Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. Will the minister update the House on the government's receipt of Professor Garnaut's update to his climate change review? How has the update been received? What is the government's view?

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

I thank the member for Moreton for his question. As the House has heard, Professor Garnaut today released the final update of his study into climate change and how the country should best respond to this important challenge. Professor Garnaut's update makes it absolutely clear that climate change is occurring, that it is caused by human activity and that it poses a serious risk to the prosperity and quality of life of all Australians.

For the benefit of the member for Tangney, Professor Garnaut states the following in his report:

Since 2008, advances in climate change science have ... broadly confirmed that the earth is warming, that human activity is the cause of it and that the changes in the physical world are likely, if anything, to be more harmful than the earlier science had suggested.

That shows the quality of the contribution made last week by the member for Tangney in suggesting that there had been no warming in the last decade, despite the empirical evidence being emphatic that it was the warmest decade on record. That is testament to the control of those opposite by the climate science deniers. We know the influence that Senator Minchin has over the Leader of the Opposition in this regard.

The views that Professor Garnaut has expressed on the climate science are based on expert advice. That advice is consistent with the advice received by the government from sources including the CSIRO, the Bureau of Meteorology, the Climate Commission and the Australian Academy of Science. Any government taking its public policy responsibility seriously to act in the national interest must respond to this challenge.

It will also come as no surprise to the House, to economists generally and to anyone wanting to act on climate change that Professor Garnaut's proposed solution to this challenge is a carbon price delivered through a market mechanism. In his words in the report, he said 'market-based approaches to mitigation can bring out the best in Australians, and a return to regulatory approaches the worst'. Furthermore, Professor Garnaut had the following to say about the coalition's subsidies-for-polluters policy in his speech to the National Press Club today. He said 'Direct action for reducing carbon emissions is likely to be immensely more expensive than a market approach.' He in fact went on to make the obvious observation about a subsidies policy: that it is in the worst traditions of old protectionism, subsidies and antimarket philosophy. That is exactly where the Leader of the Opposition sits: subsidies for the big polluters and no revenue to assist households with the slug on taxes that they will be hit with.

This is not a view that is shared by all of those who are associated with the Liberal Party. We know the views of the member for Wentworth and many others on the other side of the House. But we know, too, that former Prime Minister John Howard understands and respects the science and understands and respects the need for a market mechanism, having taken an emissions trading scheme to the election in 2007. We heard from Dr John Hewson yesterday that a market mechanism is the best position. We heard Malcolm Fraser supporting a market mechanism to tackle this problem. Holding a public political leadership position, you are irresponsible on this issue. It is time that the opposition and the Leader of the Opposition took this issue seriously and made a serious contribution to and an effort in this debate. (Time expired)