That was a big explanation. I begin on part 3 of the Carbon Credits and Other Legislation Amendment (Integrity and Transparency) Bill 2026, which is ministerial overreach and method transition declarations. I turn to the executive powers of the bill. Any law that hands the Minister for Climate Change and Energy more power to make decisions on his own must be questioned. It introduces method transition declarations, or MTDs, which would allow the minister to issue a rule declaring a carbon method superseded if he believed it fails integrity standards and poses a material risk. Once a MTD is made, it places automatic bars on new projects under that method. Proponents get six months to two years for emissions avoidance projects or up to five years for tree-planting programs to switch to a new method. If they cannot switch, they lose their ability to earn carbon credits.

Why add new broad powers? Under existing law, the independent Carbon Abatement Integrity Committee already has the power to suspend methods, and the minister can already update or cancel methods. The phrase 'material risk' is not defined in the bill and that means the minister can use his own subjective opinion to shut down carbon projects whenever political priorities change in Canberra. We saw proof of how political these decisions are on 10 September 2026. On that day, parliament voted on coalition motions to protect the native forest management carbon method, which supports forestry jobs in Tasmania and across Australia. Labor only won that vote in the Senate by cutting a political deal with the Australian Greens, resulting in three Greens senators crossing the floor. Right before the vote, the minister issued a press release announcing the new restrictions on carbon credits in the Great National Koala Park in New South Wales just to satisfy the Greens. That shows this government is willing to change carbon rules at a moment's notice for political convenience.

Peak industry groups across Australia have spoken out against these broad powers. First, the National Farmers' Federation insisted that method transition declaration powers must be strictly limited to genuinely exceptional circumstances, accompanied by clear transition support for affected producers. Second, the Carbon Market Institute warned that granting such broad executive powers directly undermines investor confidence and commercial certainty. Third, the energy producers of Australia cautioned that introducing MTDs would add unnecessary costs, uncertainty and regulatory risk to the ACCU scheme without clear evidence that the benefits outweigh the market impacts. The Environmental Defenders Office pointed out that leaving the threshold of material risk undefined leaves the statutory bar open to subjective ministerial interpretation.

The fourth part of this bill that needs examination is the safeguard mechanism tax and regional impacts. We must consider how this bill affects the broader economy and Labor's safeguard mechanism. In the past, the Commonwealth government was the main buyer of carbon credits. Today, industrial companies buy most carbon credits, because Labor turned the safeguard mechanism into an insidious carbon tax. Labor forces heavy factories, mines and processing plants to cut their emissions baselines every year or buy millions of carbon credits just to stay open. We are already seeing the impact of this carbon tax effect on Australian industry. Major regional plants face cutbacks and job losses, such as Liberty Bell Bay in Tasmania and Yancoal's operations in New South Wales. While Labor claims that this tax reduces national emissions, official data shows that Australia's annual emissions reductions have completely flatlined under Labor. And who pays the price for all of these added costs? Hardworking Australian families. These burdens on regional mining, manufacturing and agriculture flow on past the farm gate, rising prices of fuel, fertiliser, freight, electricity and groceries.

In conclusion, the bill delivers neither integrity nor transparency. It delivers red tape, legal confusion, market uncertainty and unnecessary government power. You cannot run a country by spending public money with no productivity attached to it and putting roadblocks in front of our key wealth-producing industries. Farming and resources earn the big dollars for Australia, and roadblocks hurt every Australian family. The coalition will oppose this flawed bill in the House and support Mr Tehan's amendment. We will also support the amendment moved by the member for New England, Mr Joyce, calling on the government to repeal transitional capital gains tax discounts on foreign investors selling off large renewable energy assets. Furthermore, we demand that this bill be referred to a full Senate legislation committee inquiry. A Senate inquiry will let farmers, graziers, miners, traditional owners and legal experts explain the real-world impacts of this proposal. Canberra must stop wasting taxpayer funds on net zero projects and remove damaging roadblocks. We must not support this bill, and, in fact, I don't.