House debates

Thursday, 19 November 2009

Questions without Notice

Climate Change

2:04 pm

Photo of Kevin RuddKevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

Of course we are deeply concerned about the sensitivities of those opposite on climate change. But there is hope: our good friend and colleague the member for Groom, representing the constructive end of the Liberal Party argument on this—and we appreciate his efforts in negotiating this with us. But we have had comments both from the member for Groom today and from the other end of the spectrum, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, representing the destructive end of the debate. But both their comments are interesting. The member for Groom had this to say on ABC this morning:

I accept that he—

referring to the Prime Minister—

has got a mandate to introduce the scheme. There are plenty who do not, but I do.

I thank the member for Groom for recognising that fact. Furthermore:

… by the time the Senate rises by the end of next week he will have what he is demanding …

He goes on to say:

… but it will be on our terms.

That is fine; that is his political overlay. I do welcome what the member for Groom has said. I welcome his statement that, by the end of next week, we will have a successful vote on the CPRS—in the next five sitting days. That is a good outcome. A vote one way or the other is an appropriate reflection of a good faith negotiation with the government.

The second comment is interesting as well. It is from Senator Minchin and it is directly relevant to this debate. On the question of the upcoming vote he says:

Our party room, our joint coalition party room, will make a decision on how we will treat this bill next during the course of next week after Mr Macfarlane reports to us on his negotiations with the government. We then as a party room will decide which option we will elect to take.

He goes on:

But we will have a clear position at some stage during the course of next week as to what our view on this bill will be.

What we have therefore is clarity from both ends of the debate, the climate change sceptic end of the debate and those within the coalition who actually want to bring about an outcome. So we have now the optimists in the spectrum, led by the member for Groom, backing a vote, and we have the pessimists, led by Senator Minchin, backing a vote. The only person silent so far on whether we should have a vote by the end of next week is the Leader of the Opposition. Can I just say to the Leader of the Opposition that if these are good-faith negotiations and it is the attitude that we bring to bear, stand up today and confirm that there will be a vote on climate change, on the CPRS, by the time the Senate rises next Thursday. We have it from the member for Groom, we have it from Senator Minchin, and we are all ears in terms of what the Leader of the Opposition will say. Five sitting days left until a vote: are we going to have a vote in the national interest or in some internal party interest? Five days in which to vote on the science, or five days in which to ignore the science and pursue prejudice. Five days left for action, or five days for inaction. Five sitting days left to vote for the future instead of simply lying in the path. We are engaged in good-faith negotiations with those opposite. I invite the opposition in question time today to confirm to the Australian people that there will be a vote on the CPRS legislation by the time the parliament rises at the end of next week. The nation and our global interests demand it.

Comments

No comments