Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison government is working with our international partners to advance the next generation of low-emissions technologies? 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 Moore for his question. As someone who had a distinguished business career before coming into this place, like so many on this side of the parliament, he knows the crucial role that technology plays in solving hard problems. When it comes to mitigating climate change, he knows, as we all know, that it's a global problem requiring a global solution. That's why we're absolutely committed to our Technology Investment Roadmap, bringing the next generation of low-emissions technologies to commercial parity with their existing alternatives, and that means technologies like clean hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, healthy soils, soil carbon, low-emissions steel and aluminium.

We know that not only will these technologies reduce emissions in Australia; they will do it around the world. Indeed, the five priority technologies in our Technology Investment Roadmap will either substantially reduce or eliminate emissions in sectors responsible for 90 per cent of the world's emissions. That's why we are entering into low-emissions technology partnerships with countries like Germany, Japan, Singapore and the United Kingdom to develop those technologies. We have committed $20 billion in the coming years to investment in the development and deployment of those technologies. It will create 160,000 jobs and bring forward a total of $80 billion of public and private sector investment focused on supporting heavy industry, not destroying it; supporting agriculture, not destroying it; supporting manufacturing, not destroying it.

I am asked about alternatives. Those opposite have now voted five times against the technology-led approach to reducing emissions. They've voted five times against clean hydrogen, against carbon capture and storage, against electric vehicle charging infrastructure. As the member for McMahon has said proudly—he's boasted—they're going to keep doing it. Sadly, it's not new to the member for McMahon to be against investment in technology. In his short stint as Treasurer, not only did he oversee their electricity tax rising to record levels; he also oversaw the dragging of $200 million out of their clean technology program. So he is for taxes and against technology. He opposed technology-led solutions as Treasurer. He's doing it again. As the member for Hunter has said so eloquently, that's stupid policy and stupid politics.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the IPCC report which this week warns that, without effective action on climate change, Australia faces an increase in the intensity, frequency and duration of fire weather events. Will the Morrison-Joyce government commit to net zero emissions by 2050?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition will be aware that it is the government's policy to achieve net zero as soon as possible, and preferably by 2050. The IPCC report that was released and we commented on yesterday is a very serious report. It's a report that affirms the position that the government has been taking to take action on climate change and to ensure that we continue to reduce emissions. Australia has reduced emissions by 20 per cent on 2005 levels. We have met and we have beaten our Kyoto targets. We will meet and we will beat our Paris commitments for 2030. We will exceed those commitments, and I'll tell you why we will do that. It is because Australian households, Australian businesses, Australian farmers, Australian manufacturers and Australian miners, all of them, are making changes in their businesses, supported by the policies of our government, whether that be to put solar panels on roofs, and we have the highest level of that in the world, or whether that be in rolling out renewable technologies and investments, which are eight times the global average—greater than that of the EU and greater even than that of countries like Germany.

But what we also note—and it is why technology, not taxes, is so important and why commitments without plans are a danger—is that what's important is that technology drive the changes that are needed. It's important that technology drive the changes that are needed because I know that, on this issue of net zero by 2050, the opposition has made an unqualified commitment—a blank cheque commitment with no plan—that will see a policy put in place by those opposite, because they're not supporting technology; they're voting against technology in this parliament. They're voting against it, and if you're not going to back technology, there's only one thing you will back, and that is taxes.

The policy of the Labor Party on this important policy issue has always been to tax their way to these commitments, not invest through technology to achieve these commitments. On our side of the House, we will focus on the climate action that is necessary not only to achieve the results here in Australia but to ensure that the technology that is developed can be made available and supported throughout developing countries of this world, which account for two-thirds of global emissions and rising. China alone accounts for similar emissions and, if fact, more than all OECD countries combined. That's where the solutions need to be applied.