House debates

Wednesday, 12 September 2007

National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Bill 2007

Second Reading

5:43 pm

Photo of Phillip BarresiPhillip Barresi (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Before I start my contribution on this bill, may I simply say, as the first speaker after the member for Franklin, that in the last two days we have been privileged to hear two magnificent valedictory speeches, one from the member for Franklin and one from the member for Cook—two men of outstanding principle and values who have held true to their beliefs and values right through their terms. I wish both of them well as they leave this parliament. It has been a privilege to serve with both gentlemen.

Like many Australians, I am deeply concerned about climate change. Therefore, I welcome the opportunity to speak on the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Bill 2007. Research undertaken by the world’s leading scientists, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has suggested that the earth is warming and that human activity is partly responsible. The planet’s temperature has already risen by around 0.7 degrees Celsius over the past 100 years and may rise between one and 6.4 degrees Celsius this century.

Already we are starting to feel the impact of climate change. It is no accident that 11 of the past 12 years have been the warmest since the 1850s, with 2000 being the warmest year on record. It is also no accident that most of our cities, major regional centres and country towns are now on severe water restrictions following a decade of below average rainfall. If action is not undertaken to address climate change, we are told that we run the very real risk of rising sea levels and severe changes in weather patterns. I also appreciate that not everyone shares the view of the IPCC, disputing the science and its conclusions. Some claim that the rise in temperatures is a result of fluctuations that naturally take place throughout the earth’s life cycle. The question that we need to answer is: what if we are wrong in this assessment? Governments have all resolved that action is needed urgently.

The bill is one part of the response required by governments. It would deliver an effective means to help combat climate change by laying a solid foundation for the deployment of a cap-and-trade emissions trading system. Australia’s emissions trading system will cover around 70 per cent of all sources of greenhouse gas emissions. This will be more comprehensive than the state based systems, which cover about 45 per cent, and it will produce better results than any of the systems currently operating in Europe. This legislation is a clear demonstration of the federal government’s commitment to take the threat of climate change seriously.

An emissions trading system underpinned by this legislation would build upon more than a decade of hard work to cut greenhouse gas emissions. At a national level, the federal government has invested in infrastructure and research in areas such as clean coal and solar power, as well as urgent investments in water preservation and conservation. Too often, not enough credit has been given by its critics to the various initiatives that this government has introduced during its 11½ years in office. We have seen initiatives that go beyond what any previous government had even imagined possible in the area of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. For example, $500 million is being made available to help pioneer low-emissions technology such as clean coal, and $100 million has been made available for renewable energy development initiatives. We have $75 million for five solar cities, and yet you would be hard pressed to find anyone who even knows that those cities are being constructed as solar cities. We have the much-discussed $10 billion to restore the health of the Murray-Darling river system. We have also had $2.2 billion put into the Australian water fund to improve the management and use of water resources. These in themselves are only part of the response by this government and they are very significant statements of the government’s seriousness on this issue.

Meeting the challenge of climate change and emissions reductions in our homes is something that the federal government has also invested in, recognising that each Australian wants to make a difference to the world we live in. Whether it is in our own homes or in our communities, all of us want to directly contribute to effectively managing climate change issues. While such individual action makes a small contribution, it is a powerful statement of what we truly value: our environment. Of course, the cumulative effect of such individual action does make a significant contribution to our environmental management, and the federal government has encouraged such individual and community action through programs such as rebates to help homes and community groups install solar panels and hot water systems.

The Prime Minister recently announced $50,000 rebates for schools to invest in water-saving technology and solar panels. This initiative has been welcomed by all the schools in my electorate as a way of making their contribution to the environment and as an educational tool for young kids going through the schools. The Australian Greenhouse Office, which was established to coordinate ways to reduce emissions, was the first of its kind in the world. Also, in the last budget, the Treasurer announced $200 million to help fund the protection of the world’s rainforests—the lungs of the earth—through a reafforestation program in developing nations. These are good local initiatives on top of the big national initiatives. They certainly signify the seriousness with which this government takes the issue of greenhouse gases, climate change and the setting in place of an emissions trading system.

Almost 20 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions are from clearing the world’s forests. If the world were to halve the rate of global deforestation, it could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by three billion tonnes a year, which is more than five times Australia’s total annual emissions and about 10 times the emissions reductions that will be achieved during the first commitment period of the Kyoto protocol.

The federal government has invested over $3.4 billion in finding ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Thanks to these practical initiatives, Australia is well on track to meet its Kyoto target, in contrast to Kyoto signatories such as the United Kingdom, France, Canada and even Japan. In 2005, Australia emitted 559 million tonnes of CO2. This figure is 102 per cent above the 1990 figure, and our Kyoto target is 108 per cent above the 1990 figure. It means that growth in greenhouse gas emissions was two per cent despite growth of 61 per cent in the economy. So we have the economy booming ahead—particularly the energy resource area—with 61 per cent growth and we have seen emissions levels from Australia increasing by two per cent. Australia is pulling its weight in this area; it is not lagging behind.

The ALP’s response on climate change is best summed up as extreme and unbalanced, and it ignores the intricate economic circumstances of our country. Unlike the scientific approach taken by those more actively involved in the climate change debate, the Labor Party have approached this issue with an almost religious zealotry in an attempt to turn the debate away from scientific fact into a more divisive believers versus nonbelievers scenario. The ALP’s shallow approach to climate change is best summed up in their often used catchcry ‘Sign Kyoto’—a simple message that is designed to fool Australians into thinking that the government does not take climate change seriously.

Far from being at the forefront of this important debate about the world’s future, the Labor Party and the opposition leader would jeopardise Australia’s role in creating an agreement beyond Kyoto and 2012, which was agreed to at APEC through the Sydney declaration, which was signed off by 21 leaders in the Asia-Pacific region. In fact, the ALP’s hypocrisy on this can be summed up by the inaction of the Leader of the Opposition last week in his now famous meeting with the President of the United States, George Bush. For all the rhetoric of those on the other side about signing Kyoto, when the opportunity was presented to the Leader of the Opposition to raise the issue of Kyoto and climate change with the President of the United States, what happened? He squibbed it. He squibbed the opportunity to push the claim that Kyoto should remain the flagship for international action—because deep down those on the other side know that the world has moved on beyond Kyoto. If Labor were really serious about climate change, they would check the facts on the Kyoto agreement and, rather than harping back to the catchcry of ‘Sign Kyoto’, they would realise that we are now into the next phase of international action.

The Kyoto protocol does not provide a comprehensive or environmentally effective long-term response to climate change. Of the 175 countries that ratified the protocol, only 35 signed up to greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. None of those is a developing country and many of them are failing to meet the targets that have been set, including the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan. Significantly, the protocol does not provide a clear pathway for action by developing countries, some of whom have much higher levels of greenhouse gas emissions than developed countries, such as Australia. Without commitments by all major emitters, the Kyoto protocol will be largely ineffective, as it will only deliver about a one per cent reduction in the growth of global greenhouse gas emissions. To put it another way, global greenhouse gas emissions are still expected to increase by 40 per cent on 1990 levels by 2012 under the protocol compared to an increase of 41 per cent without it. So, apart from all that effort and all that bluster, all we are seeing is a one per cent growth from actually doing nothing.

It is often said that the 21st century is the Asia century. If that is the case, why have an emissions trading scheme, an international climate action change program, which does not include some of the world’s largest polluters? We want them included not so that there can be punitive measures but simply to entice them to be part of the international response so that they too can play their part—because emissions, as they move around the globe, do not know borders; there are no boundaries.

For example, one of these Asian giants is China. China currently contributes 14.7 per cent of our global greenhouse gas emissions. Australia’s contribution stands at 1.4 per cent—and, while it is a significant 1.4 per cent, it is minuscule by comparison. On current trends, China’s contribution is set to rise to 22.9 per cent by 2050. Currently, China is the second biggest greenhouse gas emitter in the world, and it will overtake the No. 1 emitter, the United States, by 2050. It is therefore vital that all greenhouse-gas-emitting countries work together to achieve an effective international response to address climate change. The USA accounts for 23.8 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions, followed by the EU with 14.3 and China, as I mentioned, with its 14.7 per cent.

Given these figures, it is extremely encouraging to see China working in cooperation with Australian scientists and engineers to develop a clean coal plant. It is also encouraging to see the large resource companies, such as BP Australia, investing in major solar photovoltaic production plants in China. By sharing Australian know-how and working in partnership with our neighbours, Australia can help to drastically reduce global greenhouse emissions. These are practical actions that this country is taking with our partners overseas.

It is for that reason that I so strongly support our involvement in the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, towards which Australia has committed $100 million. The Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate brings together key countries—such as China, India, Korea, Japan and the United States—to explore ways to develop, deploy and transfer cleaner, more efficient technologies to help cut global greenhouse gas emissions. The importance of this partnership is clear, when you consider that these six partners account for almost half of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The recent APEC summit in Sydney demonstrated that Australia can draw together the leaders of the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters and forge a consensus on tackling climate change. One of the important agreements to come out of the APEC meeting was the agreement of all nations to help build a post-2012 international climate change agreement. Those on the other side have been critical of this agreement because it states aspirational targets. Far from them criticising, I urge those on the other side to embrace the action that took place in Sydney last week. I certainly urge them to support the government’s efforts in setting up this partnership and to work within it.

The framework for any new agreement would strengthen and deepen the current arrangements leading to reduced global emissions. This is necessary to get a global framework underway for the post-Kyoto period. It is in line with other APEC commitments, which include working towards achieving an APEC-wide reduction in energy intensity of at least 25 per cent by 2030, using 2005 as the base year, and working to increase forest cover in the APEC region by at least 20 million hectares by 2020—a goal which, if achieved, would store some 1.4 billion tonnes of carbon, which is the equivalent of around 11 per cent of annual global emissions, based on 2004 figures. That is a significant contribution which certainly should be embraced. Another commitment is to establish an Asia-Pacific network for energy technology to strengthen collaboration on energy research in the region in such areas as clean fossil energy and renewable energy.

Following more than a decade of hard work, Australia has achieved a great deal to help cut greenhouse gas emissions, both at home and internationally. Indeed, I believe Australia is leading the world when it comes to tackling climate change. Irrespective of what the critics out there may say and what the various action groups that have been established around the country may say, the fact is indisputable: this country has led the way, is making a significant contribution and is not shirking its responsibility.

Australians are renowned for their innovation and their ability to work together to overcome difficult challenges. This has certainly been the case when it comes to the challenge of climate change. The people in my electorate of Deakin are no exception. I would like to praise the many community groups, sporting clubs and schools within Deakin who made a contribution to reducing their environmental footprint. Much of this has happened under the various grants and schemes set up by this government, particularly the very popular Community Water Grants scheme. I would like to commend those groups and members of local groups, whether it be those down at Wurundjeri Walk, Blackburn Lake, the Creeklands area, Antonio Park, Loughie’s Bushland or over at Cheong Park. All of these and many more groups like them have dedicated themselves to care for our precious natural local environment. By working together as a community, we in Deakin have achieved a lot, and I look forward to working with those groups to achieve even more.

One such project which we have worked on for the last three years has been the preservation of bushland around the Blackburn Lake area, infamously known in Deakin now as 1 Lake Road, Blackburn—and the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources certainly knows about that piece of land. It is set adjacent to the environmentally significant Blackburn Lake Sanctuary. When it became clear that the state government’s lax planning laws would fail to protect this important piece of open space from developers, the federal government stepped in with $1.8 million in federal funding to protect it. Now that the open space at 1 Lake Road has been preserved, I am working with members of the local community to investigate the possibility of establishing a sustainable living centre within that Blackburn Lake precinct—a centre where the community, school groups and residents can go to find examples of the latest and best ways to make their contribution to environmental sustainability and the protection of our environment.

It is a visionary project that seeks to showcase biodiversity and conservation whilst acting as a centre of excellence in the development and demonstration of environmentally sustainable technologies. On behalf of the local community, I would like to congratulate everyone who has been involved in this project—in particular, the tireless and passionate John Bergin, from the Blackburn area.

By working together, at both the local community and national levels, Australia has managed to significantly reduce its impact on climate change. However, with Australia only accounting for 1.4 per cent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, the greatest opportunity for reducing the emissions is through cooperation with other nations. As a keen bushwalker who has climbed the magnificent Cradle Mountain in Tasmania and fully walked the Kokoda Track in Papua New Guinea, I have a deep love and respect for the environment and, like most Australians, I realise that there is still much more to be done when it comes to climate change. As a local representative and a member of the federal parliament, I will continue to work hard at local, national and international levels to foster a cleaner and safer environment so that future generations have a better environment to live in.

Comments

No comments