relate to an immigration matter at all. It is my submission that, if this amendment were accepted, then it would be possible for any amendment on any subject matter to be crafted and attached to any such second reading motion. On that basis, I request that you take this matter under advisement and come back to the chamber with respect to whether or not it's relevant under standing order 118.

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

Thank you, Senator Scarr. Senator McKim?

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was saying, the amendment that we intend to move adds the words at the end of the motion:

… but the Senate:

(a) notes the advocacy of Pacific leaders that the greatest threat to the wellbeing of the region is the threat of runaway global heating caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas; and

(b) resolves that Australia must:

(i) not open up any new coal mines or gas fields; and

(ii) remove the billions of dollars spent each year subsidising the exploration, extraction and burning of fossil fuels".

The reason this amendment is critical is that it beggars belief that our Prime Minister is going to fly into the Pacific Islands Forum this week and attempt to convince Pacific island leaders—some of whom are facing an existential threat to the survival of their nation-states due to sea level rise and the risk that their countries are going to disappear off the face of the earth and under the waves of the Pacific—that publicly subsidising the burning of fossil fuels at the same time that our climate is breaking down around us is actually a good idea and something that should be supported by them. As I said, what's going to happen is that Australia and Mr Albanese will, I have no doubt, ensure that the communique is watered down and that any mention of ending the approvals of new coal mines or gas fields is either removed or so watered down as to be meaningless.

I know that the Pacific engagement visa, which is one of the visas that this bill relates to, has been promoted by the government here in Australia, including by Foreign Minister Wong, as part of our engagement with what they describe as our Pacific friends. They are our Pacific friends, but, if we wanted to really be friends to the Pacific nations, we would stop approving new coal and gas mines in Australia. If we really wanted to be friends to our Pacific neighbours, we would stop spending billions of dollars a year encouraging the burning of fossil fuels in this country. That's what a real, true friend to Pacific island nations would do.

But we're not going to do that, because, when push comes to shove, Australia is a better friend to the greedy, ecocidal fossil fuel corporations than it is to our so-called friends in the South Pacific. We are better friends to the psychopaths running those fossil fuel corporations than we are to our neighbours in the South Pacific. That is the fundamental and sad truth that we have to accept. When you've been in this place for long enough and have listened to and watched what happens in this place closely enough, there can be no argument that that is the case. It is undoubtedly the case that big corporations effectively run this parliament, because the major parties—the Labor, Liberal and National parties—are too craven and too cowardly to stand up to them. That's the problem that we are facing, and that is a problem that won't be solved by this legislation.

Acting Deputy President Hughes, I listened to Senator Scarr's point of order, and I'm sure you'll take that matter on advisement. Notwithstanding that, I move the second reading amendment which has been circulated in my name:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes the advocacy of Pacific leaders that the greatest threat to the wellbeing of the region is the threat of runaway global heating caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas; and

(b) resolves that Australia must:

(i) not open up any new coal mines or gas fields; and

(ii) remove the billions of dollars spent each year subsidising the exploration, extraction and burning of fossil fuels".

I assure Senator Scarr that there'll be an opportunity for the matters he raised to be considered, because I won't be putting this to a vote tonight. I'll ensure that that doesn't happen, because I do respect the point that he made, even though my firm view is that it will be ruled in order. But time will tell, Senator Scarr.

I want to say, as I draw this contribution towards a conclusion, that the matters I've raised here are obviously extremely serious. They are matters of existential survival for some of the nation-states in the Pacific. The Greens did support the Pacific engagement visa legislation, and I want to place on the record that we will be supporting this legislation before the Senate as well, because we do believe that we need to do more to assist our neighbours to come here and receive support here and to encourage them to build lives here. But we need to do much more than that if we're to be true friends to them in the Pacific island region.

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order: I referred to standing order 118. I think perhaps that it was 114 that I intended to refer to.