House debates

Thursday, 25 November 2010

Questions without Notice

Climate Change

2:59 pm

Photo of John MurphyJohn Murphy (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. How is the Gillard government delivering on its commitment to tackle climate change so that Australia can cut pollution and compete successfully in a global low-carbon economy?

Photo of Greg CombetGreg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank the member for Reid for his question. The foundation for any policy to deal with the challenge of climate change is the climate science. This is one of the defining differences between the government and the Leader of the Opposition in particular. The government respects the climate science and it was for that reason, amongst others, that Labor ratified the Kyoto protocol after the years of inaction and ineptitude demonstrated by the Howard government. There is a defining difference on this issue, because we know what the Leader of the Opposition thinks about the climate science. He has famously called it ‘absolute crap’. That is his description. He has designed a climate change policy for the coalition in accordance with his belief about the climate science—because it does not take us any further.

The government has articulated three key areas of policy to deal with the challenge of climate change. They involve strong support for clean energy, strong support for improvements in energy efficiency in our industry and in our households and the establishment of a carbon price through a market mechanism. In relation to the issue of clean energy, the government has legislated a 20 per cent target by the year 2020 such that 20 per cent of our electricity supply must come from renewable sources by that year. It is expected and modelled that $19 billion worth of investment in renewable energy generation will be a consequence of that policy measure by the year 2030. It is supported by the $5.1 billion Clean Energy Initiative, which includes important things such as the Solar Flagships program, developmental support for carbon capture and storage—extremely important for the future of the coal industry in this country—the Australian Solar Institute and other initiatives. The government has also committed a billion dollars towards connecting remote renewable energy generation to the national electricity grid. These are very strong measures in the area of clean energy.

In the area of energy efficiency, the government has established the $100 million Energy Efficiency Trust and the Australian Carbon Trust to manage those funds and to work with the business community to develop innovative approaches to achieve energy efficiency improvements in business in particular. We have also brought in mandatory disclosure of the energy performance of residential and commercial buildings—a very important initiative. We have got new programs on the way—low-carbon communities and tax breaks for green buildings. We have released a Prime Minister’s task group report on energy efficiency, and we are working with stakeholders on that issue now. Most importantly, the government has established what is necessary to achieve important structural change in our economy, and that is the objective to achieve a carbon price through a market mechanism. Again, this is an issue repudiated by the opposition and repudiated by the Leader of the Opposition—a repudiation of the fundamental importance of markets in driving the most efficient changes of this nature.

A market mechanism will be extremely important in our economy to drive us towards a low-carbon future. It is supported by the business community, it is supported widely in the community and it will be supported by further policy initiatives. What we know about the other side of politics, as we head towards the end of this parliamentary sitting, is that they have papered over the cracks; they are split and divided on this issue. They are led by a leader who thinks the science is absolute crap, but we know that there are very different views on that side of the House.