Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Like the member for La Trobe, I would like to speak on the issue of climate change. This afternoon, the government is receiving the report of the emissions trading task force. What it will allow is a response which will be based on evidence and science and which will be balanced with respect to the economy.

What we need is to see global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to environmentally safe levels. Australia, over the last 10 years, has been working on this, so that the national greenhouse account shows that we will meet our Kyoto target. And a lot of the ratifying countries will not: Canada, Japan, Spain and France are all exceeding the targets that they signed up to in Kyoto 10 years ago, and some are well above.

We have heard the problems with Kyoto. If Kyoto is fully implemented we will see a 40 per cent rise in greenhouse gas emissions over 1990 levels, compared with a 41 per cent rise without Kyoto. So what we need to look at is: post 2012, how will a new Kyoto look? What it needs to do is to include major emitters like the United States, China and India.

Australia is deeply involved in the UN climate change convention. It co-chairs several important discussions on the post-2012 framework. Our initiative, the Asia-Pacific Partnership for Clean Development and Climate, AP6, includes China, India, Japan, Korea, the United States and Australia, covering 50 per cent of global emissions.

There is a lot going on in terms of technological solutions, looking at clean coal, clean gas, biofuels, and solar. Solar is only used by 25,000 homes in Australia now. But, with the budget incentive, seeing that there will be $8,000 for homes and $12,000 for schools to install solar panels, we should see that continue to grow. There is also wind and geothermal.

There have been a couple of recent initiatives by the government. One that is particularly important is the $200 million Global Initiative on Forests and Climate. The second-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions is actually deforestation in the tropical developing world. So we need more sustainable forest practices and more replanting. That is a very practical way to reduce emissions and reduce them now. This is an example of the weaknesses of Kyoto. This was not addressed in Kyoto and yet it is a very effective way of reducing growth in emissions. Carbon sink forests are, again, a very effective way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating salinity.

There are a whole lot of things we can do in the area of energy efficiency. Australia has led the world in phasing out incandescent light globes. It has led the world by minimising the power used in electrical appliances in standby. And we are looking at investing in geothermal projects which have the potential to provide emissions-free energy.

Where Labor’s approach differs from the government’s is that they say, ‘We should have ratified Kyoto.’ But, as I said earlier, that will have no practical impact. It will not lead to the reduction of one molecule of carbon dioxide if Kyoto enters into force from Australia’s point of view. They have also said that they will have a 60 per cent reduction by 2050—without knowing what the impact will be. And it is just so far away that it is an impractical approach. The target has not been researched. What it would involve would be reducing the carbon intensity of the Australian economy by more than 80 per cent.

Australia is in a very different position from a lot of other countries. It is a producer of aluminium, steel, coal and natural gas. We need to have a balanced approach which is good for the environment and good for the Australian economy. It would be crazy for any future Australian government to decrease our competitive advantage in the world. We need an Australian solution to a global problem. The emissions trading task force report today does provide a way forward which will be good for the environment and good for the economy.

See this speech in context