Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to talk about an issue that is vexing our community in the suburbs, in the cities and in our rural and regional areas—that is, the effects of global warming. For some time I was lukewarm on the issue of human induced climate change. I knew, for example, that the world’s leading climate scientists were predicting changes—a few degrees here, sea level rises there—but, despite these warnings, I still thought things would sort themselves out sooner or later.

It was not until last week that the evidence of climate change stopped me in my tracks. East of my electorate, Gippsland was ablaze with temperatures in the mid-thirties—well above the average for early October—and wind speeds reaching 100 kilometres per hour. Firefighters had an unenviable task of taming some of Victoria’s 40 fires. And three other states have declared themselves in extreme fire danger some six weeks earlier than at the same time last year. Other extreme weather events that I have witnessed this year include: two category 4 cyclones—which resulted in bananas on the shelves at my local Coles costing $14 a kilo—one of the worst snow seasons on record; water stresses in our cities; unseasonable snap frosts devastating stone fruit crops; a relentless El Nino, lowering most grain yields; and, now, according to the Treasurer, we are officially in the worst drought ever. If all of these things were written into a Hollywood movie, they would end up being on the cutting room floor for being far too fantastical. Yet, these examples are happening here in Australia, and they are happening now. Human induced global warming and its resultant changes to our climate system is no longer an intellectual issue discussed by urban greenies—it is mainstream; it is empirical and it is happening now. I get it, Labor gets it and an overwhelming number of Australians also get it.

The recently released annual Lowy Institute poll reveals Australian concern over global warming to be the big sleeper of national affairs—a problem that worries Australians more than Islamic fundamentalism. The poll found that Australians ranked improving the global environment as the top foreign policy goal and that respondents strongly believed that the federal government should now be taking steps to tackle global warming, regardless of what costs are involved.

Australian public convictions on climate change have crept up on the government and have now overtaken it. This is clearly demonstrated by public interest and awareness, apparently, in mainstream media where, for example, Channel 7’s Sunrise program—which my daughter and I watch religiously every morning—has initiated a Cool the Globe campaign. To date, over 40,000 viewers have signed the petition to stop the Howard government slashing solar electricity rebates in its plan to phase them out completely in mid-2007.

But John Howard chooses to ignore what Australians believe is important to their role in global warming, having stated that he is sceptical about the gloomy predictions. However, the gloomy predictions are fast becoming a reality whilst John Howard dismisses expert opinion, preferring to follow suit with America in refusing to sign the Kyoto protocol. In 2000, among other timely commitments to addressing climate change, Labor committed to ratifying the Kyoto protocol. Although only a small step in helping reduce greenhouse pollution globally, it remains a significant symbol of international diplomacy and one to which Labor remains committed, very much like the chlorofluorocarbon signal that was sent which changed how major manufacturers used chlorofluorocarbons.

The government says that, if Australia ratifies the Kyoto protocol, Australian jobs will be lost to places without the same market conditions such as India and China. From what I can see, Australian jobs are going to these countries largely because the government has failed to ratify the Kyoto protocol. This is evident in the fact that the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Senator Ian Campbell, will officially open a wind farm of an Australian company, Roaring Forties, worth over $300 million in China tomorrow. Three months ago this same company stated that it could not afford to go ahead with wind power projects in Tasmania and South Australia due to a lack of support from the federal government. Roaring Forties wind farms in Tasmania and South Australia alone were worth $550 million and had the potential to create 200 full-time jobs—jobs that will now be created in China. The Howard government’s policies have lost hundreds of jobs, stalling the development of the renewable energy industry in Australia, and this opening is going to add further insult to injury.

John Howard’s policies are closing renewable energy projects, but he dismisses this fact, in my view, through sheer arrogance. Just today the Prime Minister failed to identify any other country where renewable energy companies are closing despite the undisputed fact that the only way Australian companies can access investment under the Kyoto protocol is to set up offices in other countries that have ratified the protocol such as New Zealand and Fiji. How can he claim to offer other alternatives to renewable projects, and subsequently Australian jobs, when he chooses to allow our companies, like Roaring Forties, to set up in China? John Howard knows that closing the solar rebate program and freezing other energy initiatives will kill Australian jobs.

Being locked out of the protocol’s mechanisms means Australians are unable to create worthwhile business opportunities from reducing greenhouse pollution. As an example, if Australia had ratified the Kyoto protocol, farmers would be able to claim large financial rewards for permanent revegetation projects. How? By selling to Kyoto countries, and their companies, credits created by locking up carbon in trees and soil. But, under the Howard government, farmers miss out yet again. In a similar way, any local business, even a school, that undertook an energy efficiency upgrade could sell its carbon credits into a carbon market and be financially rewarded for its efforts.

In the first half of this year the European carbon market was worth $15 billion. The government’s continued isolationist position on international action is stopping Australian businesses accessing global markets and it means that jobs in new markets—the markets of the future; the jobs of the future—are being created offshore and not here in cities, suburbs or regions. So where are all the opportunities arising if not in Australia? Some 60 per cent of the world’s 40 million household solar hot water systems are in China. Chinese companies are currently building solar equipment factories in the US and other countries worldwide. Why isn’t Australia doing this? Brazil is a world leader on ethanol production, requiring 100 per cent of gasoline to be blended with ethanol. Indonesia has set a 10 per cent biofuels target by 2010. India ranks a global fourth after Germany, Spain and the US with 3,595 megawatts of wind power—three per cent of its overall energy supply. Of course, business strategies in these countries did not change overnight. Their governments introduced policies to phase in emissions targets and low carbon technologies, creating massive opportunities for local labour markets and export growth.

The disappointing element of this is that Australia was once a leader in solar power, but is no longer. We were poised to become the wind power manufacturing hub of Asia. Now we are looking at importing our first wind turbines from China in 2007. What are we doing in Australia? We are assembling V8 and four-wheel-drive cars, and we are very good at that—we have a very good car manufacturing industry—but what about hybrid cars? Is the government procuring efficient cars? No, it is not. What does this all mean for a suburban electorate like mine? Ultimately, it means that fruit and vegetable prices are moving up, there are higher energy prices, sudden industry adjustments are hurting specific communities and there are water restrictions. With water shortages, of course, comes the consumption of even more greenhouse polluting energy to extract, purify and transport water to areas needing it. There is a lack of options for householders to tackle their own emissions. They are purchasing imported cars because they are more efficient than our own home-grown ones

The Labor Party has a plan to reverse this, to do something about it, and it wants to reverse the upward trend of greenhouse gas emissions. Despite the government’s rhetoric that we are one of the biggest spenders on reducing greenhouse pollution, our emissions continue to spiral out of control. After a spend of over a billion dollars, voters would expect some results. What do we need to do? Labor wants to stimulate innovation. That is why the ALP’s greenhouse package includes a cap on carbon supported by a national emissions trading scheme—a market instrument for stimulating private sector innovation and helping Australia find least-cost, prompt solutions for reversing the upward trend in greenhouse pollution. That is why in the 2004 election Labor committed to a five per cent renewable energy target, well above the government’s paltry two per cent. It is not a smart way of building business confidence.

There has been some discussion about whether or not the implementation of the Kyoto protocol and these more efficient forms of energy consumption will cost more. Not necessarily. The Australian Business Roundtable on Climate Change commissioned research which shows that delaying action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will be more costly and concentrated over a much shorter period, leading to a major disruptive shock to the Australian economy. (Time expired)