Bridget Archer (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. Will the minister please update the House on the importance of a technology led approach to reducing emissions? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Bass for her question and for her strong commitment to low-emission technologies and the role they can play in industry in northern Tasmania, and in particular her commitment to the potential of hydrogen in Bell Bay in her electorate. She knows there are only two ways to reduce emissions: technology or taxes—and this government picks technology.

The Morrison government's Technology Investment Roadmap is positioning Australia to be a leader in next-generation clean-energy low-emission technologies that will make net zero practically achievable. The road map will drive $80 billion of combined public and private sector investment and, indeed, 160,000 jobs over the next decade, and our plan is already delivering results. Our emissions are down 20 per cent on the 2005 levels. They've fallen faster than in Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the United States, the OECD average, and we're on track to meet and beat our 2030 targets. Central to that has been world-beating levels of installation of solar, farming practices that we just heard about from the minister of agriculture, and energy efficiency in manufacturing and elsewhere.

But it's not enough to just reduce our emissions. Countries across the world need to reduce their emissions, and that's the opportunity that technology provides. That's why we have committed $568 million to low-emission technology partnerships across the world. We've already signed agreements with the UK, Japan, Singapore and Germany to use lower emissions technologies like hydrogen, healthy soils and clean steel. These are actions and outcomes that matter.

We are getting on with the job, and that's the Australian way. But I am asked about alternatives. The alternative is what's offered by those opposite, who refuse to tell Australians what their 2030 target is. The essence of the Paris Agreement, central to the Paris Agreement, is having a 2030 target. They don't want to talk about a 2030 target. They don't want to talk about their plan either. They don't have a plan. There is no plan. They just want to talk Australia down. Well, that's not the Australian way. The Australian way is to get on with the job and to deliver. Our track record of delivery is one that all Australians can be proud of.