Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I support the motion moved by Senator Fifield. I will not keep the Senate for long because I, like I think most other senators, want to get on with the actual debate; what we are debating now is a procedural motion. I have been in this chamber too long to allow the hypocrisy and humbug that we hear coming from Labor Party senators and which we will hear next from Greens senators about this procedural motion. I have been sitting in this chamber for the last six years, and for a few years before that too, and have seen the Labor Party and the Greens guillotine more than 200 important bills with absolutely no discussion in this chamber, yet we hear from them the sort of rhetoric we have heard from the previous speaker about the debate on this motion.

I say to the newer senators: I am a liberal and, regardless of what the executive government may say, I am always one who will allow proper discussion on any bill before the chamber. Having said that, I would gladly move a guillotine on this bill right away, because we have debated this full-time for the last six years. For the last six years we have debated this particular subject. We went to the 2010 election, with Mr Abbott and Ms Gillard promising the same thing: not to have a carbon tax. So why are we debating it today? Why do we have Senator Singh wasting 20 minutes of the Senate's time in a classic filibuster? I say to new senators: have a look, because this is what you going to see a lot of—Labor senator after Labor senator getting up and speaking for 20 minutes on a subject that we have debated ad infinitum for the last six years. I could repeat every speech that is going to be made by Labor and the Greens because I have heard them so often.

We do not need to worry particularly about what various senators in this chamber say; we have to listen to what the people of Australia say. There would not be an Australian who did not know that the last election was to be 'a referendum on the carbon tax'. Who won the last election? Was it the Labor Party, who dropped five senators here? Was it the Greens political party, who, in the first election in Western Australia—before some votes mysteriously went missing—did not even get a senator elected in Western Australia? It was the parties who indicated a preference to get rid of the carbon tax who were successful at the last election. And why? Because that is what the people of Australia wanted.

This is a procedural motion. If Senator Singh is so keen about the debate, let's get on with it. Why did we have a 20-minute filibuster from her to prevent us from getting on with the debate? I hope that the new senators will quickly understand the humbug and hypocrisy that they will hear from the Labor Party and from the Greens.

I do not want to refute some of the comments that Senator Singh made, but I want to raise very briefly a couple of issues. I refer any senator who is interested, to go way back to 12 May 2009 to a question that I asked on notice of the then science minister, Senator Carr. I asked him for a list of all research grants from the Labor government to universities and researchers dealing with climate change. It is on the record at question 1507 on 12 May, 2009. Have a look at that, Mr Acting Deputy President. These are the research grants that have gone to researchers who want to promote the Labor-Greens view on climate change.

I just want to make it clear to anyone who might be listening that I am not a climate change denier. I have long said that the climate is changing. I remember—and I was not around then!—when the earth was covered in ice. I remember that the centre of Australia was an inland sea, and I also remember that it was a tropical rainforest. So, clearly, the climate is changing. I am the first to admit that. I have known that all along. But is it man's emissions of carbon that has caused it? As I have often said, 'I do not know.' I have heard equally from qualified scientists who say no as those who say yes. You do not hear a lot from Australian scientists who say no because Professor Bob Carter could never get a grant because all the grants were going to those who were supported by the Greens and the Labor Party. The list is five years old now, but here are just some of the grants that went to those who wanted to promote the Greens and the Labor Party view on climate change.

Mr Acting Deputy President, I am not a scientist—you know that—but I just happened to be glancing through the Weekend Australianon 21 June and saw the headline 'Coral comes back from the dead'. Yet, if you listen to the Greens and the Labor Party you would think that the Barrier Reef is doomed and that every coral reef in the world is doomed because of climate change. There is an article quoting a respected member of the Australian Institute of Marine Science, based in Townsville, who indicates that there are different arguments about climate change.

If the new senators want an indication they just have to hear what is coming from the Greens. If you do not happen to hold their views—and the same can be said for Senator Wong—you are pilloried.