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

My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister in his capacity as the Minister representing the Minister for Regionalisation, Regional Communications and Regional Education. In the Senate just now, the minister for regionalisation said that, if the Prime Minister adopts net zero without the approval of the National Party, 'It will be ugly.' Does the minister agree?

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I can say is that the process of going through this has been diligently followed. I have been in close contact with the Prime Minister through the process. What I can say is that a committee of four—Minister McKenzie, Minister Pitt, Minister Littleproud and Minister Hogan—have all been working on this process. As recently as today I had a meeting because we're going to make sure that the Prime Minister of Australia is reported back to as soon as possible. In fact, I believe it will be within the next day that we will get back to him, because we're not grandstanding. This is not about—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my left!

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will take an interjection.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, don't take the interjection. I'm about to deal with the interjectors.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There were about 400 of them! But I would like to know. I hear so often how the Labor Party have been wanting this for years—eight years, I think—but we haven't received one dot of a costing, one dot of a proposed plan. There is not one dot of one. Even though after eight years they have not provided a skerrick of evidence as to how they would achieve their outcome—and, by gosh, they've had a lot of spare time in those eight years—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just say to the Deputy Prime Minister—Member for Isaacs, I can still hear you, notwithstanding the fact that you've moved—that he needs to come back to the question. I realise the provocation, but he has to come back to the question. I allowed some tolerance.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will make sure that we follow a prudent process. I acknowledge the work of the Senator for Victoria. I state that it will be a prudent process which our party can stand behind, and we will work constructively to make sure that it is not only the best outcome for original people, that we respect the role of the Nationals party room, that the final arbiter will be the Nationals party room—of our position. We don't—

Opposition members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my left!

The members for Isaacs and Whitlam can leave under standing order 94(a).

The members for Isaacs and Whitlam then left the chamber.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's correct, member for Grayndler—I'll take the interjection—I am the Deputy Prime Minister. And you are the Leader of the Opposition—and long may that be the case!

Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. A number of climate-denying Nationals members of your government have been holding climate policy to ransom. So that other members can reflect their communities' call to rapidly act on climate change, will you allow an open debate and conscience vote on the climate change bill before parliament? Why are the Nationals' votes the most powerful within the Coalition?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I call the Prime Minister: the first part of the question had some descriptions in it that really don't belong in a question, I need to say—assertions like that. And I think all members, including the member for Warringah, wouldn't like it if there was a question that made an assertion about them. So, I'm just going to point out that that is not really what question time is for. There are other forms of the House where people can engage in political combat of that nature.

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

The world's response to climate change—and that will be the subject of the summit that is being held in Glasgow in a few weeks time—will be seeking to bring people together on this issue, and the response being made around the world to climate change will have a significant impact on Australia. It will have a significant impact, particularly on rural and regional Australia, and I think it would be unfair for this place to send those Australians anything other than a message that we understand that. We understand that people in rural and regional Australia will face some real challenges to their economic futures because of what is happening around the world and the changes in the global economy.

The Liberals and the Nationals understand that, and we think it's important that we don't engage in any sort of pejorative way in a discussion with those who have a different view or different views to ours. I don't think that's very helpful in what we're trying to achieve here. I think Australians want to embrace the changes that are occurring, but I also think they want to ensure that all Australians can go ahead together, in rural and areas, and that we have a clear and considered plan for how that is going to be achieved so that we can mitigate the negative impacts of what is going to occur and also realise the opportunities that can be there for all Australians, particularly in rural and regional areas.

That is what the government is working through, and the government will make a decision about the position that it will take to COP26. The date hasn't changed. It's been the same date all year. We've been working towards that date over the course of the year. So, when I attend that summit I will take the government's position, and the government's position will be determined like all government positions are, and that is by federal cabinet. That was the approach taken in the past when it came to these matters and the commitments that Australia has made on these issues: on Kyoto 1, we meet and we beat; on Kyoto 2, we met and we beat it; and on Paris, we will meet and beat the commitments we have made. There is no mystery at all on this side of the House as to what our 2030 target is. It's what we took to the last election. It was endorsed by the Australian people. We've been implementing those policies, and we've seen a reduction of 20 per cent, and more, in carbon emissions since 2005. We have one of the highest rates, if not the highest rate, of rooftop solar in the world. We have seen record levels of investment in renewable technologies here in Australia, and we propose that there be more. Those opposite have not set out their 2030 target. They have repealed, they say, the target they took to the last election— (Time expired)