Peter Khalil (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

In May last year, Australians voted for real action on climate change. They voted for a government that takes real action on climate change and makes it something which is significant and real and which will make a difference to the next generation—not just empty words. Climate change is an existential issue for Australia and for Australians, as well as for people across the globe, particularly in the Pacific. The Albanese Labor government is taking leadership in making a real commitment on this issue because this government is acutely aware of the urgency and the need to act. The IPCC report that has just been released reaffirms what we've all been concerned about all along. It reminds us of our agency. It also reminds us of the urgency to act and reminds us that we should have taken this action decades ago. This country was dealing with a decade of denial and delay—a decade of dysfunction.

Of course Australians are right to be concerned. People in my electorate of Wills are contacting my office because they are worried. They're worried about their kids' future, and they're worried about the world that their kids and their grandkids will inherit—as am I, as a father of two young children. We're worried about the prediction that temperatures will likely rise 1.5 degrees in the early part of next decade and that the impacts from climate change will be more severe than estimated in previous IPCC assessments. We're worried that the climate crisis is quickly altering the earth's atmosphere, oceans, land and frozen poles, which will mean that Australians will experience extreme weather, including heat waves and catastrophic flooding. We're worried that our children and our future generations will continue to suffer if we don't seize the opportunity this week in this place to make a real start on climate action. This is what the Australian people voted for last May.

The Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 provides for a safeguard mechanism that will provide this country with key building blocks as we work towards net zero by 2050 at the latest. We've always said that we can get there faster if we're permitted to make those investments in renewable energy. It's a floor, not a ceiling. The safeguard mechanism helps ensure that our largest industrial facilities reduce emissions in line with our national targets. It provides us with a system that encourages emissions reductions from our top emitters. That is crucial to reaching Australia's updated emissions reduction targets of 43 per cent by 2030 and net zero by 2050. More than 70 per cent of safeguard facilities and 80 per cent of safeguard emissions are already covered by the 2050 net zero target, which these reforms will help them achieve.

As part of the Powering Australia plan and funded in the last budget, the Albanese Labor government is investing in the decarbonisation of existing industries and creation of new clean-energy industries through the $1.9 billion Powering the Regions Fund. At least $600 million of this will assist safeguard facilities in reducing their emissions through energy efficiency upgrades, shifts to lower carbon processes or switching of fuels to electrification, hydrogen and biofuels. Why you would oppose that I'm not sure. I haven't heard a cogent or rational argument from those opposite.

These reforms help Australian businesses remain competitive as the world decarbonises. Why would you oppose that? They enable industries to be supported during this transition. Why would you oppose that? The crediting element will enable businesses to be provided with tradable safeguard mechanism credits that will incentivise more efficiency, and other businesses with limited abatement options will be able to purchase credits to help meet their emissions reductions. Why would you oppose that? Crediting and trading will actually help Australia and our industrial businesses to meet our climate targets. Why would you oppose that?

It's a cost-effective way of enabling us to continue to work toward our larger goals—and we've got to start. This parliament debated targets last year. We agreed to a 43 per cent target. That's our starting point. It passed through this parliament—that's democracy in action. Unless the safeguard reforms are passed, our projections will be lower than 43 per cent. Why would you oppose that? Is that why—because you want us to underachieve? You want to block business and industry from reducing their emissions? Is that what your opposition is about? This is real action and real reform. Maybe you oppose it because of that—because you did nothing for nine years. You went backwards for nine years. Maybe you want to oppose this bill because of that. Maybe you just want to oppose reducing emissions, which will alleviate pressure on households and energy bills and will actually create renewable energy jobs. That's a really good start to make sure that we're headed on a path, in a direction, that will help us transition into a renewable energy future. Why would you oppose that?

Is it because there are still elements within the opposition party room that don't believe in any of the science, that don't think that we should take any action, that were responsible for torpedoing, for blowing up, for destroying I've forgotten how many—

See this speech in context