Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question goes to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Prior to the election, the minister said he would not sign Australia up to a global pledge without knowing how it would be implemented. At COP27, the minister signed Australia up to pay compensation for carbon emissions without knowing any of the details, including how much it will cost. Minister, how can Australians trust anything you say?

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm afraid the honourable member's question underlines just how much they don't understand the international conversation about dealing with developing countries and the impact of climate change, and just how willing they are to play cheap and pathetic politics on this issue. At the COP27 last week, every country in the world, every COP party, came together for this agreement. According to the Leader of the Opposition, he would have stood away with his arms folded and said, 'We're not in; we're not having this conversation.' On this side of the House, we believe that actually interacting with Pacific countries in particular about the impact of climate change on them is central to our agenda.

There have been some mistruths told by those opposite. Let's just run through them. They talk about China. Let's just call it for what it is. In fact, the agreement reflected in the cover text of the COP meeting says that this arrangement will be for the 'particularly vulnerable' countries. China is not one of those. Every country is vulnerable to climate change, but the most vulnerable are Kiribati, Vanuatu and Fiji. They are the countries that we deal with, and we are proud to deal with. The Leader of the Opposition thinks that the impacts of climate change on Pacific islands are just part of his comedy routine. It's not a very good comedy routine, but it's all he's got.

We on this side of the chamber actually believe interaction with the developing countries of the Pacific is central to our agenda, and I'm proud of that arrangement. I'm proud of the work we did together in Egypt, working with the prime ministers and climate change ministers of the Pacific. I'm proud of that. I don't run away from that. On this side of the House, we're proud of that too. Those opposite can take a different approach if they wish. They can hold the Pacific islands off to one side and say, 'Talk to the hand; we're not interested.'

The other myth perpetrated by those opposite is that somehow Australia—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my right. The member for Bruce is warned. I'll hear from the member for Fairfax, and I'll ask him to state the point of order briefly.

Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Relevance. I asked the minister, referring to him breaking a promise, how the Australian people can ever trust anything he says.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You may resume your seat. It is not an opportunity to restate the question. The minister is being—

The member for O'Connor is warned.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The other myth perpetrated by those opposite is that somehow Australia agreed to a funding arrangement, when in fact what we agreed to—and every country in the world agreed to—is for further work over the next 12 months on the establishment of a fund.

I'll tell you who would have been happiest if Australia had not participated. I'll tell you what country, to be frank, would have been happiest. That country is China, because that would have sent the message to the Pacific, in a geopolitically contested region, that Australia's not interested in the Pacific. That just underlines why this man is not fit for the office he seeks to hold. He would be a risk to our national security. In 20 years in parliament he's mentioned climate change three times. That's what the Leader of the Opposition thinks about climate change. His biggest contribution to the climate change discussion in Australia was to joke about the impacts on Pacific islanders, who are fighting for their very survival. That's why he is not fit for the office he purports to seek to hold.