Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

What a pathetic contribution we have just seen on this MPI on renewable energy. What is clear is that not only are the National Party dictating to the Liberal Party on marriage equality but they are also dictating on economic policy. The entire economic policy of the coalition is to stick their head in the sand, to consign Australia to being the rust-belt economy of the Asia-Pacific. The truth is that this is not an argument about the environment, it is not an argument about feeling good; it is an argument about hard economics and what is in the economic interests of Australia? It is clearly in the economic interests of this country to have jobs of the future, to abate carbon at the lowest possible cost through an emissions trading scheme and other associated policies, to take a rational policy and implement that policy and to make the transition as smooth and efficient as possible, rather than adopt the government's direct command and control, Bolshevik style, that would do Comrade Lenin proud. That is what has been clear in this debate.

The previous speaker talked about real jobs. I am not sure whether the Minister for the Environment even bothers turning up to cabinet anymore; he just has a little side meeting with Minister Macfarlane of the 'Rolled Cabinet Ministers Club,' who does not bother turning up. We have seen their ideological masters in Maurice Newman and the wind turbine noise conspiracy theorists, who think that wind turbine noise will somehow end the world. This is a purely ideological debate from their side, with no basis in science or economics. And this country is suffering as a result.

When I discovered the MPI was going to be on renewables I thought, 'Let's go to some source material, let's see what the government have said about renewables,' because they are supposed to be the year of good government. I went to their document shield, Real Solutions, their election policy which Tony Abbott hid behind. How many mentions of renewable are there in this? Guess. Zero.

What about Battlelines, a great read? How many mentions of 'renewables' in Battlelines? Zero. What about the greatest political suicide note since Fightback—Not Your Average Joe? Zero mentions of renewables. What about a certain member's long-term contribution to this House, because we should be judged by what we speak on in the chamber, our contribution to the public debate. I had a look in Hansard for the Prime Minister's contribution over the last 21 years and guess how many times he has mentioned 'renewables' in 21 years of parliament? Three times.

Just to give some context, once every seven years, the former chief of staff to the Treasurer—

See this speech in context