Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Every Australian has felt the effects of our warming climate, whether they realise it or not and whether they accept it or not. We've all experienced sweltering summer nights that won't cool down. We see grocery and power bills climbing and insurance premiums soaring. Beaches are disappearing to coastal erosion. Communities are flooding. We see the Great Barrier Reef, repeatedly, bleaching and dying. We see droughts getting worse, and we see storms and flooding getting worse. But the question is: are we responding fast enough as a nation? The Annual Climate Change Statement reveals the answer, and it is clearly no, despite all the things said by the government members.

Australia is at risk of missing its emissions target. We rely too much on offsets instead of cutting pollution at its source. We also continue with a flawed system when it comes to monitoring and measuring methane emissions, and spending on adaptation is woefully inadequate. Even Australia's military and intelligence experts warn that climate change is an existential threat to human civilisation and say the government refuses to face up to that challenge. So the reality is clear. This government must urgently strengthen both mitigation and resilience to protect Australians from the climate risks ahead.

In January, my electorate of Warringah and nearby areas were hit by violent summer storms, heavy rain, pounding winds and flash flooding that upended people's lives and disrupted business. The economic impact of disruption is the piece that doesn't get talked about, but it is a very vital piece. Torrential downpours swamped streets and homes. Stormwater systems overflowed, turning roads into rivers. Passengers were rescued from stranded cars. Residents were forced to evacuate, returning days later to soaked homes and damaged belongings. Insurance premiums were absolutely tested and stressed. This is experienced in many coastal communities. It's a sobering reminder of what happens in Warringah and many places in Australia and what we are going to face as it worsens. We know impacts are going to cascade, compound and escalate. We know these storms will get more severe. A warming climate with warmer temperatures means greater amounts of humidity in the atmosphere, leading to a year's worth of rain falling in short periods. Too often our infrastructure is not equipped to cope.

But the risks go far beyond just worsening disasters. Climate change is a cost-of-living issue that drives up your power bills and insurance costs as disasters become more and more frequent and severe and disrupt food production, transport and many other aspects. It's also a problem of intergenerational equity. It steals opportunities from the next generation, leaving them with a heavy carbon debt, this existential threat, and a very heavy burden to bear. Governments are not moving fast enough to protect all Australians from the climate risks ahead.

The climate change statement shows that Australia needs to accelerate its action to meet even just its 2030 emission target. Our emissions are falling but not fast enough. Australia has committed to cutting emissions by between 62 and 70 per cent by 2035, based on 2005 levels, and I know that many members of government want a pat on the back for that because it certainly is better than the woeful ignorance of the opposition and their complete lack of policy or commitment to our biggest threat. But the reality is that only the upper end of that 2035 target is even remotely within the range of science and what is needed to actually keep the temperature increase under two degrees. We urgently need to accelerate emissions reduction, especially around transport, agriculture and industry. Right now, only the energy sector is doing the heavy lifting.

Last year, the Climate Change Authority released decarbonisation plans for six sectors of the economy, but, disappointingly, the authority did not set specific, binding targets for each sector. We need clear sectoral plans for all of these areas. Without those targets, there is no accountability and companies or governments can ignore the guidance without consequences. Voluntary targets rarely drive the urgent change needed to meet Australia's climate goals and don't give businesses a clear signal to plan for cleaner operations over the long term and meaningful investment.

The other issue of great concern I referred to is that Australia's net zero strategy relies too heavily on carbon offsets. These allow polluting industries to continue business as usual, and, in fact, the government continues to approve coal and gas projects that then rely on offsets, so we are continually putting fuel on the fire. Offsets have a role for hard to abate sectors, but they cannot be used to justify continuing to increase emissions and continuing with polluting industries like coal and gas. We have to ensure that we don't replace genuine low-emissions transformation with the use of offsets.

We can't overlook, of course, the problem of methane, a greenhouse gas that is 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide over its first 20 years. It is absolutely responsible for the increases in warming that we are currently seeing, and yet you don't hear a peep about methane from anyone in government. Reducing methane is a huge necessity and opportunity, yet the government action to ensure that it is properly measured has not been progressed. If we can't measure methane emissions, how are we going to reduce them or at least acknowledge that they are there? In 2023, the Climate Change Authority made recommendations to improve how Australia measures and reports methane emissions, as part of the NGER Act review. The government has agreed to those recommendations, fully or in principle, and set up an expert panel to examine the issue. But, two years on from that review, we haven't heard a peep. Progress has been painfully slow. Meanwhile, those emissions are continuing and we are continuing to cook! I urge the expert panel to ensure its interim report, due in June this year, meaningfully progresses the issue of methane reporting, monitoring and measuring, especially in the oil and gas sector.

Meanwhile, we can't forget native forests—powerful natural carbon sinks that protect biodiversity. They still lack the adequate protection from logging and other threats. It is mind-blowing that we are heading into a budget period where I believe further millions or billions of taxpayer dollars are going to be wasted on carbon capture and storage when the best carbon sink capacity, our native forests, is just being ignored. Millions are poured into unproven carbon-capturing projects that continue to fail to meet benchmarks, but—and they continue to excuse high emissions—it's a 'unicorn technology'. I compare it to nuclear SMRs—it's this great big hope on the horizon that never delivers but costs a bomb. Why are we continuing to talk about that most expensive, uncertain technology? Why is the government still not protecting native forests and putting an end to native forest logging?

Last November, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Chris Bowen, admitted that based on current global emissions the world is on track to 2.8 degrees of warming. That is diabolical. For Australia, it means bushfires like Black Summer could happen nearly every year, days over 50 degrees in Sydney and Melbourne will be common, storms and floods will reshape our coasts and the Great Barrier Reef will be lost forever. I can assure the members in this place from regional communities that they will be bearing the brunt of it, and then we will see the endless need for emergency disaster relief packages which we simply will not be able to afford. We know you won't be able to have insurance; insurance will be unaffordable for many. We will see spikes in heat-related illness and biodiversity loss. Billions in spending on disaster recovery will become the norm.

Sustainable economic management is not possible without addressing climate risks. In 2022 alone, climate fuelled disasters cost Australia $30 billion, and the cost will only rise. What's missing from the picture is serious investment in adaptation and resilience.

The National Climate Risk Assessment last year outlined the threats, but since then nothing: no funding, no serious plan. As we approach the next budget, I am calling for at least one-quarter of one per cent of GDP to be invested annually into climate risk reduction. We don't blink an eye when we talk about the percentage of GDP to be invested in defence. Well, our domestic defence, our risk to climate, needs that same focus. Natural disasters already cost nearly $40 billion a year—about two per cent of GDP—and it's projected to nearly double by 2060. Investing in adaptation saves money. For every $1 spent, we save about $11 in future losses. So if we want to talk about sensible economic management, it must include investment in adaptation and resilience.

I've proposed a detailed plan of how we can strengthen building codes, invest in local government capacity, protect wetlands and dunes, and make climate risk disclosures standard in financial decisions. This is not ideology; this is sensible economic management. My time is up, but there is so much more we can talk about. From a national security perspective, we know it is existential and urgent that we address this and do more. I urge the government to get real and actually do more.

See this speech in context