Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts) Share this | Hansard source

We are now starting to get interesting interjections across the table. I very much look forward to seeing the policy develop on this question of what should or should not be included in an emissions trading scheme. What I can say is that the Rudd Labor government has approached this issue with consistency, with diligence, with care and with true deliberation. We have the Garnaut review underway, we have the Treasury modelling underway and we have the Wilkins review underway. We have a commitment to ensure that by 2010 there will be an emissions-trading scheme which will drive the economy of this country and make sure that emissions are reduced at low cost. We would have had to wait another two years, from a very reluctant government if they had been elected, for that to happen. We got on with the job. We are serious about climate change and we are serious about enabling the market and market signals to play their role in reducing emissions.

Today we went to the heart of the question of empowering the community to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I have laid out a significant platform of policy measures that we are bringing into this parliament and that we will take out to the Australian community. It is about responsible economic management. I will go straight to the question of responsible economic management and simply say this: if the solar PV rebate was not means tested, as those opposite are calling for, and if it continued to grow at the current rates, then it would lead to a massive blow-out in the budget. Not only do we have the coalition raiding the surplus already, when we know that it is important to have a surplus and that we need to keep downward pressure on interest rates; but if this program were not means tested then it would simply grow, and at current rates that would lead to a massive blow-out and a blow-out in the budget. If the program continued to grow at current rates, within 12 months the government would be providing approximately more than 8,000 rebates. That is what the opposition is saying. That is a budget blow-out which is really significant. Not only is it significant; it is irresponsible. I put it to the member for Flinders that you cannot seriously be arguing in opposition that you should have a blow-out of this rebate to that extent. I will be very interested to see the private member’s bill when it comes through. Is that what you will be arguing for? If you will be arguing for that then you are actually arguing for an unsustainable program, in current budgetary circumstances, to be maintained.

What we say is: let us cap a rebate to enable the program to be delivered sustainably. That is the economically responsible way to go about delivering this program to Australians who need it most and it is the ecologically responsible way of doing it because it ensures that there is sustainability in the system. We do not have a solar industry that swings from pillar to post. We have a solar industry that has the confidence that we have programs in place that will ensure their long-term viability.

See this speech in context